Jump to content

Menu

Recommended Posts

Well they can divide it up more since a lot of people are responding. That should save people $$.

 

YOU MAY BRING CHEESE AND ONLY CHEESE!! DO NOT WANDER FROM THE PATH OF CHEESE!!

 

YOU MAY ONLY BRING CRACKERS AND *NOTHING* ELSE!! ONLY CRACKERS!!

 

:lol:

 

:hurray::smilielol5:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 323
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I would probably think you sounded a bit irrational. Sugar isn't going to *kill* your child like peanuts can do to children who are allergic.

 

Just point out, gently that all this sugar isn't going to result in a great Sunday for *anyone* point out that six cupcakes at 6:30 pm on a Sunday = FAIL.

 

And again gently suggest cheese, crackers, veggies, fruit.

 

Thank you -- you have couched your advice in a very nice way, and now, I do see that perhaps I should have chilled a little before sending off my email. hmmmmm, irrational isn't typically the effect I'm going for -- oh, well! :001_huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not read all the replies....but I know what you mean.

 

I'm the mom who says "No, I'm sorry, they cannot have so-and-so-treat." Yes, my kids give me the pouty face at times, but for the most part they know that sugar and treats is just that.....a treat, which happens on occasion. No every day. Not every other day.

 

This time of year is hard. We are attending a Halloween event tonight, as well as on Saturday evening. Then we are going down to Disney and attending their Halloween party. Plus we'll be trick or treating down there on Halloween night. Yesterday at homeschool group was birthday celebration day for the month, and there was cake. We went to DH's aunt's house for dinner on Tuesday night and they had dessert after dinner (which we never have at home). It's just crazy!!!!!

 

My kids will get tons of candy during the next week. I'm allowing them to choose 20 of their favorites from each night that we have an event. Those 20 will go in a jar, along with the others they choose from other events, and they can have one or two pieces of candy per day.

 

When I was a kid, my mom used to let me take my entire bag of Halloween candy up to my room and eat it all, whenever I pleased. Now, today, I have a huge sweet tooth and I dislike most fruits and veggies. I wish I had been brought up with better eating habits. So I'm doing better for my kids.

 

I'm the mom who would not allow my kids to have a whole piece of cake yesterday at homeschool group. Everyone else had a huge piece. I took one piece, cut it in three slices, and split it between my two DD's and me.

 

I don't want my kids to miss out on the sweet stuff, I just want it really monitored and in moderation.

 

But at home, we do not keep sweets around, and we eat mostly stuff that does not have high fructose corn syrup or any dyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sounds like a Snack Czar.

 

 

My dd was in PS at first and in her class there was three nut allergies, an egg allergy, a wheat allergy. Things that MIGHT contain nuts weren't even opened but sent back home. TWO of the kids had to have epi pens. You can't just send cupcakes if there might be nuts in the bakery.

 

People don't read they just send stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is because people don't care. I think it seems like we can't win. Kids have allergies to everything these days.

 

:iagree:

 

If my kids are doing an activity and the person in charge asks for a treat, I ask my kids what they want to bring. We make it and we bring it. I don't poll everyone involved for various allergies, religious restrictions, or other food preferences and tastes. Likewise, I don't expect other families to cater to our limitations. We don't eat meat on Fridays during Lent. My kids know that rule. If we are eating somewhere that day, I take along appropriate food *for us* if I expect to show up and find meat.

 

I think you should be glad to know that everyone else is bringing sugar. This you can prepare your kids so they will be able to graciously decline the treats, and you can prepare something in line with your family's food preferences. Seems like a win-win situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled that parents with children to are sensitive to sugary-treats should have to feel on the defensive because the harm done to their child isn't immediately "life-treating."

 

People respect "tree-nut" allergies, as well they should. We had a child in our coop last year with nut allergies, so even though "sharing" of food wasn't allowed in any case, there was a zero-tolerance policy on bringing nuts/or nut containing products to school. A policy we fully understood and supported.

 

No "normal" person would intentionally give a vegan child meat, and if they accidently gave a child a dish with meat I'm sure "most people" would feel terrible. And "guilty." And say, "I'm so sorry."

 

But ordinary, sane, other-wise rational people who've been told a child doesn't react well to sugar seem to have no problem going ahead and handing out treats on the "down-low."

 

Don't tell your folks. Wink Wink.

 

And it's rather galling to have a child who's one who really does badly on sugar, and to be intentionally undermined in ways no person of good-will would dream of doing with a vegan child or one with an allergy. I simply don't understand the mentality.

 

To say, well it's not as serious as anaphylactic shock, is simply a dismissive and not particularly respectful position to take. Anaphylactic shock, obviously, puts a child in peril in a way that sugar sensitivity does not. But both fall into a category of "harm."

 

Bill

Edited by Spy Car
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in the 'why must we have snacks all the time' camp. Three meals a day is plenty & you should have them at home. And if you like snacks or need snacks or just want snacks, just bring your own in a little bag and politely eat it. Why oh WHY must there be group snacking at all events?

