Does this mean he wasn't ready for solids? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-03-2009, 05:32 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 1,777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyCatherine185 View Post
"I feed her purees to keep her satisfied so I know exactly what she's eating, and so she doesn't steal my food."

your quote from a previous thread. That is not your baby grabbing the food, and putting it in her own mouth.
I LIKE giving her purees. I like making them. I like eating them. I think it's great fun. If I gave her chunks of food (which I do) she would eat them (and she does).

I'm not telling anyone else that they need to give purees to their little ones, I am sharing my experiences. I'm certainly not advocating giving babies food before they are ready.

What I am trying to do is get rid of this misinformation that solid food is not needed before the age of one. In some rare cases this might be true, but it is not good to spread myths like that around.

I'm also trying to say that YES some babies are different and YES my baby is one of them. Because I don't want people to feel guilty for giving their babies food when they are clearly ready just because they haven't reached such and such age. Because I thought my baby was BAD for wanting to eat so early and it that kind of thinking is just wrong. I don't want it to happen to anyone else.

The baby is ready when the baby is ready. And solid food is needed for nutrition starting at around 6-8 months, some babies may be outside of that range and that is fine.

Nik! Mama to Evelynn Rose 08/19/08 and Autumn Lily 11/02/10
holothuroidea is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-03-2009, 07:55 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by holothuroidea View Post
And solid food is needed for nutrition starting at around 6-8 months, some babies may be outside of that range and that is fine.
Links?

And any breastfeeding-supportive source will discuss the fact that as they eat more solids, they consume less breastmilk. Please show me any source saying otherwise.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 02-03-2009, 09:18 PM
 
kiara7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Isn't it way they say to bf before offering solids? So that the baby doesn't fill up on solids and then not want their main source of nutrition, bm?
kiara7 is offline  
Old 02-03-2009, 11:52 PM
 
LadyCatherine185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Powhatan, VA
Posts: 3,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
a quote from kellymom.com

What we're aiming for during the first year is to have solids complementing breastmilk, not replacing it. This means that when solids are introduced the breastfeeding pattern is not interrupted at all, but baby is fed solids in slowly increasing amounts as his appetite increases. Baby will be getting the same amount of breastmilk (or even more) as he gets older, with increasing amounts of solids on top of that.

I think the main point in the matter is maintaining breastmilk as baby's main source of nutrition throughout the first year. This is important both to baby's good nutrition and good health. The nutrients in breastmilk are particularly important for growth and development during baby's first year. In addition, some (but certainly not all) of the health benefits of breastfeeding are directly related to the degree of exclusivity of breastfeeding (the greater the percentage of baby's diet made up of breastmilk, the greater the health benefit).

Nursing before (rather than after) the solids is a good way to help keep the transition to solids proceeding slowly so that mom's milk supply is maintained and baby gets the breastmilk that he needs.


it is not a myth that breastmilk is supposed to be the main nutrition source for the first year. I don't think anyone said that it is supposed to be the ONLY nutrition source, but yes, the main one.

another quote-

Solids during the first year are only meant to complement breastmilk, not take precedence over it or replace any breastfeedings. It is more of a way to add textures to the baby's diet, to allow the baby new experiences, and to help her develop hand/eye coordination through finger feeding.

Catie belly.gif- Happy wife to Aaron stillheart.gif(01.05), mama to Liambikenew.gif(08.08), and Ian jammin.gif (11.10)! homebirth.jpgnocirc.giffamilybed1.gif and joy.gif due Feb 2013 with blessing #3!

LadyCatherine185 is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 01:35 AM
 
celia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just wanted to throw in my experiences. Both my kids HATED cereal. My ped told me the suggestion for starting with cereal is an old fasioned one, the belief having been that babies needed the iron. I'd say don't worry about cereal if the babe doesn't like it.
celia is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 01:38 AM
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 1,777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyCatherine185 View Post
it is not a myth that breastmilk is supposed to be the main nutrition source for the first year. I don't think anyone said that it is supposed to be the ONLY nutrition source, but yes, the main one.
The word around here is, "Food in the first year is only for fun, not for nutrition." Which is not a true statement. I never said kellymom was perpetuating myths.

