Is everyone against traditional weaning?

[Maffie]

I do a mix of both, although nothing is pureed as he wont touch it, he seems to like lumpy food.

 

[suzanne108]

Kit - you explained exactly what I meant about the "divide".

 

[craftymumof4]

I weaned all mine at around 4 months as I that what was recommended then plus I felt they were ready for it, even though the twins were 9 weeks early it helped with their reflux. I think its up to each individual when they start weaning, as they are the best to judge when their little one is ready .

 

[BabyNo.1]

I think giving BLW the title it has also seems to cause suspicion in some people/put people off. i've seen posts saying "BLW just isnt for us" Perhaps this is because it associated with "natural parenting" and things like baby wearing and breastfeeding. I think perhaps if people read some more about it they would see its not much different to what they are doing and what people have been doing for years. My mum was horrified when I first told her about it. After I told her a bit more about it she said "well you had finger foods at 6 months".

Hmmm not sure on BLW being promoted. Id never heard of it until coming on here. None of my friends have heard of it and my HV encourages baby rice. Im reading the book, it makes sense to me and im going to give it a go.However im not ruling out purees either. Just going to see what happens. Im going to be looking for support on here and im confident that no-one will judge whatever I choose to do - this is one of the least "judgey" forums out there!

 

[purpledaisy2]

Comments like;

It doesnt matter if he chews when you do, or babies put everything in their mouth anyway - it doesnt mean they want food, is probably what makes the OP doubt herself.

I cant see what she meant with regards to her original post in the weaning section.

BUT normally when people post about weaning at 4 months, you get bombarded with people quoting this that and the other. Medical studies and what not, it can be overwhelming. I know i've read a few threads and thought christ she was only asking for abit for advice.

I don't think there was any need for this thread though.

 

[TattiesMum]

I think giving BLW the title it has also seems to cause suspicion in some people/put people off. i've seen posts saying "BLW just isnt for us" Perhaps this is because it associated with "natural parenting" and things like baby wearing and breastfeeding. I think perhaps if people read some more about it they would see its not much different to what they are doing and what people have been doing for years. My mum was horrified when I first told her about it. After I told her a bit more about it she said "well you had finger foods at 6 months".

Hmmm not sure on BLW being promoted. Id never heard of it until coming on here. None of my friends have heard of it and my HV encourages baby rice. Im reading the book, it makes sense to me and im going to give it a go.However im not ruling out purees either. Just going to see what happens. Im going to be looking for support on here and im confident that no-one will judge whatever I choose to do - this is one of the least "judgey" forums out there!

I agree with your Mum ... although my LO's had purees, they also had finger foods at 6 months - they ate/were fed the same food as we had (albeit mashed up) and generally at the same time as the rest of the family ate, at the dining table

It's just weaning

Personally I never fed my LO's baby rice (have you TASTED that stuff??? It's like wallpaper paste ) but that's just me - there is nothing wrong with baby rice, it just wasn't my thing

You are also right about this being one of the least judgemental parenting forums I've belonged to quite a few over the years (including a couple of the 'big names' ) and they are so Cliquey .... it's like walking on eggshells

 

[Kitten]

I think the thing is, from speaking to health professionals and reading things etc., that the 6month guideline changed everything. This is what I have been told, as 'fact', by a variety of sources, summed up:

Babies do not have a developed enough stomach/digestive system to process 'normal' food until 6months.

Back in the day, babies were weaned from as young as 6 weeks because people believed that their crying meant they were hungry (amongst other reasons).

As a result, purees were 'invented' because the babies digestive systems couldn't handle un-pureed food.

Now the guidelines have changed to 6months, purees are now unnecessary. A baby at 6months can eat the same food as adults, albeit with less salt, additives, and smaller portions.

Therefore, if you follow the guidelines and wait until 6months, you don't need to puree feed.

However, the weaning 'system' of stage 1, stage 2 etc. is still widely promoted and advertised because a whole industry relies on it (Cow&Gate, Heinz etc). You only need to follow the stage system if you need to puree feed. You only need to puree feed if you start before 6months, because babies need their food puree'd before this age because they have undeveloped digestive systems.

To save confusion, this process of eliminating purees altogether (rather than continuing with purees and supplementing with finger foods and slowly making a transition to 'normal' foods) got given a name: baby-led weaning. Since then, baby-led weaning has picked up more things, such as not spoon feeding your child at all (even cereals and yoghurt) so has become more of a genre in it's own rather than just being skipping purees which has caused more confusion.

The end.

Yet, despite all this, everyone will do things their own way, hence we now have people who BLW before 6months, people who puree feed before 6months, people who puree feed after 6months, and people who do a combination of both either side of 6months.