 

And to be totally contrary - my entire family loves sweet things, my dd bakes like a fiend, she makes amazing coffee cakes and pastries and cookies and if I have to bring something, I'm most inclined to bring a sweet thing. Pie, bundt cake, lemon squares, jam puffs, chocolate eclairs..... I love sweets. :D

 

You can keep your browning apple slices, and the mangled orange wedges, and the grape bunches which have been handled by a multitude of dirty hands. And the group veggie tray with dip - bleh:ack2: How many times has it been 'double dipped?'

 

I will agree however that Skittles are bad, bad, bad. I don't know what's in them but I can't have them at all. I get all woozy and weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled that parents with children to are sensitive to sugary-treats should have to feel on the defensive because the harm done to their child isn't immediately "life-treating."

 

People respect "tree-nut" allergies, as well they should. We had a child in out coop last year with nut allergies, so even "sharing" of food wasn't allowed there was a zero-tolerance policy on bringing nuts/or nut containing products to school. A policy we fully understood and supported.

 

No "normal" person would intentionally give a vegan child meat, and if they accidently gave a child a dish with meat I'm sure "most people" would feel terrible. And "guilty." And say, "I'm so sorry."

 

But ordinary, sane, other-wise rational people who've been told a child doesn't react well to sugar seem to have no problem going ahead and handing out treats on the "down-low."

 

Don't tell your folks. Wink Wink.

 

And it's rather galling to have a child who's one who really does badly on sugar, and to be intentionally undermined in ways no person of good-will would dream of doing with a vegan child or one with an allergy. I simply don't understand the mentality.

 

To say, well it's not as serious as anaphylactic shock, is simply a dismissive and not particularly respectful position to take. Anaphylactic shock, obviously, puts a child in peril in a way that sugar sensitivity does not. But both far into a category of "harm."

 

Bill

 

I HAVE a food allergy. It isn't the same. It is just not.

 

I have had to run through a museum carrying someone else's child during a field trip trying to get to his epipen which the teacher had because the museum thought nut sorting was a fun activity.

 

It isn't fair to exaggerate other issues and compare them, it makes other people just think nut allergies aren't serious when nut allergies are VERY serious. There are still all these people who send their kids to school or other functions with PB&J when they know a child sits next to them everday who could DIE.

 

It isn't right to compare the two and yes I do take an issue with that.

 

Implying I would blow off an issue with sugar because I don't think it will KILL A CHILD is not reasonable. I have never given any child something without the parent's permission. I always do what everyone tells me to and I am allergic to freaking cheese. I have no idea how many cheese trays I have bought when I can't even eat it.

Edited by Sis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled that parents with children to are sensitive to sugary-treats should have to feel on the defensive because the harm done to their child isn't immediately "life-treating."

 

I don't think anyone should be on the defensive for not giving copious amounts of sugar. I just know from experience that getting all up in arms about it makes you look like "that crazy mom" instead of "the healthy snack mom." Bring a healthy snack and other people will often follow suit. Sometimes, the leader of an activity will even say "man, thanks for bringing a healthy snack, they are crazy after some of those snacks!" And you can say "well, how about letting parents choose snacks from a list instead of bringing whatever they want?" You can react in a way that doesn't make you look judgmental, snarky or irrational and get a better result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if so many people jump to bring the cupcakes and the cookies because fruit and veggies are so expensive. I know that is my first thought when there is a sign-up sheet to bring food to an event. My son can't even eat the cookies or cupcakes because of multiple allergies, but I'd rather bring that stuff than pay for a huge tray of veggies.

 

Lisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if so many people jump to bring the cupcakes and the cookies because fruit and veggies are so expensive. I know that is my first thought when there is a sign-up sheet to bring food to an event. My son can't even eat the cookies or cupcakes because of multiple allergies, but I'd rather bring that stuff than pay for a huge tray of veggies.

 

Lisa

 

This is a really good point. Fruit and veggies are more expensive than junk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To say, well it's not as serious as anaphylactic shock, is simply a dismissive and not particularly respectful position to take. Anaphylactic shock, obviously, puts a child in peril in a way that sugar sensitivity does not. But both fall into a category of "harm."

 

Bill

It's not dismissive to say it's not as serious, because it's not as serious. Anaphylactic shock will kill you. Comparing the two, imo, makes light of those allergies that could result in death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HOw about this one....

 

I am going to be asked again this year to participate in providing snacks for dd's holiday party for her musical activities. I'm happy to do that. But, what gets me is that we are asked to bring "healthy" snacks for the kiddos but "chocolatey" things (brownies, cupcakes, cookies, etc) for the moms. Hello!!! How can we, as middle aged adults handle the calories??

 

By the way, not everyone's idea of healthy is my idea of healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dd was in PS at first and in her class there was three nut allergies, an egg allergy, a wheat allergy. Things that MIGHT contain nuts weren't even opened but sent back home. TWO of the kids had to have epi pens. You can't just send cupcakes if there might be nuts in the bakery.

 

People don't read they just send stuff.

 

My snack Czar post was not in reference to allergies. My son had a dairy allergy when he was a baby and I was very careful in what I ate and what he ate but I didn't criticize others for bringing the wrong things. I made sure we brought what he could eat. I am also very careful about label reading when I know a child has an allergy. I know how to read labels since I had to do it when he was a baby.