Quote:
What I am trying to do is get rid of this misinformation that solid food is not needed before the age of one. In some rare cases this might be true, but it is not good to spread myths like that around.
I am sorry that I have been misunderstood.

Nik! Mama to Evelynn Rose 08/19/08 and Autumn Lily 11/02/10
holothuroidea is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 01:45 PM
 
marisa724's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nutley, NJ
Posts: 1,182
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
holothuroidea -- I think I understand what you are trying to say. A growing baby has growing needs for food. You are not suggesting that a mother skip a milk meal in favor of a puree, but rather that when the baby has a need for additional food as he grows, the mother can offer a puree to fill that additional need.

Where I would disagree with that strategy is that there is no solid food that is as nutritionally complete as breastmilk. The nutritional content of breastmilk does not change at 6-8 months; it remains a complete source of fats, vitamins, protein, etc. So the moms who choose to provide those additional meals in the form of breastmilk are also doing just fine by their babies. Solids are not needed, because there is literally nothing they can offer that breastmilk does not have, beyond the experience of different textures and tastes.

(One possible exception might be iron, my exclusively breastfed DS1 was somewhat anemic after 9m and we had to add iron-rich foods to his diet for a little while. This is the exception rather than the rule, however, and it is fairly common for drs. to offer a finger-prick test for iron levels to find out whether baby has a demonstrated need in this area.)

mama to Joey (1/04) and Teddy (4/08) :
marisa724 is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 02:19 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 1,777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by marisa724 View Post
holothuroidea -- I think I understand what you are trying to say. A growing baby has growing needs for food. You are not suggesting that a mother skip a milk meal in favor of a puree, but rather that when the baby has a need for additional food as he grows, the mother can offer a puree to fill that additional need.

Where I would disagree with that strategy is that there is no solid food that is as nutritionally complete as breastmilk. The nutritional content of breastmilk does not change at 6-8 months; it remains a complete source of fats, vitamins, protein, etc. So the moms who choose to provide those additional meals in the form of breastmilk are also doing just fine by their babies. Solids are not needed, because there is literally nothing they can offer that breastmilk does not have, beyond the experience of different textures and tastes.

(One possible exception might be iron, my exclusively breastfed DS1 was somewhat anemic after 9m and we had to add iron-rich foods to his diet for a little while. This is the exception rather than the rule, however, and it is fairly common for drs. to offer a finger-prick test for iron levels to find out whether baby has a demonstrated need in this area.)
That was very well written. Thank you.

It really depends on the baby. My baby's appetite could never be satisfied by breast milk. She nurses every hour as it is. And NO I don't have a low supply (there was a period where I had to pump a lot and I got 30+ oz a day just from pumping). I swear she has the metabolism of a marathon runner. She does nothing but eat and she's just a little string bean.

I guess I was just trying to say that for most babies, they do need some solid food under one. Some start sooner than others.

Nik! Mama to Evelynn Rose 08/19/08 and Autumn Lily 11/02/10
holothuroidea is offline  
Old 02-04-2009, 10:14 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by holothuroidea View Post

I guess I was just trying to say that for most babies, they do need some solid food under one. Some start sooner than others.
Again- do you have a link for that? Because my research has shown that that is not the case.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 12:15 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Can someone post a study that says "before one-just for fun"?

thank you

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 02:30 AM
 
junipermoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
here is an article that is floating in many sites on the web that is attributed to dr. jack newman.

he says that 4-6 months is best, when the baby seems interested and wants to eat, BUT he also says that if protocols for establishing better bm transfer and increasing supply don't work and weight is an issue you could start as early as 3 months.

he also says that

"A full term baby will start requiring iron from other sources by 6
to 9 months of age. The calories supplied by breastmilk may become inadequate by 8 to 9 months of age, although some babies can continue to grow well on breastmilk alone well past a year."

