If they won't eat....

[Fleur de Lis]

With five kids, there is always someone who doesn't like what we are having. Their option is to eat what I cooked, or they may have plain cheerios with milk. No dessert though. Sometimes they will choke down what they don't like, since they really want dessert, other times they will just have the cheerios.

 

That is an interesting idea. I may use it in the future. Our current dessert rule is that everything that I've put on his plate must be eaten first. Half the time he'll choke the veggies down, half the time he won't.

[Heather in OK]

I'm not reading through all the pages so this has probably already been suggested.

 

Let him help plan some meals. Get him involved, use it as a lesson on nutrition (eg why crackers are NOT a nutritious option), etc.

 

To answer the OP:

 

I do not cook separate meals. I do always try to plan something within the meal that I know they like.

 

If it is something new they must take a "no thank you" helping and try. If they don't like it, fine. I'll allow a sandwich or something else to be made.

[Fleur de Lis]

Having plenty of healthy snack options around is good, and can lead to life long healthy eating habits. We keep lots of fruit, raw vegies, nuts, popcorn, whole grain bread, and other similar items around.

 

We also keep these items around, but if I let him fill himself up with other things (which he would if given the option), he wouldn't be hungry for the healthy snacks/meals.

[QueenCat]

I have a daughter who changes her mind about what she likes from week to week. My sister comes and cooks a very nice dinner on Sundays, one that Miss Picky loved and devoured the last time we had it. Miss Picky decides that this time, she does not want to eat more than a few bites. Could be that she isn't hungry, could be that she's being a brat. Sometimes she does it in the hope that she can move on to dessert sooner. Not sure what else it could be. She is 5yo and very healthy. She's never vomited or had any of those kinds of problems with food. Frankly, I think she just does this because she wants the attention - and it's rude to my sister. She doesn't get to have a pbj sandwich. If she goes to bed with a little room left in her stomach, she can fill it up in the morning. (It's not like she goes to bed crying with hunger. She never complains of hunger after leaving the table.)

 

My other daughter is normally a very good eater, and she will sometimes say she wants to be excused without finishing much of her food. Again, food she does not dislike. Must not be very hungry. Same analysis as above, except that she isn't rude about it.

 

I think it is healthier to allow a child to decide whether or not she's had enough food (assuming no medical issues). If I push my child to eat more by making a more favorite food and putting it in front of her, that could actually teach her to eat beyond the point where her hunger is satisfied. Now my second child (the good eater) used to have a problem with eating too much - like she never felt like she'd had enough. So now if she says she's had enough a little earlier than I might expect, I'm not going to mess with that.

 

If you want to call what I do "punishment" for bad behavior, that's your choice, I guess. I don't see it that way at all.

 

I agree with you, if a child has had enough food, then of course they don't have to go get a sandwich. That would be silly. If a child isn't hungry at mealtime, they might be later though. Then they can eat either leftovers or make a sandwich, find a healthy snack. I don't allow my children to be rude either. Your example of liked it one week, played "rude" the next is very different than a child going to bed hungry on a regular basis because they don't like the food that is typically served in their home and are NOT allowed an alternative. When I say typically served, I'm thinking of people who don't do well with foods mixed together, say casserole style, or don't like a lot of grains, or something similar. One of mine can't stand casseroles of any sort, he much prefers things separated out. So if it's a casserole being served, he's likely to make a sandwich. No problem. He still eats with us though, as we focus on "family time" at dinner time.

[Fleur de Lis]

a child going to bed hungry on a regular basis because they don't like the food that is typically served in their home and are NOT allowed an alternative.

 

I haven't read all of the posts, but are there many families on here whose children go to bed hungry on a regular basis? My impression is that if a kid knows they don't have other options they typically will decide to expand their palettes after only a couple of incidences - deciding the food isn't that bad after all.

 

BTW, please don't interpret what I am saying as critical of other people's choices. Just defending us "eat it or don't" types against the charges of child abuse (!).

[QueenCat]

I haven't read all of the posts, but are there many families on here whose children go to bed hungry on a regular basis? My impression is that if a kid knows they don't have other options they typically will decide to expand their palettes after only a couple of incidences - deciding the food isn't that bad after all.

 

I didn't say there were many but some do give that impression. There are foods I will NEVER like, and have tried them many of times, sometimes by force. If I'm not going to eat what I don't like, it is unreasonable to expect the same of my children. And if you read all of what I wrote, my kids do usually eat what I (or dh) has made.

[freesia]

Do you send your children to bed without any supper if they won't eat what you serve? Do you try to always offer a side dish that is kid-approved? Do you make a picky eater their own, separate meal? My dh is tired of me fixing a separate meal for our 8 yr. old. For the past two nights our son has taken one look at our meal and refused to eat. He had crackers (and nothing else) both nights. He wouldn't even try the yummy apple crumble I made b/c it looked weird to him. Is there a way to make all foods look like a chicken nugget?:glare:

In general I will. I usually offer a plain alternative: plain, unsweetened yogurt, plain cheerios w/ milk, a plain piece of bread. As the child ages (5 or6 on up) I do make them take a bite or two of everything on the table. We have also been known to send a child from the table w/o eating for complaining about the meal. One meal won't hurt.

 

I do have a picky eater but I don't cater to him. He doesn't eat as "well" as the others but he does eat a variety bc he knows I'll send him to bed hungry (or make him wait until snack if it's lunch.)

 

If it were a child with RAD, or a medical issue of some sort I would probably handle the situation differently.

 

eta: I think one of my children once to bed without any dinner. I am okay if they have a few foods they don't like. I try to have something that they will like at the meal. I try to make sure w/in the week there are a couple of meals each likes.

 

I really believe that you need to serve the food at least 15 times before some get used to it. With my picky eater it also helped to have an "expert" (the doctor) tell him to eat his legumes.

