Yeah, yeah, you pervs. I'm not talking about that!

So I've been thinking lately, and I've got a whole theory that baby size makes a difference when it comes to gross motor skills development. I think that the bigger the baby, the faster they develop gross motor skills. Taryn was my biggest baby of the three. Not only was she the biggest at birth, but she's always been the heaviest, and has pretty much kept up w/TJ in height (I think she's slowing down now, but...). She started walking at 8 months, as compared to his 9 months, which was even pretty early. She also sat up sooner and started eating and feeding herself earlier. Mind you, TJ did all of this stuff pretty early on as well, but she was just a tad earlier on most of them. As far as talking goes, she's way behind TJ, but I'm not calling that a gross motor skill today, maybe later.

Then there's Cole. Now, my thought had always been that Taryn wanted to be like TJ, so she just went ahead and did everything as soon as possible so she could more like him sooner. However, that line of thinking is debunked by Cole. He is taking his sweet time with things. He's by far the smallest in every way. He was actually born in the middle as far as weight, but height-wise was inches shorter (which is like feet for a newborn!). He's remained at average size, as compared to TJ and Taryn, who've always been near the 100% or over. By his age, five months, TJ and Taryn both could hold their own bottles, sit up, and had popped out a tooth or two. Not Cole. He's trying desperately to crawl, but other than that, he doesn't seem at all interested in anything else. He drools about three gallons of slobber out a day, yet shows no signs of any teeth coming anytime soon. At times I'll find myself worrying that he'll be slow or disabled. However, most times I delight in knowing that he's sustaining the baby days just a wee bit longer for me (which I'm so happy about, knowing he's the last), and also making it that much longer before I have to chase him down or feed him baby food and solids. I'm really not upset by it at all. I just find it interesting that he's taking so much longer than the first two. I've thought that maybe he's not getting as much attention, which could be true, but I truly strive to give him as much attention as possible. Plus, he gets extra attention from TJ and Taryn that they didn't get themselves. So I dunno...

I don't just draw these theories from personal experience, either. I've known people w/smaller sized children, and their babies all seem to do things on a little more drawn out timeline. For instance, my friend's baby is just a month younger than TJ. She was a good bit smaller than him when they were little (they're the same size now and pretty much on the same level w/everything). When we would go to visit, TJ would be doing so much more than her. It was kinda funny, b/c I would always get a call sometime in the next few days after visiting that she had started doing whatever it was that TJ had been doing already! Then there's Julia's kids. Alison was smaller than Andrew, and she didn't start walking till she was 14 months old, as compared to him walking around 9 or 10 months (is that right, Julia?). There are other stories, but I think you get my point.

So anyway, that's just a thought I have. In the long run, it doesn't really matter, b/c this stuff will come when it's ready, and once they're a little older everyone's at the same place. Just, sometimes I wonder if size really does make a difference? I've always thought that a bigger baby would have a harder time holding himself up to walk sooner, but who knows. Just thought I'd rant for you for a bit.

Talk to you later! Have a great day!