http://74.6.239.67/search/cache?ei=U...icp=1&.intl=us


i was sursprised to hear this about the iron thing!

but--similar to what many posts are saying--digging around on the net i also saw very serious concerns raised about allergies and asthma--that were grounded in data that looked legitimate, too.

this thread comes at a good time for me b/c my 4 month old is starting to be very interested in food--in a different way from reaching for toys--he clearly smells and understands and is thinking he'd like to explore.

but after reading about this stuff a little bit i think i am going to hold off at least until i am able to sort out if tastes that can't be swallowed (like a raw carrot or 1/4 of a cored apple, for instance) pose a threat or not. anyone have any links or ideas on that?

in terms of actually giving him chunks he could swallow, i am waiting till 6 months definitely.

my guy can sit in a tripod pose (just mastered it!) and upright in a chair, but, he has a tongue thrust, no teeth, and no pincer grasp.

to the op--yeah, i think if your baby doesn't seem to be swallowing the cereal or loving it either, i would definitely stop feeding it. that situation must be frustrating to you. great job growing your baby though! he sounds healthy and perfect and just not ready for solids yet.
junipermoon is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 10:35 AM
 
LadyCatherine185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Powhatan, VA
Posts: 3,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've heard so many good things about Jack Newman, but that article is full of contradictary statements!

"When a baby seems to be hungry, or when weight gain is not continuing at the desired rate, it may be reasonable to start solids as early as three months
of age. Starting at three months of age when things are going well, however, is not recommended (see
above)."


Basically, you can start at 3 months, but he doesn't recommend it? Then why would he even say it??? Only if weight gain isn't adequate maybe?

oy.. i think i have a headache.

Catie belly.gif- Happy wife to Aaron stillheart.gif(01.05), mama to Liambikenew.gif(08.08), and Ian jammin.gif (11.10)! homebirth.jpgnocirc.giffamilybed1.gif and joy.gif due Feb 2013 with blessing #3!

LadyCatherine185 is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 10:50 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
there seems to be many studies (mostly by american pediatrics ) that state the need for infant nutrition calorie inaddition to BM, but I can not find any stating to holding off on real feeding as is so often stated here (fun before one)-

tongue thrust is one things, but I fail to understand sitting alone ( I know a child, without digestive problems , that can not sit unassisted at age three, has a back issue), a downs child that does not have pincher at one in a half- should these children not be fed? Can the same apply to elderly?

iron-anemia seems only to be only mentioned when a child tests low (9 to 12 months) - I can't understand why this is so blown off here as a NOT real issue, it can cause lasting effects and is so easily prevented??

WBV are far more than vaccinations, I would hope that the message so often given (fun before one) would be really looked into by some mothers.

What studies show that you "harm" the BF relationship by giving food inaddition?

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 02:01 PM
 
junipermoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyCatherine185 View Post
I've heard so many good things about Jack Newman, but that article is full of contradictary statements!....

oy.. i think i have a headache.
no kidding. me too, headache, and yep, contradiction ridden...it gives me the impression that 3-9 months is the best time to introduce solids! um, that is a little vague. i do think he is saying only under 4 months if you have tried everything to increase the quantity/quality of milk supply and transfer and then even then there are concerns, and only under 6 months if the baby is exhibiting signs of super-readiness.

in any case, i certainly wouldn't base my decisions on one article with no citations--i just actually pasted it up there b/c i just wanted to point out that there are many opinions on this--even in the pro-breastfeeding community.

what frustrates me though is that even if an article is citing primary literature, how do you tell the difference between legitimate data and lies, damn lies? my h is a scientist in a university setting and many moons ago when he was getting his phd he said that you could often trust university based research because the funding sources used to be (semi) neutral--nowadays there is little federal funding available and more and more university studies are funded in part by private entities with vested interests in outcomes...so where do you turn?