 

 

Anne

Edited December 10, 2011 by freesia

[SKL]

Your example of liked it one week, played "rude" the next is very different than a child going to bed hungry on a regular basis because they don't like the food that is typically served in their home and are NOT allowed an alternative.

 

But not every family has the luxury of catering to each child's preferences to that extent. It comes down to - is being poor child abuse? My friend from Brazil commented that most people in his homeland have to eat rice and beans every day of their lives. I said, hey, that sounds healthy! He said, yeah, but the same fare every day of your life? But they do it. Because otherwise they would starve. My family is not in that situation, but some US families are living on the edge like that, and I can't imagine the law would require them to cater to the whims of their kids when it comes to providing food. Again, if we're talking about a legitimate physical intolerance, that would be a different discussion.

 

Fact is, as stated by my Honduran friend: hunger is the best seasoning. Everything tastes more palateable when you're hungry. And the feeling of hunger is not a bad thing, as long as there is "something" to eat before it becomes illness.

[QueenCat]

But not every family has the luxury of catering to each child's preferences to that extent. It comes down to - is being poor child abuse? My friend from Brazil commented that most people in his homeland have to eat rice and beans every day of their lives. I said, hey, that sounds healthy! He said, yeah, but the same fare every day of your life? But they do it. Because otherwise they would starve. My family is not in that situation, but some US families are living on the edge like that, and I can't imagine the law would require them to cater to the whims of their kids when it comes to providing food. Again, if we're talking about a legitimate physical intolerance, that would be a different discussion.

 

Fact is, as stated by my Honduran friend: hunger is the best seasoning. Everything tastes more palateable when you're hungry. And the feeling of hunger is not a bad thing, as long as there is "something" to eat before it becomes illness.

 

No, being poor is not child abuse. Pb&j is cheaper than most meat dishes. I'm done here, we aren't going to change each others minds on the issues. And I need to start dinner :001_smile:.

[sewingmama]

Yes for my boys - they are not picky eaters so if they don't eat their dinner then I know it is truely because they aren't hungry and so it doesn't matter.

 

No for my DD - she has SPD and a range of other eating disorders. If she misses a meal she spends 12 hours vomiting. There are so many things she can't/won't eat because of texture. She is also on a G/F diet and misses out on a lot of fun things and is left with a kind of bland diet that needs to be carefully balanced. So if she doesn't eat then I basically let her eat whatever she wants. Sometimes I make her a seperate meal from scratch if I know she won't touch what we are eating but most of the time I just make her a small snack type food. I've tried everything in the last few years including therapy to gt her to eat and now I've just accepted this is how it is and she needs to eat and I need to feed her around her issues. So no -she doesn't get sent to bed hungry and yes I do make special meals for her. She has special needs that can't be fixed by intentionally starving her for punishment.

[Tarreymere]

I certainly do NOT like rice and beans or lentil soup or things like that but I make them for dinner regularly AND EAT THEM because that is what we can afford. If you are wealthy enough to have choices, good for you. We do not. So if my kids decide they don't like rice and beans when it is served to them for dinner, then they will be hungry. And no, I can't afford to keep buying peanut butter all the time for them nor is it particularly healthy for a kid to eat nothing but peanut butter, as most people who have any kind of education regarding nutrition are aware of.

 

It is NOT child abuse. I shared a link to the criteria for child abuse and neglect in my state. My husband works for CPS. It is beyond ridiculous to suggest that a child has some sort of right to have an assortment of food choices for dinner every day or will be removed to foster care. CPS expects parents to offer the child nutritious, healthy food on a regular basis, not a smorgasbord of their particular favorites. If a child refuses to eat the nutritious healthy food their parent provides it is NOT grounds for a child abuse investigation.

 

I especially despise this form of fear-mongering as it makes perfectly normal respectable parents fear CPS when they have nothing to hide and nothing to fear. It makes my DH look like a villain who is out to steal children. Just because YOU hold a particular opinion about feeding the children in YOUR house does not mean you can use CPS to frighten other people into doing what you think they ought to do.

 

Edited to add: If your child is not normal and has special food requirements, then you should do as you need to do for your own particular child's sake. But do NOT make the mistake of trying to frighten ME with CPS over my perfectly normal, normal weight healthy children turning up their noses at a particular dinner and not being petted and given special choices.

Edited December 10, 2011 by Rainefox

[Tarreymere]

Sorry, but you & I will never agree on this one. I have several in my social circle who are either social workers or foster parents. They will remove a child who is being punished for not eating by not being fed, if it is on a regular basis, and the parents won't change the parents behavior. You choose to make "not eating what I serve" a bad behavior, I choose to not make it a "behavior" issue. For a short time in my kids lives, I did, and I DEEPLY regret it because I know deep in my heart that it was the wrong thing to do. That does NOT mean they got to snack/eat on junk in place of the meal.

 

So you are saying that in YOUR state the child abuse critieria punishes parents who have limited resources? I am telling you very clearly that YOU are seriously mistaken or are twisting reality to fit your own opinion. I don't have 'friends' or participate in a 'social circle' with social workers, my DH is a CPS supervisor. I know for A FACT that children who are regularly offered nutritious, healthy foods and who make a choice to not eat those foods are NOT REMOVED FROM THEIR HOMES BECAUSE MOM DOES NOT JUMP UP AND OFFER ALTERNATIVES. Usually Mom doesn't like the food either, but it is what the family has available. And I am very, very certain your state can't afford to place all of the kids who turn up their noses at a dinner in a foster placement since foster placements cost a lot of money and eat up a lot of caseworker time, time that REAL caseworkers would rather spend working with children and families who are really at risk.

[justamouse]

My kids eat what is served. Period.

 

Outside of medical issues - for instance we have friends who have a diabetic son, and others with a child whose underlying medical issues cause dangerously low blood sugar - I am not inclined to cater to pickiness.

