BLW and baby under 6 months

[PetitFilou1]

Ds2 (3 of 3) is 20 weeks and desperate for food. He has no tongue thrust reflex and can grab food and put it in his mouth (and has - several times) He can't sit up unsupported but neither could my other two children until much older (with dd it was 8 months). Will it really do much harm to start now?

and please...no one get the popcorn out .... he really does seem hungry.

But maria that's what people have been saying here, around 26 accomapnied by the signs you mention. I don't think anyone's arguing with that, but it's a different kettle of fish to "anytime from 17 weeks" or whatever nonsense someone (can't remember who) was spouting earlier. Or the usual "he's waking in the night again" at 16 weeks.

exactly, macacao, which is why most of my posts too re weaning will say around 26 weeks and list some of the signs of readiness

there is a massive and potentially dangerous difference between weaning at 17 weeks at 23 IMO

Yes macaco, I do appreciate that there's a difference between 23-24 weeks and 16-17 weeks. But you do realize though that when people go on & on AND ON about the 6 months, people like me will also be feeling slightly strange about weaning a bit earlier than that? Also, there are many mums who are not convinced by the new recommendations (for whatever reason) which is why they're sticking with the old recommendations. I think there's a lot of vagueness & lack of information (or misinformation) about this issue. For example, my health visitor never explained to me why 6 months is optimum for weaning. She said it's 'best' but I felt it was a bit patronizing because she couldn't actually tell me why when I asked.

Maria, no one sensible is going to be horrified at what you did. Exaggerated predictions of what people are going to say about weaning at 6 mths minus whatever time raise the temperature of the debate, and it's totally unnecessary.

Responding to what a baby seems to need, like you did, makes sense. Babies don't all walk, sit, talk on the same day, and readiness for weaning is a developmental process, just like them. The difference is that babies will walk, sit and talk without any conscious or deliberate input from their parents, as long as the environment enables them to do so. With weaning, in our society, with tables, cookers, and calendars (all modern inventions and unknown for 99.9999 per cent of human let alone mammalian existence), parents decide to offer solids knowingly, rather than just accepting the baby will reach out and take something from whatever his mum is eating, when he's ready.

Given the massive cultural difference between that and what we do now, it's reasonable for health and nutritional needs to be worked out, and guidance issued.

An HV who doesn't know the reasons for the guidance being six months is simply poorly trained.

And as for the health visitor 'patronising' you by merely saying it was 'best' - she exposed her ignorance and you would be justified in feeling superior to her!

Maria well in that case I think maybe people DO need to keep going on and on and on (at least on here) about the around 6 months rule if there is so much confusion and people are still sticking to 4 months. And again, I don't see why you should feel strange about having weaned a couple of weeks early for perfectly good reasons, I did too. But I think it's important you KNOW those signs and not just some vague "instinct".