also, even if you have legitimate data, it often does contradict itself and it seems you can never be sure of anything--ask my h a question about something that relates to his specific research interests and his answers are always qualified and often uncertain--and this is even when he has read everything published on the issue and done his own research to boot.

so, how to know when to feed baby solids?

i guess for me, i am trying to take into consideration 1. the baby's cues 2. the opinions of specialists/experts who i personally trust 3. my own research (which i have yet to do!).

everything i see so far seems to point to delaying till at least six months--more if the baby's family has a hx of allergies/asthma (and my h does have asthma...)
junipermoon is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 02:46 PM
 
delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i starterd offering solids to my baby at 6 1/2 months. we always did self feeding. For 6 months, he smashed, on himself and around himeverything i gave him. He would put it in his hair, in mine, in his mouth ocasionally, swallowing veeery little, spitting a lot. I continued to nurse on demand. He's growing, is healthy, is lively. He didn't "need" the nutrition in solids, therefore, he didn't actually eat solids until very recently.
A healthy baby will not starve himself, if he had had a need for the nutrition in solids he would have been eating them!instead, he was having fun.
delfin is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 02:56 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by delfin View Post
i starterd offering solids to my baby at 6 1/2 months. we always did self feeding. For 6 months, he smashed, on himself and around himeverything i gave him. He would put it in his hair, in mine, in his mouth ocasionally, swallowing veeery little, spitting a lot. I continued to nurse on demand. He's growing, is healthy, is lively. He didn't "need" the nutrition in solids, therefore, he didn't actually eat solids until very recently.
A healthy baby will not starve himself, if he had had a need for the nutrition in solids he would have been eating them!instead, he was having fun.
This. I have no problem at all offering solids (once a baby meets readiness signs)

The problem is that when spoon feeding liquid foods, the tendency is to put in more than baby needs. THEN you are discouraging breastfeeding. B/c if there is an 8oz tummy and 2oz are filled with liquid foods, then that's 2oz less breastmilk that that baby will get. 2 oz less that that baby will signal that mom's breasts to make. 2 oz less that mom will make in the future. etc.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 03:03 PM
 
sapphire_chan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 27,052
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
but I fail to understand sitting alone ( I know a child, without digestive problems , that can not sit unassisted at age three, has a back issue), a downs child that does not have pincher at one in a half- should these children not be fed? Can the same apply to elderly?
Which is why I often add "barring other factors that might hinder the ability to sit," but not always since that should be obvious.
sapphire_chan is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 04:06 PM - Thread Starter
 
ILoveSweetpea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Wow - I didn't think my post would lead to such a lively discussion! This is a very interesting debate though.

What I don't understand (er...just one of many things I don't understand) is this "signs of readiness" thing. DS seems to have all the signs of readiness. The pincer grasp, sitting up on his own, etc. When he is fed with a bottle, he is interested in feeding himself. But when I go to feed him cereal (or recently the homemade mashed carrots I tried), he is clearly not into it and closes his mouth tightly. (It's actually pretty cute how clear he is in communicating he doesn't want to eat... as soon as he sees the spoon, his little lips tightly close. So, yeah...we don't get very far and there is no way I would force a spoon into an unwilling mouth.)

What should I make of him showing all signs of readiness EXCEPT for actually wanting to eat? I'll guess keep occasionally offering him food and hopefully he will eventually let me know he is ready to eat. Because if I went by readiness signs, you'd think he would already be eating.

We have his six-month appointment in just two weeks. I am a bit nervous about being scolded from the ped for not having really started solids yet. Not that I'd let that change my parenting choices... but I do feel like a bad student going to the principal's office.


Thanks to everyone for adding to this discussion. I'm learning a lot about both sides of the debate.

