Should I consider weaning my 16 week old?

[Samsean]

Hi

I know the NHS recommends weaning at 6 months. My LO is 16 weeks and doesn't have much interest in feeding (tends to mainly sleep feed). Yesterday she went 6 hours during the day without a feed. She has been on silent reflux medication for a week, but the peadetrician didn't think she had reflux.

Whenever I eat she stares and opens her mouth etc, which makes me feel she wants food. But when I offer the breast, she refuses.

I know at 16 weeks it is very early (though I was weaned at that age!), but should I consider weaning her? The poor girls naps are so short too and has still not got over the colicky fussy stage!

Thanks for your help

[trixymalixy]

No

[emeraldgirl1]

Hi, all I will say is that DD was also a silent refluxer and hated her bottle, we used to have to fight to get it into her at all. On hot days I had to spoon milk into her mouth a drop at a time as she just refused feeds so often. On GP advice we started weaning (at 17w not 16) and have never looked back. She is finally happy to eat, and has been infinitely happier with her bottle too ever since.

However this is ONLY my experience. I am not advocating anything but what I felt, with support, was right for my baby.

Have you considered going up a teat size btw? DD fussed (and still does) whenever her teat size was too small. She needed a level 3 teat from 3m, it took us weeks to work out what the problem was. She still refused feeds regularly but the ones she did have she stopped fussing over.

[peachactiviaminge]

Talk to your HV. We started very very slowly at 18 weeks still going very slowly but DS can sit up alone, reach for and place objects in his mouth and loses very very little of his food. We were told by the HV that guidelines for our area are after 17 weeks but always before 6 months.

[rattlemehearties]

No.

HTH.

[Samsean]

Thanks everyone! I will speak to my HV.

[curlew]

No.

[LookingForwardToSalmon]

No definitely not.

[curlew]

"We were told by the HV that guidelines for our area are after 17 weeks but always before 6 months."

What's particularly special and different about your area?

[Artijoke]

Can anyone point to the evidence that backs up the six months guidance? I have a 17 seeker and will wait to wean but it occurs to me that I don't really know WHY I'm waiting.

[cantthinkofagoodone]

There are hungry babies who may want solids before 6 months but she doesn't sound particularly hungry. 16 weeks can be a fussy stage where babies need to be fed in dark rooms etc, chat to your HV and try feeding somewhere different.

[Artijoke]

Weeker not seeker!

[curlew]

"There are hungry babies who may want solids before 6 months but she doesn't sound particularly hungry"

Being hungry should mean mor milk, not solids.

[trixymalixy]

Early weaning maybe suggested for babies with really bad reflux, but doesn't sound like its the case here.

[Oceansurf]

No.

[stargirl1701]

No. DD has silent reflux. We waited until 24 weeks but it was still hell. It made things much worse.

[hettienne]

17 weeks is the absolute earliest, and you will have to start very slowly with rice, fruit and veg only. A baby that age needs calories from milk though, and food shouldn't replace any milk feeds.

[WinningBread]

No

[gretagrape]

Artijoke I think the guidelines changed to waiting until 6 months because the immaturity of the baby's digestive and immune system can increase the risk of allergies if they are weaned earlier.

But then again, there are tons more babies with allergies these days than there were when we were are weaned at 3/4 months, so who knows what's right?

[Monikita]

It's thought that the increase in food intolerances (eg gluten, dairy etc) is very strongly linked to early weaning. Before the war, many babies weren't weaned until they had teeth or 1 year old.

[Littlefish]

No.

[mrsmartin1984]

No, categorically no. Under no circumstances.

No