I’ve just found out that my inlaws think babies older than 6 months should either be weaned or be fed mostly solids to keep them from “starving”. I think this is nonsense- my first kid nursed frequently until after a year old, didn’t show too much interest in solids, and was frigging huge, plump, and happy. He’s still in the 95% percentile at almost three.
Anyway, we have a seven-month-old, and my (idiot) inlaws think he should be weaned, not nursed on demand, and eating three square meals a day. (I challenge anyone to get even one square meal into a baby. Good luck) I have our family doctor’s assurance that on-demand feeding is better than meal regulation, but I was interested in numbers and studies regarding infant nutrition, breastfeeding benefits, and baby caloric intake.
I’d also like the theory that babies who are fed on demand are winning some kind of Machiavellian power struggle and will become clingy and manipulative refuted, if anyone feels like tackling it.
Paging WhyNot and Unauthorized Cinnamon. Please report.
My first kid, hated nursing. Our pediatrician advised starting him on baby cereal at age 4 weeks, which he took to like hogs on corn. He was in the 90th percentile up unitl he was about 3, then trimmed down to average.
If you in-laws don’t live with you, just ignore them. If they do live with you, let them take over feeding and caring for the kid. I would be willing to bet that you could find studies that support both sides of the argument. But in reality it doesn’t make much difference as long as they are getting the calories they need for growth. All babies are different in what they like and don’t like. Try and find what works best for your kid.
Personally, I think people who speak in “musts” about toddler timelines are talking out their asses. Every baby’s going to have a different schedule. We’ve been doing solid food since about 5 1/2 months and probably could have gone earlier - she’d have stolen fries off our plate if she had the dexterity. My wife’s nurses thought we were forcing it on her, but if she wanted real food, why not give it to her? We were under a deadline in that my wife is back at work now but that was more of a happy coincidence.
There are nutritional and behavioral reasons to stick with breast feeding instead of solids. I don’t keep up with those, so I’ll leave them to someone else.
I’ll talk about baby poop. I have experience with that. A baby on solds has much stinkier poop than a baby who’s breast feeding only. There’s a big difference. That wouldn’t be the reason I’d decide what I’d feed a baby, but if I was on the fence, it would be the tie-breaker.
WHO recommends exclusive and on-demand breastfeeding for six months, followed by breastfeeding AND complementary feeding for two years or beyond.
AAPreccomends exclusive breast feeding for six months and “support for breastfeeding for the first year and beyond as long as mutually desired by mother and child.”
The Cochrane Library found “no deficits have been demonstrated in growth among infants from either developing or developed countries who are exclusively breastfed for six months or longer” (emphasis mine.)
AAFPsays, “As recommended by the WHO, breastfeeding should ideally continue beyond infancy, but this is not the cultural norm in the United States and requires ongoing support and encouragement.69 It has been estimated that a natural weaning age for humans is between two and seven years.70 Family physicians should be knowledgeable regarding the ongoing benefits to the child of extended breastfeeding, including continued immune protection,71 better social adjustment,72 and having a sustainable food source in times of emergency. The longer women breastfeed, the greater the decrease in their risk of breast cancer.73 Mothers who have immigrated from cultures in which breastfeeding beyond infancy is routine should be encouraged to continue this tradition. There is no evidence that extended breastfeeding is harmful to mother or child.” (emphasis, again, mine)
National Guideline Clearinghouse, used by nurses to determine the best evidence based practices in nursing, did a big ol’ database study, and found: “Recommendation 2 (Unchanged): Nurses and health care practice settings endorse the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months, with introduction of complementary foods and continued breastfeeding up to two years and beyond thereafter. (Level of Evidence I)”
If you want more from other agencies, go to here: Breastfeeding :
I don’t have a study, but based on thousands of children I’ve interacted with through various programs like Scouting, Big Brother, and Little League I have an observation. You don’t spoil a child by giving him or her attention, you spoil a child by giving him or her stuff.
Baby From Mars is just about 12 months and I am surprised at the number of people who have either congratulated me for still nursing her, or being on the edge of disapproving. Whatever.
We did baby-led solids with her (no purees, finger food from the start) but regardless, she was completely disinterested in food until around 10 months, even when we played around with offering food before milk, or gave her a few hours to get hungry. If I hadn’t been nursing her, she would have really suffered. She’d turn her head away, spit it out, or fling her hands up in front of her face to avoid food. Now, she eats gnocchi with pesto, duck, all types of cheese and anything of any shape or consistency (including broccoli from my spicy curry laksa the other day). In my experience following your baby’s natural demands has done nothing but good, although I have no cite for facts on this. Simply the BLW mantra, “Food is fun until they are 1”.