 

Not everything I serve has to be anyone's favorite. They do have to display proper manners and eat what they are offered, graciously. My kids eat pretty much any cuisine, and are pretty adventurous when looking at a menu. And yes, they all have different preferences.

:iagree:

 

Same at my house.

[Element]

I just noticed the tag-- very appropriate! That's exactly what I was thinking of this thread and the other.

[sewingmama]

He starves himself, vomits, and turns into a raving lunatic. So what should I do about that? Just hold out until he gets over it?

 

:iagree:

 

If I tell my DD she will eat nothing unless she eats what I serve she will literally eat nothing for days and days rather then eat something she can't stand to put in her mouth. Which then turns into vomiting from low blood sugar and 2 hour long tantrums and lunatic bad behaviour.

 

If a 5yo can willingly starve themselves to that extent rather then eat a certain food - there is no way I am going to force her to eat it. Talk about creating massive future eating disorders.

 

I and most people I know will eat stuff they hate if they are hungry enough - if I ate nothing for 24 hours and someone gave me a big bowl of snails and frog legs I'd eat it happily I would be so hungry - but my DD can go days and not be tempted in the least if it's something nasty (to her) - so it's way more then just pickiness with her.

[Scarlett]

I have a daughter who changes her mind about what she likes from week to week. My sister comes and cooks a very nice dinner on Sundays, one that Miss Picky loved and devoured the last time we had it. Miss Picky decides that this time, she does not want to eat more than a few bites. Could be that she isn't hungry, could be that she's being a brat. Sometimes she does it in the hope that she can move on to dessert sooner. Not sure what else it could be. She is 5yo and very healthy. She's never vomited or had any of those kinds of problems with food. Frankly, I think she just does this because she wants the attention - and it's rude to my sister. She doesn't get to have a pbj sandwich. If she goes to bed with a little room left in her stomach, she can fill it up in the morning. (It's not like she goes to bed crying with hunger. She never complains of hunger after leaving the table.)

 

My other daughter is normally a very good eater, and she will sometimes say she wants to be excused without finishing much of her food. Again, food she does not dislike. Must not be very hungry. Same analysis as above, except that she isn't rude about it.

 

I think it is healthier to allow a child to decide whether or not she's had enough food (assuming no medical issues). If I push my child to eat more by making a more favorite food and putting it in front of her, that could actually teach her to eat beyond the point where her hunger is satisfied. Now my second child (the good eater) used to have a problem with eating too much - like she never felt like she'd had enough. So now if she says she's had enough a little earlier than I might expect, I'm not going to mess with that.

 

If you want to call what I do "punishment" for bad behavior, that's your choice, I guess. I don't see it that way at all.

 

:iagree:

[Scarlett]

So you are saying that in YOUR state the child abuse critieria punishes parents who have limited resources? I am telling you very clearly that YOU are seriously mistaken or are twisting reality to fit your own opinion. I don't have 'friends' or participate in a 'social circle' with social workers, my DH is a CPS supervisor. I know for A FACT that children who are regularly offered nutritious, healthy foods and who make a choice to not eat those foods are NOT REMOVED FROM THEIR HOMES BECAUSE MOM DOES NOT JUMP UP AND OFFER ALTERNATIVES. Usually Mom doesn't like the food either, but it is what the family has available. And I am very, very certain your state can't afford to place all of the kids who turn up their noses at a dinner in a foster placement since foster placements cost a lot of money and eat up a lot of caseworker time, time that REAL caseworkers would rather spend working with children and families who are really at risk.

 

Yep. This.

[SweetMissMagnolia]

I've done a little of "all of the above"......lately if he doesn't want what I offer he can have spaghetti o's or a pbj sandwich...

[QueenCat]

So you are saying that in YOUR state the child abuse critieria punishes parents who have limited resources? I am telling you very clearly that YOU are seriously mistaken or are twisting reality to fit your own opinion. I don't have 'friends' or participate in a 'social circle' with social workers, my DH is a CPS supervisor. I know for A FACT that children who are regularly offered nutritious, healthy foods and who make a choice to not eat those foods are NOT REMOVED FROM THEIR HOMES BECAUSE MOM DOES NOT JUMP UP AND OFFER ALTERNATIVES. Usually Mom doesn't like the food either, but it is what the family has available. And I am very, very certain your state can't afford to place all of the kids who turn up their noses at a dinner in a foster placement since foster placements cost a lot of money and eat up a lot of caseworker time, time that REAL caseworkers would rather spend working with children and families who are really at risk.

 

NO, I did NOT say that. I said they remove them, if they punish them by not feeding them, or making sure they do eat. And I'm not talking about a one time thing either, like "turning up their noses" at "a dinner". It is an issue for DCS (same thing as CPS, different states use different terms, as I'm sure you know) if it is a regular pattern and a child is not eating on a regular basis. Age is also considered. Help is also offered as far as helping families access resources, etc. I NEVER said they punish people for being poor by taking their kids. NEVER. And I didn't suggest "MOM" jump up with alternatives. Having pb & j once in a while because you don't like something that you have tried is a reasonable alternative, even for those with little money. And now, back to cooking...

 

You know, I just realized you used the term "REAL caseworkers". Are you actually accusing me of lying about what my friends have shared with me when we discuss issues? And no, they don't give personal details, just examples. We talk about these things quite a bit because they know I have thought about getting a degree in social work, and we've thought about foster care.

[Scarlett]

I have to admit that picky eaters irk me. I mean REALLY irk me.

 

I had a SIL that would close her eyes and 'shiver' in disgust if she was offered a food she didn't like. :glare: She is still well loved, but her habit of doing that is a family joke.

 

I was mid 20s and married when I one day realized I don't really like macaroni and cheese. I had been served M&C all my life and never refused or complained about it.

 

I understand texture issues. I like some things more, some things less based upon texture.

 

However, I still believe it is VERY rude to turn ones nose up at food offered. If I serve a tasty nutritious meal, by george everyone better show up and be polite and eat what is in front of them. My dss15 isn't crazy about eggs. He eats a bit or two and his brother, age 10 eats a plate full. No problem.