 

There was no mention of allergies in the first post or in the choir directors instructions. That would be completely different. This was a rant about sugar not allergies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled that parents with children to are sensitive to sugary-treats should have to feel on the defensive because the harm done to their child isn't immediately "life-treating."

 

People respect "tree-nut" allergies, as well they should. We had a child in our coop last year with nut allergies, so even though "sharing" of food wasn't allowed in any case, there was a zero-tolerance policy on bringing nuts/or nut containing products to school. A policy we fully understood and supported.

 

No "normal" person would intentionally give a vegan child meat, and if they accidently gave a child a dish with meat I'm sure "most people" would feel terrible. And "guilty." And say, "I'm so sorry."

 

But ordinary, sane, other-wise rational people who've been told a child doesn't react well to sugar seem to have no problem going ahead and handing out treats on the "down-low."

 

Don't tell your folks. Wink Wink.

 

And it's rather galling to have a child who's one who really does badly on sugar, and to be intentionally undermined in ways no person of good-will would dream of doing with a vegan child or one with an allergy. I simply don't understand the mentality.

 

To say, well it's not as serious as anaphylactic shock, is simply a dismissive and not particularly respectful position to take. Anaphylactic shock, obviously, puts a child in peril in a way that sugar sensitivity does not. But both fall into a category of "harm."

 

Bill

 

I'm sorry you have to deal with people like that. If I'm told a person doesn't respond well to something then I make sure I don't give it to that person. I can't fathom not respecting a parents wishes.

 

I think your issue, Bill, is that your parental authority is being undermined. Not necessarily that in group situations those types of food are available (although life would be easier if it wasn't), but that people are giving it to your children despite specific instruction not to. That's a whole 'nuther can of worms.....and completely unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HOw about this one....

 

I am going to be asked again this year to participate in providing snacks for dd's holiday party for her musical activities. I'm happy to do that. But, what gets me is that we are asked to bring "healthy" snacks for the kiddos but "chocolatey" things (brownies, cupcakes, cookies, etc) for the moms. Hello!!! How can we, as middle aged adults handle the calories??

 

By the way, not everyone's idea of healthy is my idea of healthy.

 

I almost *always* volunteer to bring snacks. I volunteered for snacks at our last homeschool group meeting (a parents-only meeting). I brought a crockpot with meatballs, homemade salsa with chips and a veggie tray. The other two people who volunteered brought only sweets. I don't like sweets, so I volunteer to bring snacks every time and I bring what I like. :tongue_smilie:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My snack Czar post was not in reference to allergies. My son had a dairy allergy when he was a baby and I was very careful in what I ate and what he ate but I didn't criticize others for bringing the wrong things. I made sure we brought what he could eat. I am also very careful about label reading when I know a child has an allergy. I know how to read labels since I had to do it when he was a baby.

 

There was no mention of allergies in the first post or in the choir directors instructions. That would be completely different. This was a rant about sugar not allergies.

 

I am just kind of jumpy about snacks. I once brought some chocolate coated sugar bomb type of cookies and the kids FREAKED OUT. I was horrified. The other parents were kind of "haha" but I have some anxiety about it. I have never brought sugar to anything ever again. :lol: Even "apple day!!" at church I didn't bring dessert. I brought a salad, it did have apples in it. :lol:

Edited by Sis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 cupcakes cost about $17 if they are buying them.

 

I think a few heads of broccoli would be less than that. Maybe everyone could take a "stone soup" approach and bring one item? I am sure if someone took the lead on something like that the other parents would breath a sigh of relief.

 

Yeah, but I wouldn't feel like I could just bring a head of broccoli. To me, a veggie tray would mean bringing a variety of vegetables and maybe even some dip. I know I can bake cupcakes and frost them fairly inexpensively.

 

Lisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I HAVE a food allergy. It isn't the same. It is just not.

 

I have had to run through a museum carrying someone else's child during a field trip trying to get to his epipen which the teacher had because the museum thought nut sorting was a fun activity.

 

It isn't fair to exaggerate other issues and compare them, it makes other people just think nut allergies aren't serious when nut allergies are VERY serious. There are still all these people who send their kids to school or other functions with PB&J when they know a child sits next to them everday who could DIE.

 

It isn't right to compare the two and yes I do take an issue with that.

 

Implying I would blow off an issue with sugar because I don't think it will KILL A CHILD is not reasonable. I have never given any child something without the parent's permission. I always bring fruit. Sheesh.

 

Again, who said it was "the same?"

 

Anaphylactic shock can put a child's life in danger, where a sugar-sensitive child eating "snacks" usually means just dealing with behavioral problems for several hours.

 

But why does not wanting your child being fed treats that negatively effect them bring a hostile reaction, and charges that your problems aren't "serious" or valid? This I simply don't understand.

 

Try telling a group anywhere that you'd appreciate it if they limit the sugary treats because your child has a bad reaction to them and see what kind of reaction you get.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can a rant be polite? I tried to make it that way. Yesterday evening, my children's lovely, patient, wonderful Choir Director (the woman has the patience of a saint!) sent out an email with instructions for this Sunday (kids are singing), and a request for two families to provide a 'TREAT' (she specifically stated cheese, crackers, veggies, cookies, drinks) for Sunday evening's rehearsal for a little celebration for singing at two services Sunday morning. There are 26 children in junior choir.

