Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Weaning

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

Flip

1 2

Original poster

DD is 23 wks and HV banging in about 'new advice' and 'window of opportunity'

26 replies

StrikeUpTheBand · 19/05/2010 15:12

Hi,

I have one DS who was 2 months prem (now 3) and did mostly BLW with him (from 7 months because he didn't have the coordination before that). My DD is now 23 weeks and although she shows a lot of interest in putting things in her mouth and often swipes at my food I was planning on leaving it till 26 weeks. However, saw HV today and she was very clear that the advice was (according to her) to wean between 5 and 6 months and certainly by 6 months. I told her my intention was to start in a few more weeks and do BLW. She was ok about this but kept saying now was the optimum time etc.

Why is she so sure about this? Have I missed something?

OP posts:

ruddynorah · 19/05/2010 15:13

no. just do blw, then it's not up to you anyway, it's upto your baby.

Original poster

StrikeUpTheBand · 19/05/2010 15:49

Thanks for reply ruddynorah .

It was just strange - the booklet she gave me was pretty good and stated around 6 months. The Bounty pack had writing on it and said similar - so why was she saying 5-6 months as though it was unrefutable while giving out literature for me to read which said differently?!

OP posts:

Original poster

StrikeUpTheBand · 19/05/2010 15:52

(unrefutable - pretty sure I've made up my own word there .)

OP posts:

CMOTdibbler · 19/05/2010 15:55

Who knows why she said that, but the leaflets are correct. If you feel like it, contact her again and say you are confused by the difference between what she says and the leaflets, and can she direct you to where you can read more about what she has said. And then come back and tell us

There are lots of publications out there, touting different ages, but the current DoH and WHO advice is 6 months

ruddynorah · 19/05/2010 16:02

at my weaning talk the woman said ok everyone the rules are you should wait til they're 6 months old, but you can start at 17 weeks. she said if you wait til 6 months then you only have 2 weeks to quickly get them on 3 meals a day, but if you start at 17 weeks you can build up nice and slowly to 3 meals at 6 months

i started a thread about it at the time

AngelDog · 21/05/2010 13:04

Here's the Department of Health leaflet for info (although you may have seen it already).

The strapline from page 2 is "Enjoy it. Encourage it. Don?t force it." Then: "Let it happen at its own pace, and if you have any worries talk to your health visitor." She is clearly not following that first bit of advice!

FWIW, my health visitor seemed slightly surprised that I'd not started 4.5m.o. DS on solids yet (although she didn't pressurise me to start). Lots of them do seem to be pro-early weaning - friends of mine have had HVs tell them to wean from 17 weeks. (I'm sure it's not the case for all of them, though - that's just my experience.)

jinglesticks · 21/05/2010 19:03

I was about to start a thread on this, after just being told by HV that the advice is about to be changed again to introduce solids gradually from 4-6 months. has anyone else heard this?

Original poster

StrikeUpTheBand · 21/05/2010 22:24

Interesting...maybe they both went on similar training?

Anybody know what is going on in the wonderful world of HVs lately?

OP posts:

bruffin · 21/05/2010 22:51

The AAP in the US changed their guidelines in march back to 4-6 months.

tiktok · 22/05/2010 16:16

Give it a rest, bruffin. What are you on, for goodness sake!?

Every weaning thread...why?

The advice in the UK has not changed. There are no plans to change it. There is not even a consultation out. There is no prospect of us changing....and for good reason. If evidence accrues for change, then the usual steps will be taken, but it does not happen overnight.

'Solids at 6 mths' (and certainly no earlier than 17 weeks) is a good, sound, public health policy, while being flexible enough to accommodate individual needs and even parental preference. There is no reason why a healthily growing, normally developing baby needs solids before 6 mths, and there is definitely no suggestion that this needs to be rushed into a 2 week window to get the baby on three meals a day.

But bruffin pops up with this US policy as if it's somehow relevant to UK public health guidance.

ParanoidAtAllTimes · 22/05/2010 16:25

I find it utterly bizarre that every hv my friends or I have talked to about weaning has been very pro early weaning. Even while handing you a 'don't rush to mush' leaflet. Tis odd.

I can only assume that it is because every baby they raised was weaned early and 'fine'.

People seem to take it as a personal slight on them if you choose to wait until your baby is (IMO) ready.

I just smiled, nodded, told them what they wanted to hear and then did my own thing. And haven't got him weighed since he was 6m

LaDiDaDi · 22/05/2010 16:26

I did blw weaning from 6 months with dd (though similar to op she didn't really get it at first due to prematurity) and tbh I immediately started with at least offering her foods three times a day, clearly she didn't necessarily eat each time. I intend to do the same thing with ds in 4 weeks time.

I think a lot of HV still have very odd ideas about weaning, I remember the HV ringing to invite us to a first stage weaning party when dd was 12 weeks, 4 weeks corrected for her prematurity, so clearly I didn't go and I felt it was bad practice for her to even ask tbh. Got a letter to invite us to a similar thing for ds and I've recently had an invite for a second stage weaning party?? which again I will merrily ignore.