 

My ds11 can be picky about weird things. He eats brussel sprouts no problem but oh heaven forbid he is served anything with nuts in it. It irritates me. He was the same way with onions cooked in food....would fuss....I gave him no choice. Onions cooked in food are NOT disgusting...I just don't believe that. Now, when it is just ds and me and I'm making him scrambled eggs....I leave the onions out. When the entire family is here....in they go and he eats them without a fuss. Same way with other foods that traditonally have onions cooked in.

 

I realize that there are all sorts of extreme exceptions out there. But generally, I believe kids should eat what they are offered. If they don't like it then they might possibly get out of eating it. But I will not reward them with an alternative unless it is an extreme situation. And I will not reward them with dessert later. That is up to them.

[QueenCat]

It is beyond ridiculous to suggest that a child has some sort of right to have an assortment of food choices for dinner every day or will be removed to foster care. CPS expects parents to offer the child nutritious, healthy food on a regular basis, not a smorgasbord of their particular favorites. If a child refuses to eat the nutritious healthy food their parent provides it is NOT grounds for a child abuse investigation.

 

I especially despise this form of fear-mongering as it makes perfectly normal respectable parents fear CPS when they have nothing to hide and nothing to fear. It makes my DH look like a villain who is out to steal children. Just because YOU hold a particular opinion about feeding the children in YOUR house does not mean you can use CPS to frighten other people into doing what you think they ought to do.

 

 

I did not suggest parents offer a smorgasbord of options. Cereal or a sandwich on occasion, for the detestable to the palate food is not unreasonable. And no one is "fear mongering", at least not me. If someone regularly sends their child to bed without food, it is an issue in our state. DCS is not out to steal children, only help those who need it. And sometimes that involves food. Often helping, at least in my state, with meal planning, parenting classes, finding resources, etc, to help families stay together.

[EKS]

I don't make separate meals, but I do leave offensive items off a plate and I will serve a dish to the picky one before an offensive ingredient is added (for example, I'll give my son stew before I add peas to it). I do try to make things that everyone likes and my kids have gotten more adventurous as they have gotten older. If someone really doesn't want the entire dinner, that person can make himself a sandwich.

[QueenCat]

I have to admit that picky eaters irk me. I mean REALLY irk me.

 

I had a SIL that would close her eyes and 'shiver' in disgust if she was offered a food she didn't like. :glare: She is still well loved, but her habit of doing that is a family joke.

 

 

 

Mine aren't too picky..... and they know not to be rude if they are a guest and don't care for something. That's a different issue than regular meals at home, with the occasional detestable food to the palate.

[Scarlett]

And I didn't suggest "MOM" jump up with alternatives. Having pb & j once in a while because you don't like something that you have tried is a reasonable alternative, even for those with little money. And now, back to cooking... .

 

Seriously, picky eaters are usually picky all the time. Either they stop being so darn picky or they get rewarded with getting a seperate menu.

 

If it is just once in a while it certainly won't hurt them to go without a meal.

[Element]

Seriously, picky eaters are usually picky all the time. Either they stop being so darn picky or they get rewarded with getting a seperate menu.

 

:iagree::iagree:

[QueenCat]

Seriously, picky eaters are usually picky all the time. Either they stop being so darn picky or they get rewarded with getting a seperate menu.

 

If it is just once in a while it certainly won't hurt them to go without a meal.

 

It's only a reward if parents make food a discipline issue. Now poor dh is finishing our meal since I can't get away from this. Sorry, but it is a very sore subject for me.

[Joker]

Seriously, picky eaters are usually picky all the time. Either they stop being so darn picky or they get rewarded with getting a seperate menu.

 

If it is just once in a while it certainly won't hurt them to go without a meal.

 

I don't think this is true. My dds had about 4 yrs (around 4-8 yrs old) where they were rather picky but now they will eat just about everything. They both have a few meals that they really don't like and they make themselves eggs or a sandwich instead.

 

(Also, I agree with your ds about the cooked onion thing - they are gross and 9 out of 10 times my tummy revolts after those meals :tongue_smilie:)

[LibraryLover]

Rudeness isn't good. A simple 'No thank you', or "I tried it and I still don't like it" is fine.

 

I think (most lol) kids who understand they can say no without drama are less likely to be dramatic, ime.

 

I also think some kids come to the table with low blood sugar and start off totally cranky and not thinking straight. I liked to offer a little appetizer while I was cooking. A little bite of cheese with carrots/crackers or the like, helped take the edge off if I was running late. Ime, a little food before dinner helps get the taste buds ready, and also keeps little people from melting into a tired, bratty puddle.

Edited December 11, 2011 by LibraryLover

[Pretty in Pink]

I did not suggest parents offer a smorgasbord of options. Cereal or a sandwich on occasion, for the detestable to the palate food is not unreasonable. And no one is "fear mongering", at least not me. If someone regularly sends their child to bed without food, it is an issue in our state. DCS is not out to steal children, only help those who need it. And sometimes that involves food. Often helping, at least in my state, with meal planning, parenting classes, finding resources, etc, to help families stay together.

 

Who does that? If someone habitually, 7 days a week, serves food that they know their child hates and then punishes them for not eating it well, yes, I guess that could be an issue, but I've never known a person to do that. Never. What I have seen many times over are children that demand peanut butter & jelly, chicken nuggets, macaroni and cheese, etc. and are catered to by their parents because, "...little Johnny simply won't eat anything else, I swear!" Whatever. Their kids, their choice, but I think that is absurd. Perhaps a few nights of going to bed hungry would do little Johnny some good.

 

I'm not talking about sensory issues, medical issues, etc. If little Johnny can eat a breaded chicken nugget then he can eat grilled chicken.

