If you don't follow latest research or guidelines wrt baby feeding (in particular weaning)

[hunkermunker]

Can I ask why?

Obviously all babies are individuals, yada yada - and guidelines are just that.

But what happens to make you disregard the up-to-date stuff?

(This is following on from a posting on another thread - but I wanted to make it a less personal, wider thread, rather than it be construed as an attack on one person - because I think the process of how we make decisions regarding our children is interesting).

Message withdrawn

I am following the guidelines with DS but with DD I started weaning at 20 weeks.

Why?

Because she had gone from waking twice a night to waking upwards of 6 times and everyone elses babies were sleeping through. Seriously-that is the whole reason.

I'm not blaming anyone else because at the end of the day it was my decision but I was surrounded by people telling me that she was obviously hungry and to try giving her solids to help her sleep. I was also made to feel that it was very very abnormal for a baby of her age to still be waking at night.

In the end she ate only a couple of spoonfuls for a couple of days before refusing to eat again. She barely touched food until 9 months and ate hardly anything until 13 months. This has really helped me keep going with ds because I now know firsthand that babies can survive on just milk for a year so waiting til 6 months to introduce solids isn't starving them.

I also didn't realise when I decided to give DD solids that there were dangers involved with early weaning. I had the nhs booklet but that doesn't tell you anything. It says they advise waiting until 6 months but doesn't tell you why. It also says you should not wean before 4 months, which I took as a green light to wean at 20 weeks. I think a lot of people who wean early are simply not aware that the guideline is research based and that long term health problems can result.

Guidelines have not changed much at all - what poorly-trained HVs say to mothers may change with the wind, of course.

It was 4-6 mths for a long time. Then (in 2003) it was 6 mths.

Big change - not.

we weaned at 5 months with both DS1 & DS2.
guidance was just that when DS1 was born, guidance, not rules.
I don't know the ins and outs of the research but I did know that it was an absolute no before 17 weeks.

I was discussing the new guidelines with a play worker today. My DS has just turned 6 months. She said "and has he been ok on just milk all this time?" I had to laugh as I was bouncing my 20lber (!) exclusively bfed baby on my knee at the time. I think that it takes a long time (several generations) for people's mindset to change. She could clearly see that he was thriving on "just milk" but if you were advised differently then it must be hard to get your head around.

I started this reply ages ago but went off on a tangent so will now answer the OP properly!

With ds1 the advice was 4-6 months. He was 4 months to the day as we were excited

With ds2 the advice was 4-6 months but really it should be 6 months. he had ongoing concerns that no one could diagnose and HV suggested weaning him, so, on HVs advice we weaned at 4 months. It turns out he has amilk intolerance which they still refuse to diagnose officialy and if i had known that then i would have weaned him later.

With ds3 i am going to wait as long as possible. am hoping to get to 6 months and just shove a banana in his hands and let him do it himself!

Oh that is interesting Tik-Tok - think people must have taken 4-6 months and interpreted it as from 4 months.

I started weaning at about 22 weeks when my ds started attacking any soft fruit I happened to be eating! Unfortunately, I didn't know about blw at that point otherwise I would have just continued letting him try things out.

Will investigate blw for next one though (whenever that might be)

I do remember I felt a huge amount of pressure from other people to wean sooner rather than later.

It's tough when you have a baby who isn't sleeping.

And of course you know your own baby better than anyone.

But I don't think that "instinct" plays a part in deciding they need solid food - it doesn't sound like the right use of the word to my mind.

Instinct is the "protect your baby from lions" thing, I think.

Message withdrawn

mine were all big and started solids at 26 weeks. We have a family history of atopic disease and i didnt want to put them at increased risk. It didn't seem a big deal to wait

I stand - well, sit - at the table, next to babies doing that, DA

I reckon if a baby can sit up unaided, pick food up, get it into their mouth, move it from front to back with tongue and swallow it, their innards are probably good to go.

oh i have a baby who doesn't sleep too - should I give him more baby rice?

Just to add; my DS had a growth spurt at 5 months which seemed to last for ages. With old guidelines I may have been tempted to wean him. Growth spurt has finished now and if anything he is going longer between feeds. Glad I hung on.

GG, DS1 did that too - babies are funny buggers and can be unsettled for philosophical reasons, I think. Maybe they get to 4 months old and go, "Oh, what's it all about then? The meaning of life? I'll wake up and ask Mum, I reckon".

Then they work out the meaning of life is a nice warm boob in the middle of the night and all's right with the world, so they sleep again.

Sorted.

with dd1 my hv told me weaning was 3-4months. she was weaned at 4months.

with dd2 i had read a brief side article about weaing at 6months (this was 2002/03) and the hv didnt know a thing about it and told me to wean at 4months. but dd2 was very refluxy and although she had some food at 4months we didnt really get going untill 6months+

dd3 was weaned one week shy of 6months i think.

dc#4 i think i am going to attempt the BLW route as it seems so much easier.

PS - I was being flippant. Well, kinda.

maybe instinct is the wrong word. It's more about personal knowledge of your baby.

I think that weaning below 4 months is a bad idea.

I think weaning below 6 months if you feel that your baby is ready, and with full understanding of why you are doing it, is not necessarily a problem.

LOL HM, never thought of my boobs being able to soothe a troubled mind as well as an empty tummy .

Message withdrawn

GreedyGirl - DS thinks my boobs are the answer to pretty much everything and we're quite happy with that!

On the weaning/guidelines idea, is there a general agreement that following the baby's development is a better idea than following mum's "instinct"? I read somewhere (I think the BLW guidelines) that once a baby can do all the things necessary to feed themselves, they're probably physically ready for it, and this makes sense to me...

While I'm not saying we shouldn't follow the research, guidelines from our health professionals make me nervous - having been "told off" several times for co-sleeping with my baby (following all the guidelines for how to do it) by midwives and our postnatal group leader ("You do know you're not supposed to do that") makes me really try to read up about things rather than just following all those little booklets we get given. Anyone else feel the same?

because they are only guidelines, if your instincts are different and you don't give foods that are high in fat / salt or nuts honey etc. then why not

i think it is unfortunate that there seems to be some irritation with people who have listened to health visitors as opposed to doing their own research into official guidelines. I certainly received conflicting advice with ds2 who is now 2 years old - was not told 6 mths, but didn't occur to me that this was incorrect advice.

MTM, no, there's irritation with health visitors...

That's fine, but if you haven't had reason to doubt them, you tend to believe what you say. i think that might answer your original post...