Weaning is rubbish imo, creates loads of mess and nastier nappies so why rush?

ParanoidAtAllTimes · 22/05/2010 16:26

Oh and 'window of opportunity'?!

So wait later than 6m and...what?

They lose all ability to chew?

bruffin · 22/05/2010 16:27

tiktok, the other poster ask why the HV's are now giving this advice. I just pointed out there is obviously a change of thinking elsewhere, which may affect the change of thinking here.
If it bothers you so much why don't you actually go and talk to ask some HVs and find out what their current training is rather than rubbishing it.
Nobody is saying that it has to be rushed into 3 meals a day in 2 weeks

ProfessorLaytonIsMyLoveSlave · 22/05/2010 16:32

Well, ruddynorah's HV did (say it had to be rushed into 3 meals a day in 2 weeks, that is).

ParanoidAtAllTimes · 22/05/2010 16:32

'Weaning is rubbish imo, creates loads of mess and nastier nappies so why rush? '

Ladidadi- exactly!

I weaned ds in the same way you did with your dd and it seems to have worked well!

Iggisfulloftayto · 22/05/2010 16:36

"The HVs" aren't now giving this advice Bruffin, the OP's HV is. You make it sound like there has been a general change. HVs come in all flavours and give very different advice. Would be nice if it wasn't so contradictory

bruffin · 22/05/2010 16:43

There has been a lot of threads on here lately about HVs going on training courses and coming back with new advicem, this has coincided with the AAP changing there advice. Annecdotal I know, but interestingly it's seems to be the same advice

tiktok · 22/05/2010 16:49

bruffin, without outing myself, I do talk to HVs a lot. I come across many who are confused and under-informed, however most are supposed to be working to local feeding policies which are more or less identical to national guidance.

Despite this, in practice, some of them have not updated their advice for many years, and the 2003 change in guidance appears to have passed them by.

They are certainly not being 'officially' trained in anything but the 6 mths (and not before 17 weeks) policy.

I have also heard (not just on mumsnet) HVs talking about rumours about guidance being about to change.

It seems to me poor practice to change what you tell mothers on the basis of rumours, and a good HV would surely not do this.

It's not changing. It may, I suppose, change in the future, but there are no signs of this happening at the moment.

tiktok · 22/05/2010 16:53

No one - not a mother, not any of the HVs who post on mumsnet - has been able to say exactly what training is telling HVs that the advice has changed/is changing.

The current training that all HVs are (or should be) doing is the 'travelling' workshop about the use of the new weight charts. This echoes the 6 mths guidance (I know, because I sat in as an observer on one of these).

Formula and baby food manufacturers sometimes offer training sessions to HCPs. It's these ones that sometimes have midwives and HVs convinced that Brand X is 'closest to breastmilk'. It is very possible they are hearing at sessions like this something about guidance being changed. This is not official training.

CarmenSanDiego · 22/05/2010 16:56

I take everything the AAP says with a pinch of salt. They have received funding from Gerber (baby food)/Nestle and other formula companies. Their priorities are not evidence-based medicine.

bruffin · 22/05/2010 18:45

Carmen the AAP changed it's advice based on the ESPGHAN medical position paper on complimentary feeding, nothing to do with nestle.

tiktok · 22/05/2010 18:49

bruffin, it is perfectly possible for an association's view on these matters to be affected by their commercial links, don't you agree?

The ESPGHAN paper - as I have already explained to you - does not actually undermine the current guidance.

bruffin · 22/05/2010 21:31

Yes of course some matters can be affected by commercial links but there is no evidence of it in this case and there is evidence that they changed their advice because of the paper.
Germany, Italy, France and now the US all advise between 4 -6 months, advice differs all over the world, However you read it the ESPGHAN paper definitely says complimentary feeding needs to start no later than the 26th week.

Original poster

StrikeUpTheBand · 22/05/2010 22:52

Bruffin - was predicting that you'd turn up somehow (in the nicest possible way - just that I've seen you on many other weaning threads lately ).

My guess is that there are some rumours and maybe some HVs are very quick to adopt them as fact because it is more like the advice they were originally trained to give?

As it is I may start offering food (BLW style) for her to explore/throw around/etc from about 24 weeks. She is a completely different kettle of fish from my prem DS who was still at the "batting a toy while laying there quite passively in the bouncy chair" stage. I actually started him on purees at 23 weeks because Bliss etc advise weaning preemies slightly earlier. I found 6 weeks or so later that his coordination improved and so we started BLW and it was fine. With DD she is sitting almost unaided already and can pick things up and chew them (toys etc).

By the way, I try not to overhear conversations at baby clinic as it just makes me a bit (many of them are very young babies' mothers going on about how they don't think they can wait till 4 months with their 9 week old etc .

OP posts:

Flip

1 2