Everything I Thought I Knew Was Wrong
It was pointed out to me last week that I’ve been miscalculating Lucia’s age for, oh, the entire time she’s been born. I’ve been tracking her age in weeks; and for some reason I assumed her age in months was calculated by dividing that number by four. That is, clearly, wrong, and I’m not sure why I never realized it; surely this error is rooted in the same part of my brain that has me give a salesclerk four dollars plus two extra pennies on a $3.98 total to make it even.
Anyway, Lucia is not six months old. She is five and a half months old. She will be six months old on April 15. Which means I inadvertently gave her solid food several weeks before I actually wanted to. This seems to be somewhat beside the point, however. She is loving her solid foods—sweet potatoes yesterday were a huge hit; she slurped them up so eagerly that the bib was nearly clean—and has excellent spoon-eating abilities. She’s ready; she’s fine; she doesn’t care about her mama’s best-laid plans. She cares about being well fed and happy.
But still. I didn’t even know how old my own baby was, a fairly large matter. Let’s hope I’m doing better with the small stuff.
Anyway, Lucia is not six months old. She is five and a half months old. She will be six months old on April 15. Which means I inadvertently gave her solid food several weeks before I actually wanted to. This seems to be somewhat beside the point, however. She is loving her solid foods—sweet potatoes yesterday were a huge hit; she slurped them up so eagerly that the bib was nearly clean—and has excellent spoon-eating abilities. She’s ready; she’s fine; she doesn’t care about her mama’s best-laid plans. She cares about being well fed and happy.
But still. I didn’t even know how old my own baby was, a fairly large matter. Let’s hope I’m doing better with the small stuff.
Comments
I think you should keep track of her age in days ("Ooh, how old is she?" "168 days"), and then just divide by 30 - it's a closer approximation.
See you soon! - Rach