Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I have a 5 month old daughter so I am preparing to wean her in month.

I bought a book on baby-led weaning (by accident!) and I am thinking of using this method to wean her.

I exclusively breast-feed and co-sleep.

I would appreciate any advice on BLW, if people found it helpful/unhelpful.


Laura Perrins

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/10083-baby-led-weaning/
Share on other sites

Just to say, sometimes you don't have the choice! I wanted to do it but it quickly became apparent that my daughter would have starved if I had gone down that route. She loved mush and she loved me to feed it to her! Happy to say that she's feeding herself these days (although for a time there I wondered if she ever would!)
Babies have been eating mush for a very long time and I don't see that many children or adults who can't feed themselves. As I have said before, it is all about balance. There are certain foods that are very nutritious that are just difficult to give to a baby unless they are mashed. My child that was fussy about mashed food as a baby is the one who is still fussy whereas the one who didn't care what his food looked is the one who will eat everything.

EDMummy yes - I totally struggle to get vegetables down babySB - the spoon denial comes with a strong will!


And it is still after 4 months EXTREMELY messy. But that is mostly because my baby throws so much on the floor (again - testing little character!) ON PURPOSE!! Oh that I could just occasionally spoonfeed him a jar of hipp organic!!


ps - I am finding those pouches are my friend!! Ellas etc - and you can get yoghurts in pouches in sainsburys - yay - I thought I'd never get yoghurt down him!!!

A good compromise is to puree a few things to try and offer the same as finger food (eg puree some carrot and also give some cooked carrot sticks)


BLW is much easier, less pureeing, less work feeding, less stressful... but is prob only at 1y+ the baby really seems to eat much

I think you need to do what suits your baby. Some like it mashed, some like it whole, it is all trial and error, usually baby led weaning is started because the babies will grab food off their parents plates and shove it in their mouths, as babies were first introduced to solids from 3 months onwards, mashed was best because of their lack of mouth control but at 6 months onwards they are supposed to be better at controlling things in their mouths ( losing the tongue thrust reflex) hence they can handle whole food, hence baby led weaning. My son who is now six months and refusing food, bottles and beakers. He just want boobs, but he cannot have boobs forever! I thought like most babies he would love food but nope, he is not having it at all! Snowboarder, I have a strong willed one too..he refuses to go to sleep before 11pm ( usually at midnight he prefers to sleep and he wakes up at 10/11am!).

I always assumed that the texture of food served to a baby was based on the teeth they had....... since they are mostly just gumming their food until around 8 or 10 months (I can't remember, wow memory is short!) I thought that was nature's way of telling me which foods he could handle....... basically anything that would easily mush up or dissolve. Then as more teeth come in the textures get more complex. And just guessing, but maybe molars coming in signal a transition to properly chewing more adult food? Or am I confusing adaptive traits from biology class :)


Anyway I was always way too paranoid about choking. And I made some pretty awesome baby food!



edited for pathetic spelling

I must admit I've always been baffled by baby led weaning. I gave my son pureed food from 6 months - he was hungry and didn't have the motor skills or nouse to pick up food and get it in his mouth..seemed a bit like putting him a car on his 18th birthday and telling him to drive without having any lessons! I always made finger food available so he could improve his skills and of course soon enough he only wanted to feed himself so the spooning of purees stopped - what could be more baby led than following his lead like that?!


Obviously all babies and families are different but BLW definitely wasn't for us and I now have a gannet of a toddler who'll eat almost anything whatever texture etc.


Good luck with the weaning Laura!

I went down the Annabel Karmel pureeing organic route for No 1, who to this day (age 3 1/2) would still happily be spoonfed everything, the lazy little boy.


I simply couldn't be @rsed with baby no 2, so she was BLW by default. She got a stick on bowl (highly recommended or it jst goes on the floor) of whatever we were having, and left to her own devices. She eats like a gannet now (although mostly still with her hands at 18 months). She goes mental if you try and spoonfeed her, and always has. Chalk and cheese the pair of them.


Totally depends on the child I think from my experience.


The only thing I would say if you go down the BLW route is that it can take them a worrying amoutn of time to get to grips with it - I think my daughter was about 8 months before she really got into eating anything significant.


