Why's everyone so eager?

[AndWhat]

My Ds is 20wks and I attended a really good information session on weaning yesterday and there were a lot of people who had already started their babies on food by 5 months old. Looking on fb and others with baby's the same age/younger than my son seem to have started eating. With all the info I've been given I just don't understand why people have started weaning prior to 26 weeks?!?!?!

I think because it's a new stage, and people are keen to "move on". I don't get it either though. It's much easier when babies are just breastfeeding!

Also I think a lot of people have parents/relatives who weaned at 4 months or earlier as that was the advice in the past. They then pass on their "wisdom", so people can get a lot of pressure from family to conform with what they did.

I think it because their mums did. I've heard a lot of comments like if they aren't sleng through, they need solids.
I am going to wait I think.

Weaning is a pain in the arse and so messy I was annoyed when 6 months came around.

I don't get the people who rush to do it either.

I stuck to advice for DS1 and he started solids at 6 months (possibly minus one day) but did start our DTs at 5 months plus 1 week so a bit early.

The reason I started earlier was I became convinced DS1 could have started a little earlier - the last month was a bf slog with extra feeds put in day and night which I was dreading happening for the DTs and also I was hoping to help the twins sleep better.

It had no effect on sleep. I probably should have waited at least another week for DTS but DTD did seem very keen and ready to eat (had been sitting a while, was very interested and good at eating as soon as we started).

I agree there is some excitement about the next stage and expectation and pressure from older relatives. To those people I would say what this stage actually means is more work and a lot more nappies (and far less pleasant than bf milk ones).

We've started early because ds is sitting picks things up and puts them in his mouth has lost the young thrust and can chew and swallow. There is some evidence that tastes of food pre 6 months is good so I don't see a reason to wait until exactly 6 months in his case.

Premature babies are weaned earlier.

I was extremely lucky weaning, my kids both loved it, didn't make much mess, and both started sleeping through the exact day they worked up to 2 solid meals a day. So I wanted to start because it was fun!

I was the same - ie why the rush?

But I have ended up giving him tastes since 23 weeks - starting with literally a few mouthfuls of homemade fruit/veg mush every other day - and I've been astonished at how ready he has been.

He was sitting well and reaching for and putting things into his mouth. I was still unconvinced at that point but when he started mimicking our chewing one night I did wonder.

So gave him a tiny bit of carrot and he swallowed with ease - no tongue thrust. A couple of days later we tried some more and he was grabbing for the spoon to feed himself.

Shortly before this I'd taken him to be weighed and was startled to see he had only put on half an ounce in a fortnight. I was thinking of taking him to gp to query reflux (he has always been very sicky) but health visitor said 'I wouldn't worry, it looks like he's getting ready to wean'. My mum and I were a bit gobsmacked by the vagueness of this but hv said to start at around 24 weeks.

So for me, was a combination of factors. Including wanting to get him at least part weaned by the time I go back to work. And seeing some research that calls the 6 month rule into question plus my son's apparent readiness also were significant.

In all honesty, it's a bit of s faff, and I still don't actually understand why we wean at 6 months anyway if the 'food before 1 is just for fun' bollocks is true - although I understand it is important for speech development.

Tl, dr; was in no rush but reality got complicated.

I don't see the relevance of the "food is for fun" quote here? It may or may not be good advice, but it doesn't have anything to do with why people start weaning earlier than 5 months, does it?

Because ExBrighton I just wondered why one needs to wean from 6 months, not a year. People say it's for fun and that it doesn't matter if you blw and baby doesn't take anything til 8mos etc - so why wean at 6mos at all?

If someone explained that, it may have a bearing on why people want to wean earlier.

As it is, I feel there is pressure to start at 6mos. If you're going back to work at 6 oe 7 mos you might want to early wean so baby is on track by then.

Point being, if it's 'just for fun' for the next 6 months then why bother?

Just thought of another reason people wean early: sleep. There is a significant perception that filling baby up encourages better sleep. Not helped by members of the previous generation who weaned at 4mos or less imparting their wisdom.

I had a full-on battle with DP over baby rice/porridge. Every time he saw it he'd say why don't we get some, it must be ok, it says 4mo+. He'll sleep better etc

Fab link Chunderella - wish I'd seen that before as DS couldn't have delayed cord clamping due to forceps.

I think, bravelilbear, that the idea of that phrase is to get it across that food should be about learning tastes and textures and not about volume from day 1. So the NHS advice is to move towards 3 meals by about 8 to 9 months. That gives you 3 months or so to gradually increase what your dc is eating, and also allows for BLW to take off. I also think it's meant to reassure parents of reluctant or slow eaters, as there is so often a lot of pressure and stress around food and eating.

Although, where does the phrase even come from? It's not used on any NHS literature, and I can't find a source for it online.

True ExB. I've not seen it anywhere other than blogs, fora and heard other mums say it (mainly reassuringly to mums of non eaters).

But the first time I heard it was at the official health visitors' weaning talk. So maybe it's crept into the consciousness as a general buzz word related to weaning.