And as some of the sites I looked at said, breastmilk offers far more fat and nutritional value in a small amount than a large amount of mostly-water pureed sweet potato or rice cereal. If your baby is happy, active and growing, you’re doing a great job.
Obviously your child is not starving, and your first one is past the breastfeeding stage and turning out fine. So they’re alarmist (you know this, obviously). But they also managed to raise your partner, who I’m assuming is a pretty neat person or else you wouldn’t be together.
Neither position is absolutely wrong or right, there are few absolutes when it comes to child-rearing (except keeping them away from heavy traffic and open flames, maybe). Do what’s right for your kid. And, while your in-laws are annoying and imperfect, they can’t have failed too badly at child-rearing or your partner wouldn’t be here to talk about it, so do take that into consideration. However, in this case I recommend your partner tell his/her parents to shut the fuck up. =)
If your inlaws are talking about weaning completely, and giving your baby only solid food, then this is against all the guidelines that I have seen. I’m in the UK, and the Department of Health stance (warning - PDF) is breast or formula milk only until 6 months, and then gradual introduction of solids and finger food from that point, working up to 3 meals a day. Milk feeds continue to compliment solid food (breastfeeding on demand or about 20oz of formula per day). I know that guidelines change from year to year, but at the moment, this is what is being advised.
So I would say, continue what your doing and don’t worry about your inlaws. You’ve obviously managed fine with your older boy! If they aren’t saying any of this to your face, then it will be easier to ignore.
As a mother of another 7 month old (how’d that happen?!), I’m figuring all this stuff out for myself at the moment and pretty much going with the flow. Mine gets 3 solid feeds a day, and I try to give him 3 milk feeds a day (he’s on formula now, but if I was still breastfeeding, he’d be fed on demand), but he’s not as interested in that now. He really loves his food! I’m just not going to worry about it too much. I figure most babies turn out fine in spite of their parents!
Well, technically that set of inlaws is my FiL and my husband’s stepmother, and both my husband and his brother say their father was never home while they were children, and both of them spent their teenaged years running away or estranged from their dad. So there are many reasons for me to not take any child-rearing advice from them seriously.
Breast milk is good for the kid that’s why it’s is what it is. If you want to breastfeed your kid do it.
In any case you’re kid certainly won’t starve. Too many people tie in breast feeding with something sexual and see it as “evil”
I don’t know when a kid should be weaned but I’d say if he can unhook your bra, and help himself, it’s probably time to start thinking about solid foods
It’s just an age thing. I’m only 35, but when my daughter was the age of your baby, 12 years ago, the official advice was to start solid food at 4 months. You say you ‘found out;’ if they aren’t nagging you about it repeatedly, then it’s just their opinion, based on older information.
Yes, it is their opinion. I’ve actually heard it in sort-of snide remarks from them several times with my older one, but this was the first time with my younger one and they basically harangued my husband about it after I’d gone to bed one night, and I’m more knowledgeable about breastfeeding and its benefits than Mr. Lissar, so he was having a difficult time defending.
Ah, well, if they’re haranguing your husband, I understand why you sounded a bit annoyed. Sadly, it doesn’t sound as if they’re the kind of people who will take notice of a little non-entity like the World Health Organisation.
The main reason I, as a parent, started our kids on solids at 4 months old was that it was fun. By that age they’ve been chewing on their hands for a month or so and other things in there for them to play with and experience is just entertaining, for them and for me. Nutritionally it doesn’t matter one way or the other. Kids will self-regulate for the same number of calories over the day and they won’t be eating enough baby food to significantly impact the volume of breast milk in until a month or two of practice. Greater amounts of breast milk do provide greater protection from gastroenteritis but it does not need to be exclusive to accomplish the protection, such as it is. Either way is fine, really.
Also personal opinion - what we want is for our kids to learn to pay attention to internal cues for saiety rahter than learning to eat or not eat in response to external cues, including what parents say about that they should or should not eat. The literature presents this as a benefit to authoritative vs authoritarian parenting styles.
You don’t get 4-year-old brats by feeding them whenever they are hungry or comforting them with the breast when they are 6 months old. You create brats by not having limits and whiners by tolerating that [del]shit[/del] behavior in toddlers. But, since you have a 3-year-old, then you already know that. The whole idea of age-appropriate discipline and training is having reasonable expectations based on the babies’/toddler’s/child’s age and ability and following through.
Babies who are loved, cared for and feel secure stand a much better chance of being a good kid than one who has been forced into a meaningless schedule by the parents.
This is just my opinion, YMMV. Now, if your older kid is a brat, then you’re doing something else wrong and you need to take care of that problem first.
