Do you approve of nearly new shoes for babies and toddlers

[shoemummy]

I'm wondering how people feel about buying used shoes for their babies and toddlers.
Shoes are so expensive and very often only get worn for a few weeks or sometimes only once. Is it ok to put your child in used shoes? Especially when they are under 2 and don't realy get hard wear out of any shoes.
I heard that the shoe shops (and doctors) will argue that shoes mold to the shape of the feet and so shouldn't be shared by other children but isn't this just an excuse to get us to cough up more money on new ones?
I'd love to know your thoughts.

Do you have a DC under two then?

I believe that it really is true, that the bones are still forming, and i know it is true because i have seen feet that have been damaged by too small shoes.

I agree the prices are ridiculous, but your child's feet are still forming - and they should form in their own way not another childs.
My DS has a very mild pronation of both ankles and as a result the wear on his shoes is much different to that of DD. Wear isn't just the sole of the shoe but the softening of the leather and insole - which is often difficult to see.
Proper fitting new shoes are a must. What you do to their feet now can affect them 30 years down the line (back and hip problems for example).
Look out for outlet stores - I know Clarkes have several. Clinkards have good sales if you need shoes at the right time. There are also a few websites that sell shoes cheaply - get them tested for fit in the shop and then go buy them online! (sorry I can't remember the web names but will have a look).

This thread reads like some kind of media request.

Are you a real mother shoemummy?

I do have a DD and one more on the way - due on May. For sure, shoes that are too small or already molded to another child's foot are bad for growing feet BUT what about those second hand shoes that really have only been worn a couple of times - esp things like party shoes. Surely they must be ok?

I dont think she is real

Huh?! Yes I'm a real mummy!

It's my first time using this site ...how am i supposed to write? Sorry if i'm not doing it right

I use second hand shoes for all my children
needs must

I have bought barely-worn shoes for dd ie ones that have obv only been worn for one or two parties

having said that, dd never wears shoes 'only once' - at any one time she generally has just one pair of shoes (usu trad mary janes, so tough enough for nursery but polish up ok for parties), one pair of wellies and then sandals as well in the summer, so generally I don't mind buying new

If shoes have been sized and fitted properly you should only be needing to buy 2-3 pairs of shoes a year - lots of parents buy more because they want to not because the child needs them.

Shoes should be checked every 6-8 weeks but they should not need replacing every 6-8 weeks.

Shoes do mould to foot shape and second hand shoes are a very bad idea. This is not shoe shops and manufacturers making it up - any podiatrist or chiropodist will tell you the same thing.

Reading these forums I am shocked at how many parents think it's acceptable to use hand me down shoes or buy unfitted shoes online.
They are not expensive an average pair of shoes costing £30 will work out to cost about £2.50 a week if they last 12 weeks and lots of pairs are cheaper than that and will last longer. That is not a lot of money for the sake of your child's foot.

All my DC wore their shoes a lot more than once. The very very shortest time was 6-8 weeks.

Maybe I was lucky (but really, wearing them once? Don't they wear them every day? Mine only had one pair at a time).

Anyway, no, it's the only thing everyone has new.

i think we are all made bonkers by clarks... the rest of the world seems not to be crippled by not having them.

although for dd2 i have gratefully accepted a second hand pair of shoes (worn a few times by a child as light as a feather and completely new looking) and took them to clarks for them to check the fit. perfect, it turned out.

You say that Aitch but I have a pal whose mum is the youngest of several children and always had pass-on shoes.

Her feet are very deformed and odd - she struggles to find shoes that fit and are comfortable these days

she might just have weird feet, though. posh spice has deformed feet and i doubt she was on the hand me downs, what with her dad having a roller and all.

I use DS1's outgrown shoes on DS2 - DS2 is only 16 months so we are talking about shoes that were worn by DS1 for a matter of weeks - they both wear slippers indoors and at most toddler groups, soft play etc they take shoes off anyway so the amount of actual wear these shoes got is minimal.

