My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Find weaning advice from other Mumsnetters on our Weaning forum. Use our child development calendar for more information.

Weaning

Weaning - based on gestational age or chronological age?

12 replies

mm22bys · 21/03/2007 20:07

Hi,

I am new to this board so sorry if this has been asked before.

My baby is 4 months old, while I don't think he is anywhere near being weaned yet, are the guidelines for what age to start weaning at based on gestational age, or chronological age?

DS was born 3.5 weeks early, so is the best time to wean him actually 6 months from when he was born + 3.5 weeks, or straight 6 months.

As an aside, I met a mum yesterday who is feeding her 5 month old a well-known brand of food-like-chips. She started weaning the day her dd turned 4 months, and told me the jars of baby say from 4 months, but that you can actually start at 3.5 months.

Like I am going to take advice from a mother who is giving her DD crisps!

Thx

OP posts:
Report
ceolas · 21/03/2007 20:08

Most recent advice says wait til 6 months anyway, so I'd go with that but be led by baby. Some aren't ready even then.

Report
mm22bys · 21/03/2007 20:10

Yes, but six months from when they are born, or six months from their EDD?

My DS was due mid-December, but he was actually born three and a half weeks before then.

Does the clock for the six months start the day he was born, or the day he was due?

We are going overseas for six weeks in two weeks time, and will be back 4 days before he'll be six months old. I am really hoping to be able to keep him just on bm till we get back....

Thx....

OP posts:
Report
ceolas · 21/03/2007 20:12

I'm not sure tbh. But if you're going on holiday, I'd definitely wait til you get back

Report
chipmonkey · 21/03/2007 21:29

My ds3 was 8 weeks prem and I was advised by the paed in hospital, who was very pro bf that I should start introducing solids six months from his actual birth date, not from his due date. Otherwise for developmental purposes I was to use his due date. Hth

Report
chipmonkey · 21/03/2007 21:29

Meant to say, either way I don't think 3.5 weeks would make a whole lot of difference.

Report
terramum · 21/03/2007 23:48

I quite like how La Leche Leage talk about the "middle of the first year" instead of an actual age...seems much more sensible to aim for this & look for the actual signs of readiness (sitting unaided, losing tongue thrust reflex, able to pick food up & put it in their mouth, actively chewing & swallowing foods, increased appetite or fussiness outside of growth spurt, illness or teething periods) than start on a certain date...

Report
mm22bys · 22/03/2007 07:12

Thanks, I'll think I'll wait and see, there is still plenty of time for him to show he's ready!

OP posts:
Report
BizzyDint · 22/03/2007 08:16

if you wait until he picks up food himself and eats it then you don't need to concern yourself with whether it's his corrected age or not. he'll show you he's ready.

Report
glamourbadger · 22/03/2007 10:27

To echo chipmonkey my twins were born 10 weeks early and we were advised to wean on their actual age. Apparently a babys' gut develops from the time they start taking milk so they are ready for food at 6 months from the date they were born.

This meant they were less than 4 months when we started weaning which in retrospect was way too early. They couldn't sit or hold food properly and I should have followed their lead and waited until they were more developed. They are my first babies and I blindly followed the advice I was given by the doctors. I've now learned it's important to wait until they are showing signs that they are ready for things, rather than doing everything by the book.

Report
hana · 22/03/2007 10:33

am pretty sure that babies aren't considered premature unless they are born more than 4 weeks early. My baby was born 3 weeks plus 5 days early, so wasn't considered a premmie and no dates need to be adjusted - in terms of those awful weight gain charts, milestones, injections, that sort of thing. fwiw.......she hasn't started solids yet and was 6 months last week. more out of laziness on my part rather than waiting however!!

Report
terramum · 22/03/2007 10:35

A term pregnancy is classed as anything from 37 to 42 weeks so that sounds about right to me hana

Report
BendandBreak · 22/03/2007 10:45

Six years ago (and they've changed the rules since, which shows how set in stone they are, NOT) my little girl was born 10 weeks early and was another month small-for-dates in size due to pre-eclampsia.
At that time, all babies were weaned at 16 weeks. Recently, I'm sure only breast-fed wait till 6 months.
For my daughter who COULDN'T hold a spoon or anything else, couldn't sit till she was 12 months old and was very late at almost everything, we were advised to calculate 16 weeks plus HALF her time of prematurity ie. wean at 16+5= 21 weeks.
We should all remember they take a week or so at least to get the hang of it and waiting too long after we feel they're ready can cause frustration if they're wanting the food.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.