If you follow the guidelines and wait until 6months, you do not need to start with purees, why people choose to, I don't know, it just seems like a waste of time, effort, and money to me, but it is so instilled in us to start with purees (after years of the start time being 4 months) that it's just habit I think, not to mention it's not seen as 'the norm' and people worry about choking and stuff. Equally, if you're a fan of BLW, I don't see why you'd start before 6months as the whole point of the creation of purees is that a baby's digestive system can't cope with "solid" food until 6months, but again, people have their own personal reasons.

Just so no-one thinks I'm some big preachy BLW, and to answer the original question of "is everyone against traditional weaning?" I did wait until 6months, and on the advice of my health visitor (who had never heard of "BLW" as a term/concept) I began with finger foods. I did read the Gill Rapley book and do a lot of reading around the subject and saw the reasons for waiting until 6months and not using purees and they seemed to make sense (ie. obesity/portion control, the development of the digestive system & allergies, intolerances, IBS etc etc) so I went with it. If people ask, I say I BLW because people seem to know that the term means he just eats what I eat, but I do spoon feed him yoghurts, and he prefers it usually if I tear bit of food off and hand them to him. He's also very active and curious (and moody) and refuses to eat breakfast at the table and likes to chew on a bit of a toast while he plays. He then comes over to me and opens his mouth like a bird for me to put pieces in. Bizarrely, he then takes these pieces out of his mouth, examines them, and puts them back in to eat them, he just won't take them off a plate and put them in his mouth. All this is just for the one meal of breakfast, he eats like a 'normal' BLW baby at lunch and dinner. Go figure. So on paper, I don't follow all the 'rules' of BLW, I do what works for my child.

I don't think people are against TW at all. I think the majority of people are misinformed and this causes all sorts of problems on both sides. I do not know anyone else in my day-to-day life who baby-led weans. Everyone I know started with purees at 17 weeks. Therefore, I'm the one who is judged, sneered at, or that people are 'against'. Only recently are health visitors being educated about BLW, and even that causes confusion because nutritionists are refusing to promote it as it has no scientifically proven benefits over 'traditional' weaning as of yet. But in my opinion it's not about proven benefits over TW, it's about being equal in nutritional value to TW but just coming at it from an easier and cheaper angle. And even those nutritionists advise waiting until 6months.

Anywho, that's my 2cents. Like a lot of ladies have said, it's about educating yourself and others on the guidelines. It's irresponsible, in my opinion, to make a decision without looking into the reasons for and against it, especially when it comes to a childs wellbeing. We have so much information at our fingertips with libraries, children & family centres, health professionals, helplines and the internet that there really is no excuse for people to stumble blindly making irrational choices. If you read some of the information and make a decision that other people don't like, as long as it isn't child cruelty or whatever then it really is none of their business.

Sorry for waffling but now I've put across all the facts I know of, my job here is done, lol. I just thought I'd try and help clear up some of the confusion over TW/BLW and the associated guidelines.

 

[AP]

Adding to Kittens post, another reason for the '6 months mark' is because this is when babys irons stores from birth start to run low.

 

[Wobbles]

I think giving BLW the title it has also seems to cause suspicion in some people/put people off. i've seen posts saying "BLW just isnt for us" Perhaps this is because it associated with "natural parenting" and things like baby wearing and breastfeeding. I think perhaps if people read some more about it they would see its not much different to what they are doing and what people have been doing for years. My mum was horrified when I first told her about it. After I told her a bit more about it she said "well you had finger foods at 6 months".

I can't believe I read that - What a bizarre thing to say A parent who uses any natural parenting method doesn't HAVE to use all of them that may fit into this category of parenting preference. Personal answer is I can definitely say I didn't not BLW because it reminded me of another parenting choice I didn't do in fact with Caitlin after reading up on it I was a little frightened (I'm a panicky person) but with my daughter Megan I didn't exclusively BLW but I have given her solid finger foods from 5 months from bread sticks, toast & fruit etc given advice on foods from other parents who BLW

No offence but it's comments like that which divide parents thinking of 'groups' when realistically we're all parents

x

 

[Wobbles]

To original poster - Why ask a question to then rip it apart? Surely you could have discussed your problem on the thread you created with the members you talk of instead of taking the same topic to another post? I've read the thread and it seems you just didn't get the answers you want so you added a potential heated discussion nit picking the opinions you asked for in the first place.

 

[BabyNo.1]

[/QUOTE]
I can't believe I read that - What a bizarre thing to say A parent who uses any natural parenting method doesn't HAVE to use all of them that may fit into this category of parenting preference. x[/QUOTE]

ooops perhaps that didn't come across how I mean't it! I think I was trying to say exactly what you are. Because it has a name some people seem to consider it "new fangled" or something and compartmentalize it into some sort of parenting style - maybe along with other things that they consider "not for them". I certainly don't think like that and one of the good things about forums like this is that you can read about what others do with their children and pick and choose what bits you think might work for you. I completely agree that because you choose one "method" in a certain area doesn't mean that you have to do that in all aspects of raising your children.