 

There is a huge difference between serving a "detestable" meal to a child and requiring him to eat it or go without, and serving a meal with several foods that he likes and him turning his nose up at them all and demanding something different. The first merits an alternative choice; the second does not.

[BigMamaBird]

If I'm trying something wacky and new that I KNOW the kids aren't going to like, then we will allow them to have a PBJ sandwich. Otherwise they either eat what they're given or go to bed hungry. This is the U.S., missing one meal isn't going to malnourish them.

[elfgivas]

maybe its because i cook with my kids from as soon as they can stand on a stool and stir, but i rarely if ever have an issue with food. there are things they don't like. they have grown up knowing they are expected to have three bites of anything they don't like, and then they may stop. they don't need to comment on it. i make sure there is at least one thing that everyone can eat happily.

 

they just wouldnt' ask for a specific thing after dinner was started....

i do ask them several times a week if they would like a or b, and then i make it, so they do have input. now, sometimes, they ask me if they can make a or b, and that is a beautiful thing.

 

i think if i did have issues, i would have them sit quietly at the table while we ate and talked, and then after the dishes were cleared, they could wait an hour and make something for themselves.

 

i do tell them the story of how my parents made us sit at the table until we were done, or until they gave up and put it in the fridge. then, we got it for the next meal. this was not a highly successful strategy, and many, many meals were all about power and not about food or family at all. the occasional time someone loses their mind and complains about food, i muse about whether it is time to try grandma's dinner rules, and that is the end of that....

 

fwiw,

ann

[QueenCat]

Who does that? If someone habitually, 7 days a week, serves food that they know their child hates and then punishes them for not eating it well, yes, I guess that could be an issue, but I've never known a person to do that. Never. What I have seen many times over are children that demand peanut butter & jelly, chicken nuggets, macaroni and cheese, etc. and are catered to by their parents because, "...little Johnny simply won't eat anything else, I swear!" Whatever. Their kids, their choice, but I think that is absurd. Perhaps a few nights of going to bed hungry would do little Johnny some good.

 

I'm not talking about sensory issues, medical issues, etc. If little Johnny can eat a breaded chicken nugget then he can eat grilled chicken.

 

There is a huge difference between serving a "detestable" meal to a child and requiring him to eat it or go without, and serving a meal with several foods that he likes and him turning his nose up at them all and demanding something different. The first merits an alternative choice; the second does not.

 

Honestly, I've only personally known one. Friends in the social work field have told me it can be a problem with certain discipline styles but it is not a rampant issue. My responses are getting emotionally charged so I'm sure I'm not articulating myself very well. I think I probably just need to give it a rest, and resist the urge to check the thread when I come home later. Now that we've eaten, we're heading out. Not going to think about this one while I'm gone.

[Scarlett]

Honestly, I've only personally known one. Friends in the social work field have told me it can be a problem with certain discipline styles but it is not a rampant issue. My responses are getting emotionally charged so I'm sure I'm not articulating myself very well. I think I probably just need to give it a rest, and resist the urge to check the thread when I come home later. Now that we've eaten, we're heading out. Not going to think about this one while I'm gone.

 

I have the same response. Very emotional issue for me. I just can't tolerate picky eaters.

 

I certainly don't consider it a 'discipline style'. I am at the moment making spaghetti. It isn't my favorite meal. However, if I'm hungry I eat it, if I am not I nibble...I can do without a meal for sure. But as for kids....it is meat, sauce and pasta. How gross can it really be? Served with homemade bread and steamed veggies...I figure any kid/any person can do ok with this meal.

[kewb]

If the kids don't want what I prepared-after a legitimate trying of the food-then they are free to go get themselves a yogurt or a bowl of cereal. I am not a short order cook.

[Daisy]

I wonder if part of this isthat age-old nature vs nurture thing?

 

My husband and I eat anything.

 

Our children eat anything.

 

Nature or nurture? I don't know.

 

But basically if our children decide they want to be picky, they can skip the meal.

 

Whatever.

 

Not a big deal.

 

If I had habitually picky eaters, I might tackle it differently. God, in his mercy, probably knew I couldn't deal with it and gave me easy-going eat-anything kind of kids.

 

I'm in the middle of making homemade cream of broccoli soup. My son will turn his nose up to it because he isn't a big fan of cream of...soups. I'll ignore him, and he'll eat it.

Edited December 11, 2011 by Daisy

[Tarreymere]

I did not suggest parents offer a smorgasbord of options. Cereal or a sandwich on occasion, for the detestable to the palate food is not unreasonable. And no one is "fear mongering", at least not me. If someone regularly sends their child to bed without food, it is an issue in our state. DCS is not out to steal children, only help those who need it. And sometimes that involves food. Often helping, at least in my state, with meal planning, parenting classes, finding resources, etc, to help families stay together.

 

 

DH, the CPS supervisor with over twenty years of experience, informs me that in his experience sending a child to bed regularly without food is NOT AT ALL related to the issue of a normal child refusing to eat normal food with the family on occasion (which you may recall that this discussion is actually about). In those rare instances of a child 'regularly' going to bed without food it is always about abuse or neglect and about no food being offered in the first place. THAT is a completely different issue than the one being discussed, which let me remind you again involves caring concerned parents offering healthy normal meals to normal kids who sometimes refuse to eat what is prepared for them and the disagreement in this thread is over whether those kids should be offered alternative food. CPS and threats of child removal have NO PLACE in that disagreement.

 

First of all, in your post you did not state your response was about sending a child 'regularly to bed without food' , which is one hell of a big difference from your implication that normal parents who refuse to cater to a normal child turning up his or her nose at a normal family meal on occasion are at risk of losing their children to the state per your 'circle' of social worker buddies. YOU clearly stated that your 'circle' considered not offering alternative meals to all children was certainly punishable by having the children removed. That IS fear-mongering.

 

As for food being 'detestable to the palate', let me fill you in on the fact that a normal family meal served to a truly hungry person is not going to be refused, no matter how much the person dislikes that food. In North America the children are FAR more likely to have issues with being obese and overfed, probably because of this kind of catering mentality.

