A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Debate on insisting child eat "real" food prior to filling up on chocolate/candy



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 10th 05, 11:20 PM
shinypenny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Banty wrote:


What IME is damaging is getting candy, sweets = love associated.


More accurately, sweets = comfort = not good. You say that below, and I
think that's what you meant. Love = food is not so bad, and it's
imprinted from day one, when a mother lovingly breast or bottle feeds
her child. Love = food is nearly unavoidable, I think.

The trouble is when food becomes the mechanism by which one self
soothes. During my first marriage, before I made the connection that I
was an emotional eater, I would get through the evenings when my
husband was home by stuffing my mouth with cereal. It had nothing to do
with hunger, and it was healthy cereal. I could munch through an
entire box, depending on how stressed out I was and how much I was
trying to hold back my feelings of anger or whatever. Good way to
prevent conflict: keep chewing and crunching!

I don't do this any longer. But still, old habits die hard, and as I
said, I still find myself knee-jerk wanting to offer the kids food when
they're stressed. I do stop myself and substitute with something
better.

I think I learned this from my mother, who may be reading this and will
probably call to object, but I recall she'd often stop at 4 pm for a
Dairy Queen hit or a bag of M&M's. She claims it helped her cope with
blood sugar swings, and it probably did, but it also doesn't escape me
(now that I'm a parent too) that 4 pm is the "witching hour" and can be
awfully stressful, especially if you're the mom of three unruly kids.
:-)

Sometimes, I do suggest tea. Tea is nice and comforting, without all
the empty calories.


Well, that's better. But I still think having food, drink, any of

that, too
associated with comfort isn't a great idea. Talk, hugs, support to

pursue
interests - THOSE are the things that should be associated with

comfort.

Yep! Except for us tea time is quite a ritual. We get out the special
teas. We put on our comfy jammies, robes and slippers. Then we set out
a spread with fancy cups and saucers, and linger with our tea. And over
tea, we talk! I don't think it's the tea so much as the talking.

jen

  #22  
Old January 11th 05, 08:27 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

THANK YOU to all who have given your opinions. I read a few quotes that
may make it easier to deal with this and really appreciate the time you
took to reply. I should probably clear up one thing though so as not to
appear too bad a parent. No.. I'm not putting the box of chocolate in
front of her and then wondering why she won't eat a decent meal. It's
that she asks for it. We tend to eat 2 "meals" a day around here with a
smaller snack type meal in the middle and another in the late evening.
The bigger meals are home baked bread products in the morning and a
meat and veggie combo in the evening. The snacks tend to be things like
fruit or cottage cheese or pudding or grilled cheese. She's by no means
overweight and so calories isn't really the issue. It's more what one
poster said.. that I want her filling up on "growing foods" and not
junk. Now.. today we did really well.. not one request for chocolate.
And it's almost all gone anyway so this may not be a point of
contention for much longer. And no.. I don't buy candy just to have it
laying around.. this is leftover from Christmas. I'm going to have to
just pass by all the valentine's stuff that's already being pushed upon
us. I suppose it's just hard to not use the food as a tool.. I did find
myself saying today "if you'll at least taste the rice then I'll get
you your crayons" to which my husband had a fit. But.. it worked. After
she'd colored for a bit she went back and ate the whole bowl. =) Made
me feel good. I suppose we'll be battling about this for a while.
=)

  #23  
Old January 11th 05, 02:19 PM
Lesley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

shinypenny wrote:


I confess I have zero willpower when it comes to sweets. If it's in the
house, I'll eat and eat and eat it. That's why I have learned to throw
it away after Halloween, Easter, etc. Better not to tempt *myself*
(much less the kids)! (Yep, I'm the mom who'd raid the kids' candy
supply while they weren't at home).

Also, on the subject of associating food with feelings, I must've been
raised that way myself. When my DD's are feeling sad or had a bad day,
my knee-jerk reaction is to try and offer food to cheer them up. I have
to bite my tongue constantly and try a different approach. I don't
always succeed in that. If sweets are not in the house, it's easier to
resist offering them as a pick-me-up. Instead, I offer hugs, or suggest
a warm soothing bath.




And alternatively, I suspect a lot of parents train their children to
eat to avoid boredom. Have to ride in the car? Have some crackers.
Strapping them in the stroller? Take a sippy cup of juice and a treat.
That's gotta be a lesson that sticks.

Lesley
  #24  
Old January 11th 05, 04:58 PM
Penny Gaines
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Banty wrote:

In article . com,
shinypenny says...



Also, on the subject of associating food with feelings, I must've been
raised that way myself. When my DD's are feeling sad or had a bad day,
my knee-jerk reaction is to try and offer food to cheer them up. I have
to bite my tongue constantly and try a different approach. I don't
always succeed in that. If sweets are not in the house, it's easier to
resist offering them as a pick-me-up. Instead, I offer hugs, or suggest
a warm soothing bath.


THAT's the problem, I think, in a lot of families w.r.t. food. Not so
much the
forbidden fruit thing. For a candy to have 'forbidden fruit' appeal, I
really think allowing it sometimes, at appropriate times, as a treat, as
all that's
necessary. If the candy isn't around all the time in the household, then
you also don't set up that temptation-guilt cycle by forbidding it but
also having it available.

What IME is damaging is getting candy, sweets = love associated.


