Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Weaning

Find weaning advice from other Mumsnetters on our Weaning forum. Use our child development calendar for more information.

Original poster

5 months today & feeding all night - should I start/wait to wean?

91 replies

monkeysmama · 14/10/2008 21:44

I am a first time mum and am totally confused by all this weaning information!

My dd is 5 months today and apart from some calpol & dentinox has only ever had my breast milk. I intend to keep on breast feeding until at least 8 months, probably a year.

However, everyone we know is suggesting we start weaning dd. My plan was to wait until 6 months but now I am not sure what to do.

The main reason "everyone"'s suggesting we wean her is that she slept through from a few weeks until about 6 weeks ago and now wakes up from 2am - 7am every hour for food. She goes down to bed at 8 and has a long feed just before, I have tried dream feeding her around 1130 when we go to bed but it makes no difference - she'll eat a boob full of milk then wake again and cry until I feed her at 2am. Basically she seems to always be hungry. There is no problem with my milk supply but it is getting a bit draining. I can keep going for another month but wonder why some baby rice mixed with my milk wouldn't be good?

I spoke to my HV yesterday and she seemed shocked we haven't started weaning her already (though this is the same HV that suggested I start at just 4 months) & said "give her some banana and see how well she'll sleep" which I didn't find that helpful.

So - a longish post but I would really, really appreciate some helpful advice. Dp has already started buying plastic spoons!

MM

OP posts:
MrsJamin · 14/10/2008 21:52

Stick to your guns. All your LO needs is milk. More night waking has nothing to do with a need for solids, and a few teaspoons of babyrice is hardly going to fill any baby up. You're doing a great job!

phdlife · 14/10/2008 21:56

My ds never slept through so my sitch is not entirely the same.

However, it's worth noting that he does the feeding all night thing when he's teething - most recently at 16m when he was on 3 solids + snacks + 2 bfs a day - he reverted to feeding 3x a night.

And your dd is at the right age for that to start - just saying it's a possibility!

Original poster
monkeysmama · 14/10/2008 22:00

phdlife - yes, rather silly omission from me there . She is teething & has been for c.6 weeks but no sign of the teeth yet. I suspect thisis why she isn't sleeping but whether teething wakes babies is another minefield!

OP posts:
phdlife · 14/10/2008 22:09

I know one person who says their babies slept through despite teething - everyone else I know rolls their eyes and groans at the very word.

you could try giving her calpol right before she goes down - or 1st time she wakes, if it's late - see if that keeps her settled for longer?

for 1st 8 teeth this worked, ds would sleep better, then wake up bang on time for his next dose.

Wispabarsareback · 14/10/2008 22:14

I know it's not the done thing these days, but both my DDs (now 5 and 1) seemed dissatisfied with milk alone by 4 months, so I gradually introduced baby-rice and fruit from that point. Both were more content and slept better, and are great with both sleeping and eating now. So shoot me.

MrsJamin · 14/10/2008 22:22

WBAB - ker-pow! It was probably a coincidence. The guidelines are veryclear now and for every post like yours there are dozens saying that solids made no difference to sleeping.
Teething is v likely to be the culprit to your LO's change in sleep.

MrsJamin · 14/10/2008 22:22

WBAB - ker-pow! It was probably a coincidence. The guidelines are veryclear now and for every post like yours there are dozens saying that solids made no difference to sleeping.
Teething is v likely to be the culprit to your LO's change in sleep.

MrsJamin · 14/10/2008 22:23

sorry for double post. Bloody iPhone!

Becky77 · 15/10/2008 13:27

MrsJamin the guidelines ARE very clear, they state that you should wait until 6 month but that you can start from 4 months. I really don't see the need for such aggression on these boards when it comes to weaning

MrsJamin · 15/10/2008 14:41

who's being aggressive? I still don't really understand the OP.

combustiblelemon · 15/10/2008 14:45

The guidelines say 6 months Becky77.

MrsJamin · 15/10/2008 14:52

Sorry I got confused with another thread but still don't think I'm being aggressive. "you can start from 4 months" - where does it say this? The guidelines are 6 months. They used to be 4-6 months and they changed.

lulumama · 15/10/2008 14:56

the guidelines say 6 months

they say no sooner than 4 months but if you must start then to do so on the advice of a health visitor or doctor

at the end of the day, the safest , most filling and nutririous , calorie rich food you can give your baby is milk

weaning won;t help a baby going through a growth spurt to sleep

some babies sleep, some don;t , a banana is not a magic wand that will suddenly satisfy and fill your baby so they sleep 12 hours

Becky77 · 15/10/2008 15:03

"No sooner than 4 months" means that you can at 4 months.

nightshade · 15/10/2008 15:05

ditto all. breastfed dd until a month ago. she is 2 and a half.

she is only starting to sleep through night in last two months.

i waited eagerly to introduce solids so as to get more sleep and started at five months. it made absolutely no difference!

neither did it decrease the amount she wanted to breastfeed during the day. i just had the added hassle of feeling i had to cook healthy lunches and dinners, and spend half the day sterilising and scrubbing spoons etc.

lulumama · 15/10/2008 15:11

only on medical advice though.. not because tha parent feels like it

'health experts agree that around six months is the best age for introducing solids. Before this your baby's digestive system is still developing and weaning too soon may increase the risk of infection and allergies. If your baby seems hungrier before six months, they may be having a growth spurt and extra breast or formula milk will be enough to meet their needs'

'solid foods should never be introduced before 4 months'

taken from the NHS weaning leaflet

it also says to take advice on weaning earlier especially if your baby was prem.

but based on the first paragraph, really, would you wean before 6 months.?

Becky77 · 15/10/2008 15:17

@ lulumama - I'm not saying I would. I'm saying the guidelines don't just say 6 months and that's it. I'm sick of seeing women getting jumped on by others for daring to suggest they may start earlier. There is clearly flexibility in the guidelines, you quoted "around 6 months" yourself, and let's not deny it.

lulumama · 15/10/2008 15:21

yes around 6 months

whihc does not mean 4 or 5 months IMO

it means a week or two give or take !

and looking at the physical signs of readiness such as sitting unaided , good head control, loss of tongue thrust reflex, pincer grip and co-ordinated enough to pick uo food and get it to their mouth.

so if a baby was showing those signs at 23 weeks, i would not be hysterical about 26 weeks. but i would not give a 15 week old baby rice becasue they were waking in the night

on balance, 6 months or as close to that date as possible , is healthier for the child and, frankly, easier for the mother ! once you get to 6 months you can give gluten and you can give finger foods, which is a lot easier

lulumama · 15/10/2008 15:24

i would not jump on someone saying they had a five month old who had swiped a banana or a potato off their plate and eaten it, who was sitting well and was physically showing signs

i would however jump on someone who was weaning a 12 week old , with rice or rusk in the bottle or in a bowl. that is dangerous. the information might be unpalatable , but it is out there and you can potentially harm your child by weaning too early, so that is why people get het up about it, especially 4 months and earlier weaning.

Becky77 · 15/10/2008 15:30

We are in agreement. Each baby is unique... I just don't like seeing people trotting out guidelines to people who've come looking for support and advice.

lulumama · 15/10/2008 15:34

yes i think we are, but the guidelines are worth trotting out. not as a stick to beat parents with but as a way of saying, 'this is not just my opinion or mumsnet opinion, but an NHS guideline'

i don;t thikn saying 6 months at all costs is valuable or helpful, but explaining why 6 months is better and why is vital

VictorianSqualorSquelchNSquirm · 15/10/2008 15:40

They don't say four months.
They say that you should wait until 6 months but that babies are ready somewhere between 17-26 weeks. Why risk that your baby isn't one of them that is ready earlier?

wait2wean.blogspot.com/2008/10/guidelines-when-and-by-who-they-were.html

Becky77 · 15/10/2008 15:51

@ VSSNS - Did you read what I wrote? In your link there it also says "around 6 months". Babies are not robots, they grow at different rates. I have a friend whose DS is two weeks older than mine but half the size because he was premature etc etc... Bleating 6 months loudly doesnt help anyone... It works for official organisations to release one statement because they havent got the resources to look at each individual case but we are a group of women sitting around having a chat... Or at least that's how it should be.

VictorianSqualorSquelchNSquirm · 15/10/2008 17:15

You keep saying 4 months though becky77.
Most babies are not ready at 4 months, why would you advise someone to risk it?

nappyaddict · 15/10/2008 17:18

i would say it is either teething or a growth spurt. you're doing fantastic - only 4 more weeks to go

Swipe left for the next trending thread