 

This morning, SIX families had responded -- (everyone had hit reply all so we were all on the same page)...four families said they would bring cupcakes, the other two families said they would bring cookies.

:rant:

I realize that the 'no sugar' thing is my own personal little soapbox in most circles, but I am SO tired of the sugar issue being ignored -- I respect and understand kids and peanut and nut allergies....to the point that when we have birthday parties, I make certain the pizza is ordered from the ONLY pizza place that the other mom trusts...and I accomodate her child in other ways as well. I think it is considerate, responsible, and the right thing to do. Sugar is to my kids what nuts are to kids who have nut allergies.

 

A cupcake eaten at 6:30pm on a Sunday will continue to affect my children (the twins especially) until midnight.

 

So, today (sorry -- I aLWAYS ramble) when the sixth offer for cupcakes and or cookies was made, I sent the following email to the group:

 

I am most appreciative of the kind offers that have been made to provide

cupcakes and cookies for Sunday's little celebration. I will bring something to add to the celebration that is not quite as 'sugar-intensive.' My children

react to sugar the way 'peanut-allergic' children react to nuts -- their

reaction is quite strong and the negative effects of the sugar will remain with

them for hours. One cupcake eaten at that hour of the day will create havoc till amost midnight.

I will provide small bottles of water for Sunday and perhaps cheese and crackers or veggies.

Thank you again for your kind contributions -- Mariann A*****

 

The choir director immediately responded with a thank you for all the offers, and a very specifically worded thank you for the water/veggie/cheese/crackers.

 

Am I the ONLY mom who bristles at the indifference that some others have to the junk they give their kids to eat? I am not being snarky........I've been doing this 'mom-thing' for 30 years now. When DD30 was 5 or 6, if a mom provided a sugar-y snack, she was treated like a pariah -- no kidding! Has the pendulum swung the other way? Am I seeing those kids who were given raisins and apples as 'treats' now pushing cupcakes and cookies b/c they were not given those things?

 

 

 

You are not alone! My kids were in public school for a short time a couple of years ago, and teachers were constantly giving them candy as rewards for doing schoolwork. Since then, the teachers of the after-school classes they take always give them candy at the end of class. When did this become the norm? We don't even restrict candy at our house...we don't buy it, just every once in a while, or on holidays. But it's ridiculous how much it is used as a reward. You'd think teachers wouldn't want to deal with kids bouncing off the walls.

 

What ever happened to using stickers as a reward?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just kind of jumpy about snacks. I once brought some chocolate coated sugar bomb type of cookies and the kids FREAKED OUT. I was terrified. The other parents were kind of "haha" but I have some anxiety about it. I have never brought sugar to anything ever again. :lol: Even "apple day!!" at church I didn't bring dessert. I brought a salad. :lol:

 

If someone freaks out on me for something innocent like that I'm going to bring more the next time. If they politely tell me beforehand or even during without drama then I'm ok. I'm not sure if that's passive agressive or what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, who said it was "the same?"

 

Anaphylactic shock can put a child's life in danger, where a sugar-sensitive child eating "snacks" usually means just dealing with behavioral problems for several hours.

 

But why does not wanting your child being fed treats that negatively effect them bring a hostile reaction, and charges that your problems aren't "serious" or valid? This I simply don't understand.

 

Try telling a group anywhere that you'd appreciate it if they limit the sugary treats because your child has a bad reaction to them and see what kind of reaction you get.

 

Bill

 

No one said they weren't serious or valid. In fact I said the opposite several times in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just kind of jumpy about snacks. I once brought some chocolate coated sugar bomb type of cookies and the kids FREAKED OUT. I was horrified. The other parents were kind of "haha" but I have some anxiety about it. I have never brought sugar to anything ever again. :lol: Even "apple day!!" at church I didn't bring dessert. I brought a salad, it did have apples in it. :lol:

 

Apple day? Man, my son would be so sad. I think we'd probably skip church that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same is true for any other severe allergy, including to things like bee stings or other foods. Clearly both parents and their allergic children must be careful at all times, and not let down their guard on this, and have the epipen handy.

 

I also think this is part of a culture where no one can be bothered to make anything at home. In my experience, when people are asked to bring things, they just buy them. The idea of even buying fruit/vegetables, washing them, and putting it on a plate is beyond most people. Very sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, who said it was "the same?"

 

Anaphylactic shock can put a child's life in danger, where a sugar-sensitive child eating "snacks" usually means just dealing with behavioral problems for several hours.

 

But why does not wanting your child being fed treats that negatively effect them bring a hostile reaction, and charges that your problems aren't "serious" or valid? This I simply don't understand.

 

Try telling a group anywhere that you'd appreciate it if they limit the sugary treats because your child has a bad reaction to them and see what kind of reaction you get.

 

Bill

 

I wonder if you are getting a bad reation because people think you are judging their choices? If I were you I'd be the person to bring the healthy snack and leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone should be on the defensive for not giving copious amounts of sugar. I just know from experience that getting all up in arms about it makes you look like "that crazy mom" instead of "the healthy snack mom." Bring a healthy snack and other people will often follow suit. Sometimes, the leader of an activity will even say "man, thanks for bringing a healthy snack, they are crazy after some of those snacks!" And you can say "well, how about letting parents choose snacks from a list instead of bringing whatever they want?" You can react in a way that doesn't make you look judgmental, snarky or irrational and get a better result.