 

And YES, you were certainly fear-mongering by bringing CPS into this. CPS does not interfer with normal families, even if they have a policy of not jumping up to make alternative meals for spoiled over-fed normal children. CPS and the threat of child-removal has no place in this discussion.

[LibraryLover]

You sound super-angry. Nobody is that invested. Really, it's not worth it to get so upset. I can see that it would be a feat to cook for 10 kids. You've paid your dues.

 

 

DH, the CPS supervisor with over twenty years of experience, informs me that in his experience sending a child to bed regularly without food is NOT AT ALL related to the issue of a normal child refusing to eat normal food with the family on occasion (which you may recall that this discussion is actually about). In those rare instances of a child 'regularly' going to bed without food it is always about abuse or neglect and about no food being offered in the first place. THAT is a completely different issue than the one being discussed, which let me remind you again involves caring concerned parents offering healthy normal meals to normal kids who sometimes refuse to eat what is prepared for them and the disagreement in this thread is over whether those kids should be offered alternative food. CPS and threats of child removal have NO PLACE in that disagreement.

 

First of all, in your post you did not state your response was about sending a child 'regularly to bed without food' , which is one hell of a big difference from your implication that normal parents who refuse to cater to a normal child turning up his or her nose at a normal family meal on occasion are at risk of losing their children to the state per your 'circle' of social worker buddies. YOU clearly stated that your 'circle' considered not offering alternative meals to all children was certainly punishable by having the children removed. That IS fear-mongering.

 

As for food being 'detestable to the palate', let me fill you in on the fact that a normal family meal served to a truly hungry person is not going to be refused, no matter how much the person dislikes that food. In North America the children are FAR more likely to have issues with being obese and overfed, probably because of this kind of catering mentality.

 

And YES, you were certainly fear-mongering by bringing CPS into this. CPS does not interfer with normal families, even if they have a policy of not jumping up to make alternative meals for spoiled over-fed normal children. CPS and the threat of child-removal has no place in this discussion.

Edited December 11, 2011 by LibraryLover

[Tarreymere]

You sound super-angry and I can't figure out why and I've read the dang thread. :001_smile: I see you have ten 10 kids. I wouldn't have much patience with minor individual food needs if I had 10 kids, so i am going to cut you some slack. Chill. Nobody here is really that invested. I mean that in all honesty, and I myself am chilling over your unchill-ness.

 

I'm more angry over the CPS threat thing. DH is a CPS supervisor and I am really sick and tired of hearing about how CPS is going to come and take kids away for whatever the person making the threat disagrees with, which is usually a very minor, nonharmful thing. For example, there was one poster on this forum who said her MIL reported her to CPS because she had a pile of laundry in her living room that she was folding! In my experience I've had to listen to DH complaining very frequently about people who call to report on families for the most ridiculous reasons and the threat of reporting a mom for not making a sandwich for her kid if her kid refused the family meal now and then certainly falls into that category.

 

There are a lot of families who could really benefit from some help from CPS (especially when it comes to assistance with locating resources) but there is so much fear out there that it is difficult to even communicate with some families once CPS gets involved because they are so frightened of losing their kids. Dragging CPS into disagreements about parenting styles really pisses me off, all it does is frighten people.

[Amy in NH]

It's not a "punishment" at my house. I will remind the child "this is your last chance to eat until tomorrow's breakfast. You might get hungry. But if you're sure you don't want any more, you may go wash your hands."

 

Hunger is just a logical consequence of choosing not to eat.

 

:iagree:

 

We all eat dinner together every night. We make a well balanced meal. We all eat it. If someone doesn't like something, they still have to eat 3 bites. If they don't want to eat the rest of their food, they don't have to. The natural consequence would be hunger until breakfast, but I don't think that's ever happened. :)

[LibraryLover]

In all fairness, I reframed my comments. You're all riled up and really, it's not worth it. I wouldn't send my kids to bed hungry. We could always figure something out here, foodwise. It's so not a big deal at all.

 

Nobody is going to change their mind, and many people with large families have to be much tougher. They have to spread themselves much thinner. Doing for 10 is a huge deal. My 4 were/are really a piece of cake. We never had such issues.

 

I think sending kids to bed hungry isn't nice, and if I saw it happen often, i would think there was a much, much bigger problem in the family. I might not call CPS, but as a rule, it would concern me. You see so many abuse issues wrt food, not feeding kids etc. It's not the same an undone laundry. Food is a giant, emotional hot button for many people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm more angry over the CPS threat thing. DH is a CPS supervisor and I am really sick and tired of hearing about how CPS is going to come and take kids away for whatever the person making the threat disagrees with, which is usually a very minor, nonharmful thing. For example, there was one poster on this forum who said her MIL reported her to CPS because she had a pile of laundry in her living room that she was folding! In my experience I've had to listen to DH complaining very frequently about people who call to report on families for the most ridiculous reasons and the threat of reporting a mom for not making a sandwich for her kid if her kid refused the family meal now and then certainly falls into that category.

 

There are a lot of families who could really benefit from some help from CPS (especially when it comes to assistance with locating resources) but there is so much fear out there that it is difficult to even communicate with some families once CPS gets involved because they are so frightened of losing their kids. Dragging CPS into disagreements about parenting styles really pisses me off, all it does is frighten people.

Edited December 11, 2011 by LibraryLover

[QueenCat]

DH, the CPS supervisor with over twenty years of experience, informs me that in his experience sending a child to bed regularly without food is NOT AT ALL related to the issue of a normal child refusing to eat normal food with the family on occasion (which you may recall that this discussion is actually about). In those rare instances of a child 'regularly' going to bed without food it is always about abuse or neglect and about no food being offered in the first place. THAT is a completely different issue than the one being discussed, which let me remind you again involves caring concerned parents offering healthy normal meals to normal kids who sometimes refuse to eat what is prepared for them and the disagreement in this thread is over whether those kids should be offered alternative food. CPS and threats of child removal have NO PLACE in that disagreement.

