Chocolate at 6 weeks old!!

lebly

Why do people put the babies dummy in their mouth before giving it to the baby? The mouth will have far more harmfull bacteria on it than the surface it fell on and you would not give that back to the baby.

Chocolate will not do the baby any harm. Fine it contains milk but so does baby formula.

Stop panaking - as for the grape thing - scaremongering!

lottee

squashy wrote:

If it was a fondue or some other runny dessert it may well have had raw eggs in it, so that probably wont do her much good either! I agree that she should have NOTHING but milk until at least 6 months old, so you are right to be mad at her dad really. If you make that your mantra then this one incident won't have caused too much damage. Hope she settles soon.

Just a quickie... Is this a 'new' thing? Because I started introducing other things at 12 weeks (3 months). My DS is almost 4 1/2 now, so I can appreciate that things change, just curious TBH !

OP, hope all is well now, typical man really - my OH was bouncing our DS up the stairs at a few weeks old - I'd never moved as quick as I did then! Poor little soul, probably wondered what the hell was going on! (he was 9lb 2oz, so a big boy - DS that is!!)

Also agree with a lot of others regarding people/relatives offering sweets/sugary drinks to your child. It winds me up big time, my DS is happy with a fruit platter (apples,grapes, etc) or crackers, rather than chocolate/sweets, but they still feel the need to almost 'force feed' sweets etc down his neck. Don't get me wrong, of course he has treats, but he doesn't need them everyday. (& I don't wanna share mine !!! lol ) Needless to say, I am dreading Easter...!

inkie

Just a quickie... Is this a 'new' thing? Because I started introducing other things at 12 weeks (3 months). My DS is almost 4 1/2 now, so I can appreciate that things change, just curious TBH !

My DDs are 7 and 10, and the recommendations then by the dept of health were 16 weeks, but now they are 6 months i.e. the longer you can leave it, the better.

lottee

inkie wrote:

My DDs are 7 and 10, and the recommendations then by the dept of health were 16 weeks, but now they are 6 months i.e. the longer you can leave it, the better.

I think thats crazy!!! (ok ok, I'm no expert just my opinion!) I expect it will change again in a couple of years. I don't think my DS would have been happy with just milk until 6 months, but then again, I suppose he wouldn't of known any different! I think 6 months is quite late just to be on milk though, but I suppose if that's what the experts say!

Same as the sleeping position for a baby - that has changed over the years also.

bunty109

lebly wrote:

Why do people put the babies dummy in their mouth before giving it to the baby? The mouth will have far more harmfull bacteria on it than the surface it fell on and you would not give that back to the baby.

Chocolate will not do the baby any harm. Fine it contains milk but so does baby formula.

Stop panaking - as for the grape thing - scaremongering!

The grape thing is true and I was totally staggered that anyone could be that stupid!

The point I was trying to make is that he obviously doesn't have much idea about what to feed babies/children and he probably needs educating about a few things before you let him care for her overnight. Just because he has already got children, doesn't mean he's ever changed nappies, fed them or bathed them I guess!

lebly

Didnt say it wasnt true but why sow seeds of worry!

Six months for weaning - pile of pants. If you leave some babies that long you will be constantly feeding them with milk/formula (or have a constant bodily attachment) as they will not be getting what they need. Every baby is different.

THROW OUT THAT SILLY RULE BOOK.

lottee

lebly wrote:

Six months for weaning - pile of pants. If you leave some babies that long you will be constantly feeding them with milk/formula (or have a constant bodily attachment) as they will not be getting what they need. Every baby is different.

THROW OUT THAT SILLY RULE BOOK.

Thought it was just me! Thanks!

bunty109

lebly wrote:

Didnt say it wasnt true but why sow seeds of worry!

Six months for weaning - pile of pants. If you leave some babies that long you will be constantly feeding them with milk/formula (or have a constant bodily attachment) as they will not be getting what they need. Every baby is different.

THROW OUT THAT SILLY RULE BOOK.

Lebly, I agree about the weaning. When I had my first 2 it was 4 months, but it had gone up to 6 months by the time I had number 3!! My youngest was weaned at 11 weeks she was so hungry (health visitor said it used to be done at 12 weeks anyway!).

Don't meant to be alarmist about the grape btw. I'm generally pretty laid back (I think)

inkie

I'm a midwife and personally started to introduce 'first tastes' at around 3 1/2 months - based on my assesment of my child being ready for it! Even though the current best practice at the time was 4 months.

As has already been highlighted in this post, you would be surprised at what babies are given, at such an early age. I've seen babies being given bottles of tea/ milky bars when they've been 6 weeks and come back with their mums for Post Natal check!

liney

My DS first taste was a lick of a Panda Licorice stick his dad was eating; apparently he dived at it ;/ I wasn't best pleased, but it did him no harm.

My Ds is 2 and a half, and my HV told me that 20 - 26 weeks was the ideal, 26 weeks being the very latest to start.

DS was weened at 41/2 months (18 weeks ish) as it is not recommened that baby consumes 32oz of formula per day which he was regularly. Each baby is different. The guidelines are just a guide afterall.