 

You know, I'm not exactly the "irrational" type. I'm pretty well-reason and calm, actually. And this is the one issue where, I've found, that no amount of good-natured discussion is treated seriously.

 

People think you are koo-koo-loo-loo if your child can't tolerate sugar-snacks the way their children might. And no mater how calmly one asks, people get mad if you ask to cut out sweets at group events. Really mad!

 

No amount of calmness in the asking has and effect. Believe me!

 

Look at the reactions in this thread.

 

We did get lucky in soccer, as we were the first "snack-moms" and we brought oranges, and watermelon, and some-sort of Kashi bars (that are a little bit sweet, but not too bad) and so far everyone else has copied the snack menu.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What type of sugars do your children react to? Does it matter? For example, I'm assuming white sugar is bad, but what about maple syrup or honey? Agave? I'm curious, but didn't think it rated a whole new thread.

 

thanks!

 

For my daughter? Anything sugary, including something too heavy in carbs. She LOVES carbs but they make her act crazy. I have to impose severe limits on her bagel intake, for example. So, for her, it doesn't matter whether or not it is simple sugars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest RecumbentHeart

I too have been bristled over this and just dumbfounded by the complete lack of concern from others. My old church was terrible for this. It started with a sunday school teacher who was watching my 8mo informing me she'd fed him a piece of sugared donut with the rest of the children. Then a nursery worker fed him peanut crackers when he was not much older and had never had peanuts before. I only found out because of the crumbs I found in his stroller. Thank the Lord he wasn't allergic. Then one time when he was thirsty he was fed soda .. a 1yo. Whenever I mentioned these things politely it seemed to go straight over people's heads. They just didn't get it.

 

The first time he came with us to our new church (that wasn't why we changed churches, just to be clear) a nursery worker asked us if it he was allowed to have Goldfish because that is what they usually offered the children for a snack between services and I honestly teared up. Someone was actually thoughtful. I just plain wasn't used to that at all.

 

Anyway, all that to say .. I understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled that parents with children to are sensitive to sugary-treats should have to feel on the defensive because the harm done to their child isn't immediately "life-treating."

 

People respect "tree-nut" allergies, as well they should. We had a child in our coop last year with nut allergies, so even though "sharing" of food wasn't allowed in any case, there was a zero-tolerance policy on bringing nuts/or nut containing products to school. A policy we fully understood and supported.

 

No "normal" person would intentionally give a vegan child meat, and if they accidently gave a child a dish with meat I'm sure "most people" would feel terrible. And "guilty." And say, "I'm so sorry."

 

But ordinary, sane, other-wise rational people who've been told a child doesn't react well to sugar seem to have no problem going ahead and handing out treats on the "down-low."

 

Don't tell your folks. Wink Wink.

 

And it's rather galling to have a child who's one who really does badly on sugar, and to be intentionally undermined in ways no person of good-will would dream of doing with a vegan child or one with an allergy. I simply don't understand the mentality.

 

To say, well it's not as serious as anaphylactic shock, is simply a dismissive and not particularly respectful position to take. Anaphylactic shock, obviously, puts a child in peril in a way that sugar sensitivity does not. But both fall into a category of "harm."

 

Bill

 

The distinction is that certain food allergies (such as the nuts etc) can be life threatening. Those allergies aren't a choice and they are something everyone needs to give serious consideration to. Whereas hyperactivity to sugar, while not fun to have to deal with until the affect wear off, is not life threatening. It certainly isn't right to undermine a parent if you know their child isn't supposed to have sugar and I think the instances of that would be rare. But in a situation (party etc) where sugary stuff is available and if a child doesn't self-monitor outside the parent's influence then it is not really a case of the sugar supplier undermining the parent or enticing the child but more an issue of the child needing to observe the rules the parent has set forth. I wouldn't consider parents that innocently sign up and provide cupcakes to a function as doing something harmful merely because of the sugar. I can't seem to shake the feeling that more and more the shift is away from personal responsibility when it comes to some parenting issues. If I want my child to control the sugar intake, then it is my responsibility to make that happen and not my place to police the diet of others. JMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I'm not exactly the "irrational" type. I'm pretty well-reason and calm, actually. And this is the one issue where, I've found, that no amount of good-natured discussion is treated seriously.

 

I didn't think you were being irrational but I did think some of the statements made in the thread sounded irrational (sometimes things sound different in your head than they look in black and white).

 

People think you are koo-koo-loo-loo if your child can't tolerate sugar-snacks the way their children might. And no mater how calmly one asks, people get mad if you ask to cut out sweets at group events. Really mad!

 

No amount of calmness in the asking has and effect. Believe me!

 

Look at the reactions in this thread.

 

We did get lucky in soccer, as we were the first "snack-moms" and we brought oranges, and watermelon, and some-sort of Kashi bars (that are a little bit sweet, but not too bad) and so far everyone else has copied the snack menu.