Remember the old adage though "Until they're 1 its just for fun". They don't need food for nutritional reasons, as milk still supplies it all - its just to get them used to a broad range of textures and flavours.

must say I'm a huge fan of the BLW-with a bit of a puree- method...BLW worked really well for us but that's partly because a) am not that houseproud so can cope with the mess and b) baby is v strong-willed and it seemd to suit him to be in charge from the start. It is slow at the start and I think def true that won't be right for every baby, and it's not like one way is 'better'. Does suit lazy non-cooking mums like me though...we do a lot of keeping leftovers etc. At the beginning there is a lot of gumming going on but as long as they're getting plenty milk it's not a problem. I do use fruit and veg purees partly to perk up things like mash, but have always found he can handle veg/fruit without having to puree it. Think you kind of have to have a bit of faith in them.

Totally agree with Mellors, I did BLW with number 4 & wished I'd caught on to it with the other 3. Away with puree-ing all that 'stuff' (something I took a lot of pride in with my PFB incidentally!), baby ate what we ate - in appropriate form, at the same times we did (roughly) and of all them he is now, at age 6. The best, least fussy eater. If he wanted something mushy, I just mushed it with a fork. It never occured to me to relate it to how many teeth he had, and whilst randomv's analogy made me laugh I can't realate it to my experience of BLW in any way at all. Number 4, ate what he wanted from what we were having, when he wanted it, no probs with motor skills at all - what could be more baby led than that?


He probably didn't eat 3 meals a day or whatever for a while, but he was still breastfed so it didn't matter. But like belle & Mellors, I've become increasingly a 'lazy' Mum & this definitely made our lives so much easier. Go for it I say, & enjoy the shared family mealtimes.

That is one of the other main benefits of BLW as well - you can take them out to eat anywhere without having schlep about jars/pots of food and get them heated up. Just get them a sarnie and a banana and leave them to it.


I still can't believe I took my hand blender on a holiday hiking in Norway when No 1 was 7 months old. Bonkers.

It's very interesting as obviously every family situation is unique. Can I see myself slaving away maki g purees should I have another baby? Unlikely. But what if I have another very hungry child like this one? I imagine it'd be even more difficult to breast feed a hungry 7 month old on demand because they aren't getting enough solids. and what about the effects of that on everyones sleep? Wouldn't it be a nightmare looking after 2 very young children on months of broken sleep due to night feeds, and that's not even considering work of the paid variety!


I agree with the up to one just for fun idea to an extent and yes, nutritionally breast milk is usually sufficient but that doesn't mean it satisfies the hunger of big, hungry babies. It comes down to taking bits of ideas from here and her that work in your individual circumstances.

I tried the puree route with no1 but he never took to it and so with subsequent children they only ever had what we were having but cut up small or a bit mashed.


In addition (bit worried I'm telling you this) but I would also give the babies my food after I have given it a quick chew. Does no-one else do this? I know that my mothers generation did it and I wouldn't do it if I had a raging cold but my kids seem to survive ok on it.

Do have to say BLW must be easier with second/subsequent children as you are already making baby friendly meals at baby friendly times...I reckon it's as time consuming as puree for number 1. Eg I'm going to try and make some fish 'fingers' for him tonight. Just for him. And he will throw them on the floor! Our meals just don't seem to be suitable (not 'finger food-y' enough) and we always have our main meal in the evening.


It does seem v hard to get any quantity and variety of food down them this way. Mostly finger food seems to simply be ammunition to be thrown around the kitchen. Give me strength - I WISH he would eat puree!!


trinity - to my horror I absent mindedly found myself doing what you say but the other way round!! To be tidy I just finished off a half sucked piece of pasta yesterday. Must sort self out!

I read the baby led weaning book and it made sense but I did a mixture of that and purees from 6 months. HH and Randomv it's surprising how quickly many babies (my daughter included)learn to eat solid food with 2 or no teeth. E was eating (very small) avocado sandwiches at 7 months. But I did worry that she wasn't getting enough as she has always eaten like a bird. Unfortunately purees made no difference to this and she's almost fallen off the bottom of the weight chart (another story). She completely refused to be spoonfed from about 9 months anyway (apart from yoghurt thank goodness). As others have said it depends on the baby. I have noticed that friends whose babies have been baby led weaned are, at a year ish, fantastic eaters- they can load the spoon and everything


Snowboarder I completely agree. I found BLW almost as time consuming as pureeing. Steaming veg to just the right softness, finding pasta that fits into little hands and for me making food loaded with butter and cream that I try desparately not to eat once it's been thrown on the floor.


