Girl's 9-month appointment

This appointment was rather uneventful. She didn't have to get vaccines, which was a nice change of pace--so there was nothing traumatic to brace ourselves for. She weighs 17 pounds, 2 ounces and is just over 27 inches long. It's odd, because she looks perfectly average to me--average height and average weight--but her percentiles were down again. This time, her weight was in the 15th percentile and her height was in the 30th percentile. It's puzzling to me; I just can't imagine that 85% of babies her age weigh more and 70% are taller. She does not look stumpy or shrimpy or skinny at all to me, and in fact, sometimes people tell me how BIG she is (though this just may be their ignorance about how big babies her age tend to be--it is shocking how far off base people are sometimes in guessing her age). Anyway, those percentiles are the reality check. The doctors weren't worried at all, nor are they the least bit concerned that every time we go in, her percentiles are lower than before.

And here's another thing: the explanation they keep giving me makes no sense. They say, "Oh, don't worry about it, it's totally normal for babies her age to be slipping in percentiles! I see babies all the time at their 9-month checkup whose percentiles have dropped. It's really normal for this age, when babies are more active, etc etc etc." Now, I may be an English major, and I am certainly no Einstein Junior, but I do think I understand what a percentile means. If it were true that ALL or MOST of the babies her age were slipping at the same rate, then her percentiles wouldn't be lower. They would be the same. See? Yeah. Percentile means "compared to other babies her age, she is smaller." Or larger. So that explanation from the doctors frustrates me. It makes no sense.

But they are not worried that every single checkup, her percentiles have yet again gotten lower-- so I guess I should try not to be worried either. Again, when I look at her, she looks normal. She doesn't look short, and she doesn't look skinny. (And she doesn't look tall, or fat. Hence my sense that she is average, which the percentiles apparently contradict!)

She doesn't crawl yet, and they weren't worried about that, either. I explained that most of the babies we know crawled at 7 and a half months. The doctors were shocked and one of them said, "That's too early!" (Can a baby crawl too early??) This confuses me. Is it possible that Daisy is surrounded by baby prodigies? If so, then she is surrounded by MANY baby prodigies, because most of the babies we know are crawling right past her. I have to believe it's perfectly normal to crawl at 7 and a half months. But Daisy doesn't crawl yet. She has no teeth yet. She has a bunch of spots in her diaper area that I've been concerned about, but which the doctors say are not a yeast infection (my guess). In fact, they say they are nothing but hyperpigmentation and will go away on their own someday, and that I shouldn't worry. They weren't worried about anything!

They asked me if Daisy pulls herself up to a standing position, and I said no. Now, if I place her on her legs, she can support herself, holding on to me or to the side of the couch, but she makes no attempt to pull herself up when she is sitting, and she doesn't try taking steps or cruising (another question they asked me). She likes to sit, babbling and examining objects; or, if she wants to go somewhere, she is happy to roll there instead of try to crawl. She does quite a bit of rolling.

So, in short: my baby is a stumpy, shrimpy, spotty, no-crawl, no-teeth baby, and apparently, to be all these things at 9 months is perfectly normal. Yay!