 

Bill

 

I totally agree with you. What I'm saying is that my experience has told me that it's best to just let it go. I *did* get the snack at lego robotics cut but that's the only time I really advocated for it. The best I can do is bring a healthy snack every time. My kid gets something they can eat and maybe other parents copy the example. Getting up in arms about it just upsets other people and doesn't result in better snack choices. That's all I'm saying.

 

And I do know what you're talking about-my third born sister was shocked when she found out my kids had no idea what a Twinkie was. She gave them some Twinkies and at that point their reaction was "ew! is this even food?!" :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We belong to a group where we are asked to bring healthy snacks. Invariably we end up with cupcakes, rice krispie treats candy. I always bring fresh fruit, cheese/crackers, veggies/dip, dried fruit or home made trail mix. There is one other mom who does the same. This is on Fri. afternoon. My twins are so wired by the time I get home, Friday evening is chaos. (Their nickname - A & B Demolition - wasn't for nothing) It is so hard to say to my girls, 'no', when all the other kids are stuffing their faces with rice krispie treats or whatnot. I have to stand guard at the snack table. Anyway, it's difficult for the lady running the group I guess. She has asked and asked, yet she relies on everyone attending to provide the snacks. Maybe a sign-up sheet with suggestions would be the way to go. It is a problem for us. Sugar does not make for happy children in my home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What does get to me though is the fact that food (of any kind) has to be served almost any time there is a gathering. I mean, you can't attend Sunday school, children's church, choir practice, sports practice, etc. without dealing with food issues....every single time....even when they are there for 30 minutes! As a mom with the allergy issue, it's not that I mind dealing with it and providing something else. It's the fact that I can never let my guard down and just let the kids go somewhere or attend something. I just truly don't remember as a kid EATING this much when we had functions and parties....

 

Shanna

:iagree: and I could have said that to multiple posts on here. Honestly, I truly wish the whole snack policy would die. Parents are responsible enough to provide that for their own children (and therefore not have to worry about any said issues). And if you are attending a b-day party, get over the fact there will probably be a sugary cake there...or bring your own substitute. If I had a child with allergies or high sensitivity, I as THEIR parent would do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For my daughter? Anything sugary, including something too heavy in carbs. She LOVES carbs but they make her act crazy. I have to impose severe limits on her bagel intake, for example. So, for her, it doesn't matter whether or not it is simple sugars.

 

Thanks! I can see some people (for example me:tongue_smilie:) getting confused and trying to give non sugary snacks, and wind up doing it anyway. My fallback is usually goldfish or pretzels - not sweet, so it seems like it'd be ok....and they're inexpensive, which is a plus because when we have guests it's usually a crowd. Now I know to watch for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:iagree: and I could have said that to multiple posts on here. Honestly, I truly wish the whole snack policy would die. Parents are responsible enough to provide that for their own children (and therefore not have to worry about any said issues). And if you are attending a b-day party, get over the fact there will probably be a sugary cake there...or bring your own substitute. If I had a child with allergies or high sensitivity, I as THEIR parent would do so.

 

I don't think a birthday is really the same as random snack. At a birthday there is expectation of cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, who said it was "the same?"

 

Anaphylactic shock can put a child's life in danger, where a sugar-sensitive child eating "snacks" usually means just dealing with behavioral problems for several hours.

 

But why does not wanting your child being fed treats that negatively effect them bring a hostile reaction, and charges that your problems aren't "serious" or valid? This I simply don't understand.

 

Try telling a group anywhere that you'd appreciate it if they limit the sugary treats because your child has a bad reaction to them and see what kind of reaction you get.

 

Bill

 

 

I hear you on this. We have people giving sugary treats to the kids and telling them to not tell etc. I do allow my kids to have sugary treats but do try to limit them and control what time of day etc they are given. Ds does not have an ana reaction to sugar HOWEVER, it can become a life and death situation for others because of the violence. We struggle everyday with his impulse control issues etc. He has violent meltdowns already without the sugar. BUT if he has sugar and reacts to it, he is a scary scary fellow. Choking, punching, kicking, throwing things, he even once held a knife on some one, all because he ate sugar.

 

He knows he is not supposed to have it, but like a drug addict he is drawn to it. I have caught him sitting by the freezer eating it straight out of the bag, after trying to eliminate it from his diet cold turkey. Dealing with him and sugar is a nightmare. We don't try to tell others what they can and can't bring, BUT It would be nice if 1)non-sugary treats were served and 2) people wouldn't give to my kids after I have said no, because they think mommy is just being "a big meanie" (and yes they have been told that while people slip them sugary snacks.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The distinction is that certain food allergies (such as the nuts etc) can be life threatening. Those allergies aren't a choice and they are something everyone needs to give serious consideration to. Whereas hyperactivity to sugar, while not fun to have to deal with until the affect wear off, is not life threatening.

 

Which is a distinction I've stipulated is true in several posts including the one you quoted.

 

But you seem to be saying (as are others) because sugar hyperactivity "wears-off" eventually it can be dismissed as "not serious."

 

And so, those of us who have sugar-sensitive kids are ignored when we ask that our children not be fed sugary-snacks.

 

It certainly isn't right to undermine a parent if you know their child isn't supposed to have sugar and I think the instances of that would be rare. But in a situation (party etc) where sugary stuff is available and if a child doesn't self-monitor outside the parent's influence then it is not really a case of the sugar supplier undermining the parent or enticing the child but more an issue of the child needing to observe the rules the parent has set forth.