Is it only me that thinks everything gets more difficult post weaning?!

Snowboarder, if we have an evening meal that has potentially suitable stuff for C I just keep a bit to one side, pop it in a tupperware and then heat it for her the next day.


I have to say that I am so much lazier than I was first time around, I make far less stuff 'especially' for them (probably once a week I set to and do what I'd call a proper, Annabel Karmel inspired meal), the rest of the time it is often sausages, fish fingers (from a packet, but good quality), pasta with grated cheese on it, chicken in various guises - I do make my own chicken nuggets/fingers etc. or reheated stuff we've had - lasagne, cottage pie, assorted pasta dishes. I find the more effort I go to the less they eat, so better to keep it basic but ensure plenty of fruit, vegetables, yoghurt etc. thrown in for good measure.


I just don't have the time to fuss too much these days, and when I've got 2 (or often more when friends are here) hungry children whinging because they want to be fed having something I can reheat, or rustle up in 10 minutes is worth its weight in gold.


At the stage you're at I'd say have as many different things in pots, saved from your own assorted meals, in the fridge as possible and just offer him a selection of bits so he can explore textures and flavours...oh yes, and practice his throwing!!!


We've made huge progress in the past month or two. I can now leave C to eat her own breakfast with a spoon while I do other stuff, and she will equally manage main meals - actually tells me off if I try to help her! She is suddenly eating so much better and is mad on pasta, cheese, rice, peas and melon at the moment (I have to mix broccoli in now - it was her favourite, but now she only eats it if it is mixed in broken down into little bits). She is a dream to feed, so much better than her sister ever was, and is eating probably three times what she was at 9-12 months, so don't despair.


Molly

x

I can only agree with most of the previous posters... have three children and the first always seemed to get 'tired' with finger food, as if her jaw got fatigue and I'd always end up pureeing the last bit. Second one better and fully weaned by 10/11 months. third, never been a great eater but BLW was assisted by her sisters secretly feeding her sweets (if that had happened with my first I'd have had a heart attack) so I'm not actually sure the age she first got chocolate as when first foudn her eldest sister said they fed her some everytime they got some - eek! She gave up puree at 8 months over christmas (a bit annoying as I'd planned a lazy christmas and spent a small fortune on pureed packs so I didn't have to be arsed). Her cure was being fed chipolatas on christmas day - again eek! After that she refused anything that was different to her sisters


So the upshot is, all my children are similar now with their eating, all did it waening differently and its made not one jot of difference. my only regret is that I didn't introduce 'spicy' food to out eldest soner as she is SOOOOO picky

  • 2 weeks later...

Obviously, different things work for different parents and babies, but thought I'd add a voice from a thus far successful experience with exclusive BLW.


I started BLW with my baby at 5 1/2 months after he started grabbing food out of my hand and sticking it in his mouth and it's worked a treat for us. It's not always perfect - he sometimes gets frustrated if something keeps slipping from his hand, but he's now 7 months and I'm amazed at how his dexterity has improved and he can get just about any food he wants in his mouth. He does gag sometimes, but has never choked. He gags much less now than in the beginning and only really gags with something new. In terms of the amount he's eating, he still breastfeeds quite a lot, but he's obviously getting a decent amount of food based on what I find in his nappies!


That said, I think the book is not very well written and lacks practical guidance. I pretty much just "winged" it based on my instincts. If anyone wants to talk to me about it, feel free to PM me and I'll be happy to give my phone number for a chat.

-A

  • 2 weeks later...

I'm back! This time asking for help.


Is there anyone out there who has toddlers or older children now that were weaned this way? A la the "Others dissaproving of home birth" thread, I'm am currently in the midst of controvery with my mother over baby led weaning. I feel pretty confident about it, but there is one issue for which I did not have a good answer.


My son puts quite a lot of food in his mouth at once, and just keeps piling it in. I don't thin it's an issue becuase he evenutally spits most of it out and has never choked, but do they just eventally stop doing this on thier own and figure out to eat one piece at a time?


Thanks,

-A

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...