 

First of all, in your post you did not state your response was about sending a child 'regularly to bed without food' , which is one hell of a big difference from your implication that normal parents who refuse to cater to a normal child turning up his or her nose at a normal family meal on occasion are at risk of losing their children to the state per your 'circle' of social worker buddies. YOU clearly stated that your 'circle' considered not offering alternative meals to all children was certainly punishable by having the children removed. That IS fear-mongering.

 

As for food being 'detestable to the palate', let me fill you in on the fact that a normal family meal served to a truly hungry person is not going to be refused, no matter how much the person dislikes that food. In North America the children are FAR more likely to have issues with being obese and overfed, probably because of this kind of catering mentality.

 

And YES, you were certainly fear-mongering by bringing CPS into this. CPS does not interfer with normal families, even if they have a policy of not jumping up to make alternative meals for spoiled over-fed normal children. CPS and the threat of child-removal has no place in this discussion.

 

Honestly, after some time to think about this, it is impossible for you to know what I think, or vice versa, without reading all of the posts we've written on the subject, or knowing more than we could possibly write. Over time on this board, I know that I respect your opinion. I really do not wish anyone to "fear" DCS. It is not as simplistic as can be presented here, at least by me. I have never said that a child missing an occasional meal is being abused. DCS, here, does get involved if it is reported, and is happening on a regular basis. Not fear-mongering, to me.

[SKL]

You see so many abuse issues wrt food, not feeding kids etc. ... Food is a giant, emotional hot button for many people.

 

Apparently. However, don't assume that because it is an emotional issue for one person, that automatically means that every kid who experiences food-related consequences or hardships is going to develop an eating disorder. That's called projection.

 

Seems most of us here believe that eating issues are going to be created by one of two things:

 

1) Letting a child choose "whether" to eat [what is offered] and deal with the consequences (satisfaction or hunger) that result.

 

2) Letting a child choose "what" to eat on a daily basis, regardless of what the parents think he ought to eat.

 

I think we can agree to disagree on which of these we worry about most. The OP has been doing (2) and wanted to know if people do (1). I think we've answered the question. Lots of us do (1) and have no regrets.

[Joker]

Apparently. However, don't assume that because it is an emotional issue for one person, that automatically means that every kid who experiences food-related consequences or hardships is going to develop an eating disorder. That's called projection.

 

Seems most of us here believe that eating issues are going to be created by one of two things:

 

1) Letting a child choose "whether" to eat [what is offered] and deal with the consequences (satisfaction or hunger) that result.

 

2) Letting a child choose "what" to eat on a daily basis, regardless of what the parents think he ought to eat.

 

I think we can agree to disagree on which of these we worry about most. The OP has been doing (2) and wanted to know if people do (1). I think we've answered the question. Lots of us do (1) and have no regrets.

 

This is really where I'm having a disconnect to this entire thread. The way you phrased (2) seems odd. I don't make beans and rice because I think we all need to eat it. I make it because 3 of the 4 of us really like it. My younger dd hates it and usually chooses to make herself scrambled eggs and eat them with the veggies I have served. She can cook the eggs and clean up after herself and she's eating something healthy. Her choosing not to eat what I've made isn't hurting her at all. So, why is it a big deal that some of us choose not to make food a battle?

[silliness7]

Do you send your children to bed without any supper if they won't eat what you serve? Do you try to always offer a side dish that is kid-approved? Do you make a picky eater their own, separate meal? My dh is tired of me fixing a separate meal for our 8 yr. old. For the past two nights our son has taken one look at our meal and refused to eat. He had crackers (and nothing else) both nights. He wouldn't even try the yummy apple crumble I made b/c it looked weird to him. Is there a way to make all foods look like a chicken nugget?:glare:

 

I used to. I don't anymore because it didn't produce children who would learn to eat whatever I fixed. It only produced drama and I am very tired of drama. I don't fix separate meals though, either. The picky eater will generally make a peanut butter sandwich or some other something that almost always involves peanut butter.

[myfunnybunch]

Haven't read the other responses. I can't send my picky eater, my youngest, to bed without food because he's hypoglycemic. He's got a mild form, and it really just means that he cannot go to bed without the evening meal or he will vomit all morning the next day. It's easier for me just to let him make a sandwich than it is to clean up barf and try to get a vomiting kid's blood sugar back up.

 

How we deal with meals:

 

I do not fix a separate meal.

 

I try to make sure there will be at least one food on the table that he can eat, tolerate at least even if he doesn't really love it.

 

He must taste everything on the table.

 

He must eat a reasonable portion of whatever foods he can tolerate. (If there are enough tolerable foods to make a reasonable meal for him, that is his meal and he can help himself to more of those things if he's still hungry. No sandwich.)

 

Then if he still needs to eat more, he can make a sandwich.

 

We dealt with his brother (8 y.o.) the same way. He had the same condition only even milder, though he's mostly grown out of it. Now the 8 y.o. has added a wider variety of foods to his diet. He downed tonkatsu (Japanese pork cutlets) tonight for dinner and ate a little salad, which completely shocked me, lol. He rarely makes a sandwich at dinner time these days. I think we found a nice balance, for us, between bed without supper and catering to picky eaters.

 

Cat

[SKL]

This is really where I'm having a disconnect to this entire thread. The way you phrased (2) seems odd. I don't make beans and rice because I think we all need to eat it. I make it because 3 of the 4 of us really like it. My younger dd hates it and usually chooses to make herself scrambled eggs and eat them with the veggies I have served. She can cook the eggs and clean up after herself and she's eating something healthy. Her choosing not to eat what I've made isn't hurting her at all. So, why is it a big deal that some of us choose not to make food a battle?