 

Yea, sure. Tell a 5 year-old that he's the one responsible for saying no to folks plying him with cake, ice cream, cookies, sweet drinks, and goodness knows what else.

 

My son is learning to decline such things, but it's a big onus to put on a child.

 

I wouldn't consider parents that innocently sign up and provide cupcakes to a function as doing something harmful merely because of the sugar. I can't seem to shake the feeling that more and more the shift is away from personal responsibility when it comes to some parenting issues. If I want my child to control the sugar intake, then it is my responsibility to make that happen and not my place to police the diet of others. JMHO.

 

And what if you are part of a group, and a parent of a child comes to you all and says that his/or her child has a problem with sugar-hyperactivity and they would appreciate limiting sugary snacks at group events?

 

What do you do then?

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What type of sugars do your children react to? Does it matter? For example, I'm assuming white sugar is bad, but what about maple syrup or honey? Agave? I'm curious, but didn't think it rated a whole new thread.

 

thanks!

 

Ds reacts to white sugar, brown sugar(though to a lesser degree), corn syrup, some maple syrups, and apple products(I assume due to the fructose)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what if you are part of a group, and a parent of a child comes to you all and says that his/or her child has a problem with sugar-hyperactivity and they would appreciate limiting sugary snacks at group events?

 

What do you do then?

 

If I was the group leader and this was a consistent problem then I would make a sign up sheet with things like: peanut butter crackers (assuming no allergies), baby carrots, celery sticks with cream cheese, raisins, cheese and crackers, fruit, etc. They could check which ones they are willing to bring. However, as much as I desire it, I cannot control what everyone else does. SOMEONE is going to bring something they aren't supposed to, parents and children have to be prepared for that.

 

My son likes apples and is sometimes sad that he can't have the treat someone brought. He gets over it, I don't see the sugar (or red dye) thing as being any different. Sometimes, he has to say no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you. What I'm saying is that my experience has told me that it's best to just let it go.

 

The fact of the matter is we often (usually) do let it go. The dis-harmony and anger that comes with a request to limit sugar is usually too extreme for us to press the case.

 

But our son plays a price.

 

It is not an act of kindness to feed him too much sugar. And it is painful for me as a parent to witness.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Epi-pens don't always work.

True for most medicines. I was not blaming parents or children -- I was pointing out the seriousness of this issue.

 

I am not sure what's with the tone of outrage in this whole thread. There are so many assumptions and presumptions that it's really quite sad. It's as if it's an "us vs. them" thing, except that no one slows down to see what people are talking about. It seems important to take off one's pants (er, open one's medicine cabinet) to prove one has the authority to talk about anything. It's silly. Do I have to have a food allergy to post in this thread? Do I have to eschew sugar?

 

I find people like to sabotage others when they feel someone, by their actions, is assuming moral superiority. Just last month, a man was telling my husband how they "tease" a co-worker every time they see him (!) that they will feed him a pork sandwich because he doesn't eat pork for religious reasons. I know many people who would love to get teetotalers drunk. As soon as someone says they don't eat something, people want to sneak it into their diet. I am not sure why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And no mater how calmly one asks, people get mad if you ask to cut out sweets at group events. Really mad!

 

 

That's because it's a cultural norm to celebrate with sweet treats, and people don't want to change the cultural norm. There's a lot of emotion tied up with eating and tradition.

 

And really, I don't think they should have to change, if they don't want to. If they want their kids to celebrate with sugar and junk, let them. Bring your own food. It's not so hard.

 

And I wanted also to address your statement that "normal" people don't try to feed vegan kids non-vegan food. Of course they do. It happens all the time, for one of several reasons. Some people think a vegan diet is kooky and seek to undermine it. Some people can't be bothered to read a label and choose to "assume" something is vegan because it's not a hunk of animal flesh. Some people are so threatened by veganism's assault on the cultural norm that they can't conceive of a non-vegan food and give kids whatever they feel like giving them, regardless of what the parents have stated.

 

I can't tell you the number of times people have been stumped when I have asked them to name vegan foods they enjoy. Bananas, toast with pb, carrot sticks, pasta with marinara sauce, whatever, can't be conceived of as vegan because vegan = weird.

 

It's so much easier to just bring your own food. Do I sound like a broken record yet?

 

Tara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True for most medicines. I was not blaming parents or children -- I was pointing out the seriousness of this issue.

 

I am not sure what's with the tone of outrage in this whole thread. There are so many assumptions and presumptions that it's really quite sad. It's as if it's an "us vs. them" thing, except that no one slows down to see what people are talking about. It seems important to take off one's pants (er, open one's medicine cabinet) to prove one has the authority to talk about anything. It's silly. Do I have to have a food allergy to post in this thread? Do I have to eschew sugar?

 

I find people like to sabotage others when they feel someone, by their actions, is assuming moral superiority. Just last month, a man was telling my husband how they "tease" a co-worker every time they see him (!) that they will feed him a pork sandwich because he doesn't eat pork for religious reasons. I know many people who would love to get teetotalers drunk. As soon as someone says they don't eat something, people want to sneak it into their diet. I am not sure why.