Ds2 has been measured in Clarks several times and they have confirmed that the shoes fit fine, so I see no problem with it - though I didn't tell them that they were also worn by DS1. I check both their feet all the time for any red marks or signs of pinching or rubbing

I will probably only do it with one more size of shoes thouhg, as after that DS1 wore them for longer periods and moulded them more. But at this early stage I don't see the problem.

I just buy them on ebay and get them checked out at Clarkes - I got 2 pairs for less than £20, brand new in box, and they've lasted all winter. Perfect

Posh Spice has bunions because of the way she has ill-treated her feet as an adult not because of her footwear as a child.
Her obsession with wearing ridiculously high heels at all times has resulted in constant pressure on her metatarsal bones.
This is very different to the problems caused by hand me down shoes.

I work with children's shoes and I have seen the dreadful problems that arise. Ill fitting shoes cause problems such as hammer toes, gait and walking issues, pressure sores, crossed over toes and even severe headaches.

I am glad to hear that some posters don't think they've caused any damage to their children and hopefully their children will be the lucky ones, but playing Russian Roulette with foot health is not a great idea.

The above comment about being made bonkers by Clarks did make me smile - Clarks shoes are actually not that great when it comes to quality and durability. There are many other brands on the market doing a better job for a cheaper or similar price range.
Clarks have been fantastic at brainwashing us into thinking they are the market leaders but the reality is very different.

Choosylady - sorry to butt in but which brands would you recommend? I was planning to take DD out on Saturday to get her feet measured but our local shop only does Clarks, and a smattering of Start-Rite - although only for the babies it seems.

DD was bought some little red 'party' shoes when she was born (for 3-6 months), sort of round toe with a t-bar. V cute. However, my mum saw them and said she wouldn't put them on unless it was only for a very short time, because of chance of it damaging DD's feet and that babies shouldn't really wear any shoes other than very soft slipper type ones. Is this right? Not that I very often want to put DD in shoes?! But just wondered...

Bex: I would agree with your mum, I wouldn't put a non walking child in proper shoes. Those 'crawling' shoes Clarks sell are a complete rip off.

When mine were little they didn't have shoes until they could walk properly. They did have some bootee type of things when it was cold but tbh they were probably not really necessary as they were always bundled up in the pram.

Bettymum - Start-Rite are still an excellent brand, other good ones to look out for are Ricosta and Pepino (German), Norvic (UK), Garvalin (Spanish), Umi (USA), Primigi (Italian) their prices are not a million miles away from Clarks and sometimes they are cheaper. The quality though is a whole different ball game. Most of them have removable footbeds too so you can see the space allowed for growth when you buy and check as the shoes are worn as to when new ones are needed.
All new shoes should be sold with a size worth of growth room which is roughly a thumb's width from the end of your child's toe. That will allow for the shoes to last a good length of time and not hurt your pocket too much either.
Look for shoes with leather lining where you can - they will breathe and allow sweat to disperse. You will find most Clark's shoes are textile lined which holds the sweat and can make them smell a bit. Textile lined shoes also don't last as long as the lining fails and can be snagged and torn easily.
Try not to get shoes with toys in the heels - the basic shoe is weakened by having the heel scooped out and the novelty value of the toy is not worth it.
Bex and potplant - you are totally correct, children do not need any shoes at all until they walk. Bootees to keep them warm when out and about in the pram is one thing but just for warmth and protection and they should be very roomy and definitely soft. Don't be tempted by cute mini-trainers and boots - they are a waste of money and will not do your child any good.
Putting a child in shoes does not encourage walking or help the child to walk any faster. You are better allowing the child to find it's own feet in it's own time and delay shoe buying for as long as possible. You will not do any harm keeping their feet shoe free but you can damage them by putting shoes on too early.
Crawler and so called cruiser shoes are the biggest con ever dreamt up and none of the brands I mention above make them. They don't have a place in the market. A child is either walking or not. If they are they need shoes if not they don't there is no in between and no child needs a shoe to help it crawl or cruise.

Don't be afraid to ask questions either about qualifications of shoe fitters, what they are doing and why. Any shoe fitter worth their salt will not mind and will happily talk through the process.