 

See, I don't agree that anyone here wants to make food a battle. If my kid is not interested in eating what is served, she may be excused until the next meal. She does not have the idea that she can demand something else. She understands that her hunger is to be satisfied by eating what is offered (which always includes items that she can tolerate). There is no battle involved.

 

Now if I train my kids to believe they have the right to an individual menu, and then we get into arguments about what that individual menu should be, I could see that being a battle. But that's not what goes on at my house.

 

And I don't understand what you mean when you say "why is it a big deal if . . . (the bolded above). I never said it was a "big deal" if you choose to do (2). The OP's husband was dissatisfied with her doing (2), but I didn't bring that up. I was talking about what I do.

 

Perhaps you want me to explain how I think (2) could be seen as potentially creating eating issues. OK. (a) it encourages a picky eater to refuse to expand his palate. (b) it could lead to difficult situations when you eat someplace where asking for pbj would be a poor or nonexistent choice (I can think of several variations of this, e.g., (i) Mom had 2 minutes to pack a picnic to eat in the car on the way to the after-school activity; (ii) Aunt Gourmet cooked her signature meal; (iii) pbj isn't on the menu at the Thai restaurant.) Now, if your particular kids are good eaters and the pbj solution is only resorted to occasionally, maybe it's not an issue. But the OP has an issue with it, and so do many other families. I know I would if I allowed it. So I don't.

[Joker]

Perhaps you want me to explain how I think (2) could be seen as potentially creating eating issues. OK. (a) it encourages a picky eater to refuse to expand his palate. (b) it could lead to difficult situations when you eat someplace where asking for pbj would be a poor or nonexistent choice (I can think of several variations of this, e.g., (i) Mom had 2 minutes to pack a picnic to eat in the car on the way to the after-school activity; (ii) Aunt Gourmet cooked her signature meal; (iii) pbj isn't on the menu at the Thai restaurant.) Now, if your particular kids are good eaters and the pbj solution is only resorted to occasionally, maybe it's not an issue. But the OP has an issue with it, and so do many other families. I know I would if I allowed it. So I don't.

 

See, I realize that making a kid eat what your serve or go to bed can lead to eating issues as it did with my dh. He's skinny and has a hard time knowing when he is hungry or full because he got used to just not eating when he was young. He used to sneak spoonfulls of sugar at night because he was hungry and that's all he had access to. It's weird and frustrating.

 

I've had two picky eaters and they have expanded their palate as they've grown so it hasn't harmed them at all to be allowed to make something else at dinnertime.

 

I know many threw out the option of pbj but I don't think we meant that's all they eat but that it was an easy alternative.

 

As far as eating what others serve you...I don't eat something I know I don't like. A few weeks ago some friends of ours served quail and I can't even stand the smell. Dh moved mine onto his plate and ate both portions. I'm sure someone noticed but it was actually the most polite thing to do because if I had tried to eat it I would have been sick.:tongue_smilie:

[Mrs Mungo]

Apparently. However, don't assume that because it is an emotional issue for one person, that automatically means that every kid who experiences food-related consequences or hardships is going to develop an eating disorder. That's called projection.

 

Seems most of us here believe that eating issues are going to be created by one of two things:

 

1) Letting a child choose "whether" to eat [what is offered] and deal with the consequences (satisfaction or hunger) that result.

 

2) Letting a child choose "what" to eat on a daily basis, regardless of what the parents think he ought to eat.

 

I think we can agree to disagree on which of these we worry about most. The OP has been doing (2) and wanted to know if people do (1). I think we've answered the question. Lots of us do (1) and have no regrets.

 

False dichotomy. I don't force my kids to eat something they really don't want or like. But, that does not mean they choose whatever they want to eat without regard to what I think. For example, my son doesn't like fish-not clam chowder, not salmon, he will barely eat a tuna sandwich. He eats every other type of meat he has tried. He eats veggies from asparagus to zucchini. He eats things many adults don't eat. So, big deal if there are a handful of things that he does not like.

 

It just doesn't matter in the long run because the foods he won't eat are so few. He will probably come around eventually. In the meantime, he can have leftovers or a sandwich for dinner without it making him a pampered brat who will turn up his nose at anything.

 

I think forcing the issue would cause more problems than it would ever solve.

[1GirlTwinBoys]

At that age, they would go to bed hungry. My kid's will eat what I fix, or they won't eat at all. They're not even allowed to refuse my food. We sit down together as a family every night and eat what I make. Negative comments are not allowed. I think that's rude and disrespectful.

 

When they were toddlers, I would let them eat later, but it had to be something healthy. They were too young to understand, and I didn't want them going to bed hungry.:)

[SKL]

False dichotomy. I don't force my kids to eat something they really don't want or like. But, that does not mean they choose whatever they want to eat without regard to what I think. For example, my son doesn't like fish-not clam chowder, not salmon, he will barely eat a tuna sandwich. He eats every other type of meat he has tried. He eats veggies from asparagus to zucchini. He eats things many adults don't eat. So, big deal if there are a handful of things that he does not like.

 

It just doesn't matter in the long run because the foods he won't eat are so few. He will probably come around eventually. In the meantime, he can have leftovers or a sandwich for dinner without it making him a pampered brat who will turn up his nose at anything.

 

I think forcing the issue would cause more problems than it would ever solve.

 

Like I said, we can agree to disagree.

 

I was not saying that my (1) and (2) are the only two choices out there. I said that most here seem to believe that either (1) or (2) will cause food issues.

 

The fact that your kids are apparently not picky eaters in the first place makes your situation different from those of us whose kids would reject the family meal most days if allowed a kid-preferred alternative.

 

I don't like the idea of my kids eating sandwiches or cereal for dinner every day. If I thought that was a great alternative, that's what I would serve in the first place.

 

Not sure where anyone mentioned "forcing." I really think people are mixing in unrelated experiences that we're not talking about here. Forcing is a whole different discussion.