Sometimes, I do suggest tea. Tea is nice and comforting, without all
the empty calories.


Well, that's better. But I still think having food, drink, any of that,
too
associated with comfort isn't a great idea. Talk, hugs, support to pursue
interests - THOSE are the things that should be associated with comfort.


There is something else going on in this kind of association, because
the candy = pick-you-up does not neccessarily led to weight control
problems.

When we were growing up, my parents had a supply of "violet creams":
violet flavoured fondents covered in chocolate. If we
hurt ourselves, we were given one. But as adults, none of us have
a weight problem: in fact, if I'm miserable, I eat less then normal.

So there is obviously more then one mechanism at work.

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three
  #25  
Old January 11th 05, 05:35 PM
Banty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Penny Gaines says...

Banty wrote:

In article . com,
shinypenny says...



Also, on the subject of associating food with feelings, I must've been
raised that way myself. When my DD's are feeling sad or had a bad day,
my knee-jerk reaction is to try and offer food to cheer them up. I have
to bite my tongue constantly and try a different approach. I don't
always succeed in that. If sweets are not in the house, it's easier to
resist offering them as a pick-me-up. Instead, I offer hugs, or suggest
a warm soothing bath.


THAT's the problem, I think, in a lot of families w.r.t. food. Not so
much the
forbidden fruit thing. For a candy to have 'forbidden fruit' appeal, I
really think allowing it sometimes, at appropriate times, as a treat, as
all that's
necessary. If the candy isn't around all the time in the household, then
you also don't set up that temptation-guilt cycle by forbidding it but
also having it available.

What IME is damaging is getting candy, sweets = love associated.


Sometimes, I do suggest tea. Tea is nice and comforting, without all
the empty calories.


Well, that's better. But I still think having food, drink, any of that,
too
associated with comfort isn't a great idea. Talk, hugs, support to pursue
interests - THOSE are the things that should be associated with comfort.


There is something else going on in this kind of association, because
the candy = pick-you-up does not neccessarily led to weight control
problems.

When we were growing up, my parents had a supply of "violet creams":
violet flavoured fondents covered in chocolate. If we
hurt ourselves, we were given one. But as adults, none of us have
a weight problem: in fact, if I'm miserable, I eat less then normal.

So there is obviously more then one mechanism at work.



Of course people vary.

But for a lot of us, candy as a pick-me-up is a problem.

Banty

  #26  
Old January 13th 05, 08:34 AM
P. Tierney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"LisaBell" wrote in message
...
I am with you. We don't keep a lot of candy around the house as a rule
(though we usually have a little chocolate) and we limit eating it to
after dinner, and then only allow a small piece (two squares, or half
of a candy bar). When they go to parties and come home with a bag of
candy they have to put it in the fridge, and may eat one piece every
evening.

I too was warned that limitation might make candy into too much of an
issue, but I don't see that this is happening at all. Since we believe
all things should be eaten in moderation - also cakes, cookies, potato
chips and other snacks - we have similar limitations on all of these,
and look at it as educating them to eat sensibly. In fact last Friday
they both came home from a birthday party with plates of snacks and
candy, plonked them down on the kitchen table and *asked* for dinner!

--Lisa bell
Mom to Gabriella (6) and Michaela (almost 5)




On 9 Jan 2005 11:18:35 -0800, wrote:

OK.. I'm excited to see your responses. I only have 2 kids and the
oldest, almost 3 now, has started this thing of eating nothing but
chocolate/candy if she has her way. We went through this about a year
ago and DH insisted we let her have her fill on the candy so as not to
make it a "treat". Well at the time it seemed to work and within a
couple of days she went back to eating real food and didn't seem to
care too much about the sweets. Now.. here we go again. Now this may
only be happening because there's chocolate in the house from the
holidays and when it's all gone the argument may be moot but here's the
question. I think the child should be encouraged to eat real food (ie a
bowl of cottage cheese or some meat) PRIOR to her having the box of
chocolate put in front of her. Daddy thinks she should not be coerced
into eating anything prior to filling up on candy and believes that in
doing so I will cause irreversible food association(guilt, pleasure,
rewards, etc) that he believes should in no way be associated with food
and may lead to weight control issues in the futere. In your experience
which method seemed to work better?




  #27  
Old January 13th 05, 08:45 AM
P. Tierney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"LisaBell" wrote in message
...
I am with you. We don't keep a lot of candy around the house as a rule
(though we usually have a little chocolate) and we limit eating it to
after dinner, and then only allow a small piece (two squares, or half
of a candy bar). When they go to parties and come home with a bag of
candy they have to put it in the fridge, and may eat one piece every
evening.

I too was warned that limitation might make candy into too much of an
issue, but I don't see that this is happening at all.


I don't either, so I completely relate to this post.. I've heard, by
extension, similar things about TV. But in practice, by limiting TV to
(for example) about a show a day, the child isn't used to filling her/his
time out with TV, and thus, is used to coming up with options on her
own, without even thinking of asking to watch more TV. It's the same
with food... candy isn't asked for because it isn't around and it isn't
considered a regular option. When other options have been presented
to and accepted by the child, those are the ones that she asks for.

Here, things like candy and juice aren't in the cabinets, except
on rare occasions.


P.
Tierney


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 June 28th 04 07:41 PM
| | Kids should work... Kane Spanking 12 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking Kane Spanking 63 November 17th 03 11:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.