To me its all weaning and the fact that BLW isn't actually that disimilar to what people have been doing for years. Plus many people that "traditionally" wean still seem to use many of the aspects of BLW.

I haven't even started weaning my baby yet so perhaps Im not the best person to comment on this thread anyway

BTW not sure I have quite got the hang of quoting - looks all wrong!

 

[Lu28]

Slightly off topic but I'm curious as to what people mean when they say they do a combination of BLW and TW? With BLW you don't give any purees, don't spoon feed mashed food (if LO will feed themselves yoghurt etc from a preloaded spooon then that's fine) etc. My understanding of TW was always a combination of purees/mashed food being spoon fed and giving them finger foods. So I guess I don't understand how you can combine, it's either one or the other? I haven't heard of anyone who TWs without also having finger foods

 

[jenny82]

Well I thought I did combi - but obviously I'm wrong.

I just assumed TW was purees and spoon feeds only. If I'm wrong in what I thought TW was, then I suppose I do TW only and no BLW?

As I said previously, I used finger foods and pre-loaded spoons more in the morning and let LO have a play about. At dinnertime I offered finger foods the odd time but tried to feed him myself with a spoon - not purees though, more like mashed up dinner. This is more because I was worried that he wasn't getting enough food (and I know that milk is all he needs nutritionally-wise for the first year - just personally, I preferred to know he was actually eating something).

 

[Lu28]

I can totally understand you wanting to do that Jenny, I found it the most difficult part of BLW, never knowing for sure how much she was eating!

I guess I was just wondering if there's anyone who does TW without finger foods as I always assumed finger foods were part and parcel of TW

 

[aimee-lou]

Lu - I think I do a combination, but I totally agree that it is just TW 'done properly' lol. The only thing that I think makes a difference is that I give pre-loaded spoons, and roughly half the food Earl eats is given as 'whole' finger foods. Rather than the finger foods being purely a teaching aid which I think in TW a lot of people view them as, rather than part of the meal. My normal way of working is that breakfast and dinner we get something spoonfed. I give him the first half nd then he has pre-loaded spoons the second half. He also has 'whole foods' at these meals. At lunch and mid-afternoon snack we may get a yoghurt given on a spoon, but everything is else given as-is.

I bought the BLW book and really liked it but because we started weaning so early I assumed he wouldn't be ready to self-feed and started with the spoons. I kept on trying him out and literally 1 week after we started he would pick up and eat food on his tray, or on your plate, consistently. He'd been picking them up with mixed amounts of success since 15 weeks. If I'd been a bit more confident I probably could have started him on BLW at 18 weeks, but being a first time parent I didn't expect him to be able to do this. Once I knew he could I started to do it more and more but he had gotten used to the 'filling up' that the spoon feeding brought with it, and got very frustrated as the self feeding just wasn't doing the job lol. So, I had no choice but to 'fill him up' to start with and then let him loose on the food the rest of the time. I am trying to take out the spoon feeding element at dinner time but I think this will probably take another month as his apetite is huge at the moment and he is still getting frustrated.

I hope that makes sense. I think I should probably call it 'BLW-influenced TW' lol.

Sorry, that ended up a bit long lol

 

[ellie]

im not sure the label matters too much tbh ..... we all as mothers will work out whats right for our babies and us.
the good thing i think is that there are 'other ways' if doing things. i was dreading all the pureeing / spoon feeding but some people really enjoy it.
perhaps 'watching you eat' cant be taken as itself as a 'sign', (although according to my MIL it is!!!) but as a mum you will be going on more than that to decide, but that is just hard to get across in an internet forum.

 

[Lu28]

I think I should probably call it 'BLW-influenced TW' lol.

That makes sense! We weaned at 5 months and I started on purees before moving onto BLW at 7 months and I guess the first couple of months for us was TW with some BLW intentions behind it so preloaded spoon for the puree etc. I can see now the difference between having finger food as a teaching aid v part of the meal itself.

Thanks for taking the time to explain hon

 

[Wobbles]

I've given Megan even with no teeth from the start foods like fish fingers, veg fingers, veg, pasta, rice, toast, oven potatoes, bread sticks, salad, strips of chicken, eggs whatever really self feeding - have gave her home foods from the spoon - have also used pureed jars through all stages and have done various ways since she started weaning basically depending on what Caitlin was having. Also used solid finger foods much sooner than I dreamt of with Caitlin I was a bit of a fanny.

So I have said I've done a bit of both.

What does TW mean? Never seen that used until this thread

Babyno.1 I've never seen someone say that so I was kinda shocked and giggled and thought surely not x

 

[Wobbles]

Oh ok Im being thick I know what TW means

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

@ wobbles
xx