 

That is crazy.

 

"Hahaha! I am a bigot!"

 

I don't know what is wrong with people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is a distinction I've stipulated is true in several posts including the one you quoted.

 

But you seem to be saying (as are others) because sugar hyperactivity "wears-off" eventually it can be dismissed as "not serious."

 

And so, those of us who have sugar-sensitive kids are ignored when we ask that our children not be fed sugary-snacks.

 

 

I don't think that any of the replies from those of us living with food allergies are saying sugar sensitivity isn't serious. We know more than anyone else the importance of listening to parents about food. We're not the ones who'll be slipping your kids sugar.

 

However, we are saying, "Don't say that sugar sensitivity is the same as a food allergy."

 

Yes, the sugar sensitivity is serious.

Yes, you shouldn't be undermined.

But my son can die from a snack that's brought.

It isn't the same.

That's why you're getting the debate about allergic reactions.

 

It's the comment saying that the hyperactivity/sugar reaction (not denying there's a reaction) is equivalent to a true allergy that's causing the problems for us who are terrified that if our child gets their allergen, they die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, who said it was "the same?"

See the original post.

Anaphylactic shock can put a child's life in danger, where a sugar-sensitive child eating "snacks" usually means just dealing with behavioral problems for several hours.

Hmmm, I'd change 'can' to 'does'.

...

Try telling a group anywhere that you'd appreciate it if they limit the sugary treats because your child has a bad reaction to them and see what kind of reaction you get.

I have both asked this of people & been asked by others. I've never given or received a negative reaction.

Bill

 

I respect and understand kids and peanut and nut allergies....to the point that when we have birthday parties, ... Sugar is to my kids what nuts are to kids who have nut allergies.

I think that by comparing a reaction to sugar to anaphylactic shock resulting from a food allergy, you show that you don't actually understand food allergies.

 

...

 

I am most appreciative of the kind offers that have been made to provide

cupcakes and cookies for Sunday's little celebration. I will bring something to add to the celebration that is not quite as 'sugar-intensive.' My children

react to sugar the way 'peanut-allergic' children react to nuts -- their

reaction is quite strong and the negative effects of the sugar will remain with

them for hours. One cupcake eaten at that hour of the day will create havoc till amost midnight.

I will provide small bottles of water for Sunday and perhaps cheese and crackers or veggies.

Thank you again for your kind contributions -- Mariann A*****

 

 

 

As a parent of a child with ANA reactions to certain foods, I would be livid if I received this email from you. It's disrespectful at best, IMO. If there are any families dealing with food allergies who received this email I think you owe them an apology. Also, is there a reason you put quotes around peanut-allergic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what if you are part of a group, and a parent of a child comes to you all and says that his/or her child has a problem with sugar-hyperactivity and they would appreciate limiting sugary snacks at group events?

 

What do you do then?

 

Bill

 

I've thought about this thread some more & first of all, I come back to "why the heck do we need that snack at all????"

 

If it's a long activity and/or young children who might be expected to need some food, then everyone should bring a small packed lunch/snack. We can all sit together & bring out our own bag and eat our own food. Social and fun but we eat what's in our baggie. The end.

 

Otherwise, I think it's up to the parents to feed their kids before &/or after the event.

 

Sedondly, even if it's a group meal, the onus for selecting the foods you eat ultimately rests on the child and their parents. I'm an off again/on again vegetarian and I've never had a problem with big buffets and never asked anyone to make anything special for me - and dh's family is all traditional British. They can't get together without some quivering piece of meat weighing down the table...... If we (dh & I) as a family were committed to vegetarianism as some of my friends are, or if it was against our religion to eat pork or beef or sugar, I'd teach my children about why we did this and I'd expect the kids to make the right choice & I'd stay with them and help them make what I thought was the right choice until they were ready to make it on their own. I wouldn't expect others to adapt themselves to our dietary needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because it's a cultural norm to celebrate with sweet treats, and people don't want to change the cultural norm. There's a lot of emotion tied up with eating and tradition.

 

And really, I don't think they should have to change, if they don't want to. If they want their kids to celebrate with sugar and junk, let them. Bring your own food. It's not so hard.

 

And I wanted also to address your statement that "normal" people don't try to feed vegan kids non-vegan food. Of course they do. It happens all the time, for one of several reasons. Some people think a vegan diet is kooky and seek to undermine it. Some people can't be bothered to read a label and choose to "assume" something is vegan because it's not a hunk of animal flesh. Some people are so threatened by veganism's assault on the cultural norm that they can't conceive of a non-vegan food and give kids whatever they feel like giving them, regardless of what the parents have stated.

 

I can't tell you the number of times people have been stumped when I have asked them to name vegan foods they enjoy. Bananas, toast with pb, carrot sticks, pasta with marinara sauce, whatever, can't be conceived of as vegan because vegan = weird.

 

It's so much easier to just bring your own food. Do I sound like a broken record yet?

 

Tara

 

We do bring our own food. But if a child is at a group activity, or a neighbors, or (in our case) at school, and we've packed a healthful lunch, and an adult breaks out sweets and feeds them to our child (knowing our concerns) then what do you do?

 

This is when "cultural norms" need to be re-evaluated.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...