::
ILoveSweetpea is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 04:49 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 42,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILoveSweetpea View Post

What should I make of him showing all signs of readiness EXCEPT for actually wanting to eat?
That he's not ready

Dd showed ALL readiness signs (except interest based ones) at 4 months. I started trying at 6 months- because that's what you're supposed to do, right? She really wasn't interested until around 13 months.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:35 PM
 
Mama Mko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Under the Stars
Posts: 1,467
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILoveSweetpea View Post
What should I make of him showing all signs of readiness EXCEPT for actually wanting to eat? I'll guess keep occasionally offering him food and hopefully he will eventually let me know he is ready to eat. Because if I went by readiness signs, you'd think he would already be eating.
This is from Dr Sears website: "Breast milk is nutritionally complete for at least the first year of life. This means that infants can go for at least a year on breast milk alone, without eating any foods, and be nutritionally complete. Offering foods between 6 and 12 months of age is simply for social development and to get infants used to eating."

http://askdrsears.com/faq/bf4.asp

I wouldn't worry about it. Offer them occasionally. He'll eat when he's ready.

Live and love with your whole being.
Mama Mko is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:40 PM
 
LadyCatherine185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Powhatan, VA
Posts: 3,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebeccajo View Post
This is from Dr Sears website: "Breast milk is nutritionally complete for at least the first year of life. This means that infants can go for at least a year on breast milk alone, without eating any foods, and be nutritionally complete. Offering foods between 6 and 12 months of age is simply for social development and to get infants used to eating."

http://askdrsears.com/faq/bf4.asp

I wouldn't worry about it. Offer them occasionally. He'll eat when he's ready.

Catie belly.gif- Happy wife to Aaron stillheart.gif(01.05), mama to Liambikenew.gif(08.08), and Ian jammin.gif (11.10)! homebirth.jpgnocirc.giffamilybed1.gif and joy.gif due Feb 2013 with blessing #3!

LadyCatherine185 is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 05:46 PM - Thread Starter
 
ILoveSweetpea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I love Dr. Sears... personally, I'm willing to take his advice as the final word on this matter. (For us anyway!)

Sweetpea will eat whenever he is ready to eat. He is obviously growing and developing just fine. Like I said, I'll just keep occasionally presenting food to him to see if he wants it... and won't sweat it when he purses his lips together! LOL!

::
ILoveSweetpea is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 06:59 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
www.askdrsears.com/html/3/T030500.asp

From - Dr. Sear's site

6 monthsStarter foods:
bananas, pears, rice cereal, applesauce
Strained, pureed Fingertipful Spoonful


?????????????????

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 11:07 PM
 
irony_optional's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Social development and getting used to eating, as Sears says in the above quote, is a valid reason to introduce food after about 6 months. No contradiction there.
irony_optional is offline  
Old 02-05-2009, 11:40 PM
 
sapphire_chan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 27,052
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILoveSweetpea View Post
Wow - I didn't think my post would lead to such a lively discussion! This is a very interesting debate though.

What I don't understand (er...just one of many things I don't understand) is this "signs of readiness" thing. DS seems to have all the signs of readiness. The pincer grasp, sitting up on his own, etc. When he is fed with a bottle, he is interested in feeding himself. But when I go to feed him cereal (or recently the homemade mashed carrots I tried), he is clearly not into it and closes his mouth tightly. (It's actually pretty cute how clear he is in communicating he doesn't want to eat... as soon as he sees the spoon, his little lips tightly close. So, yeah...we don't get very far and there is no way I would force a spoon into an unwilling mouth.)

What should I make of him showing all signs of readiness EXCEPT for actually wanting to eat? I'll guess keep occasionally offering him food and hopefully he will eventually let me know he is ready to eat. Because if I went by readiness signs, you'd think he would already be eating.

We have his six-month appointment in just two weeks. I am a bit nervous about being scolded from the ped for not having really started solids yet. Not that I'd let that change my parenting choices... but I do feel like a bad student going to the principal's office.


Thanks to everyone for adding to this discussion. I'm learning a lot about both sides of the debate.
you did start solids. You offered, he refused. Tell them he's eating great and they can check their little box and be happy.
sapphire_chan is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off