Reply to Alarmingly underweight tween

Forum Index » Tweens and Teens

Reply to "Alarmingly underweight tween"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Your DD weighs 53lbs at almost 12 yo; nowhere near puberty; and 3 years bone delayed -- which doctors at NIH assessed as a consequence of inadequate nutrition. She cries because she is unable to eat more than a few bites. Her cousin nearly died of an eating disorder. And despite all this, neither her father nor her therapist nor her primary pediatrician is concerned? Truly bizarre.[/quote]

I think people need to lighten up on OP.  She's working with a lot of doctors, most of whom are NOT that concerned.  There is a lot of natural variation in people's bodies.  Puberty isn't considered "late" unless the girl hasn't had her period by age 16, so it's entirely plausible and normal that puberty could be years off for an 11 year old.  (I think something like 5-10% of Caucasian girls don't have their period by 14.)  I had a grandmother that lived on butter, meat, potatoes and dessert twice daily, yet never weighed more than 90 pounds unless she was extremely pregnant -- which is just to say that size is a bell curve, and some people are going to be at one end of it regardless of what they do.  I agree that the fact that OP's daughter gets upset about eating is not a good thing, but she's working on that.  Berating her this way is really not helping (and she may be right that this is all increasing her daughter's anxiety around food).
OP, good luck with the new doctor.  If you find some great solution, please come back and post, as I think there are many people who are struggling with the same questions.[/quote]

OK I will thanks.

I wanted to add something that might be helpful for others who are struggling with natural variation. DD's endo team at NIH was extremely interested in her from a research perspective. It seems very late puberty is not well understood at this time, but there is a very strong genetic propensity toward this growth pattern. The fact that every member of DH's extended family on this paternal side experienced puberty late, they are of German descent, grew into their 20s and ended up taller than normal, is significant. The age of menses for women on his side ranges from 16-19 years; [b]men all grew through college[/b]. This is why DH is not concerned, and why DD's ped endos were not overly concerned. They suggested low calorie as a contributing factor, because that's obvious if you track her calories. But they also indicated that you cannot compare her to an "average" 11-year-old. Perhaps she is not eating because physically, [b]she is like a 7-year-old and little kids don't eat much[/b]. That is what her endos and her primary physician think. My fear is that she is small because she's not eating, but some of her docs think she's not eating because she is small. Maybe my anxiety about what is "normal" for a kid her age has contributed to lots of fear and stress around eating. Her cousin's experience with anorexia shook us all to the core and added a level of anxiety around food that wasn't there before.

The way forward is not as simple as some posters seem to think. I may never feel comfortable with our path, I may always doubt our doctors. It's my nature. I've never done this before. But I know food can't hurt, so that's what we're doing.[/quote]

Your baseline information seems off OP. The idea that your DH's family is unusual because the men grew through college is incorrect; boys typically enter puberty much later than girls and it's perfectly normal for men to grow in their late teens and early 20s. Also the presumption that 7yos don't eat much suggests to me that you have not met too many 7yos. If that is the basis for her pediatrician to dismiss an NIH team's assessment that she is significantly bone delayed as a result of insufficient nutrients, you really are overdue in finding a new pediatrician.[/quote]

Actually, the more significant factor is that all the women got their periods between 16-19 and also continued growing into their twenties, which is highly unusual statistically. You are simplifying the NIH team’s conclusion. Constitutional growth delay was the primary diagnosis on her chart with insufficient caloric consumption as a “contributing factor.” My point is that it’s not a simple case for anyone, including her doctors.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics