To be irritated with parents forcing children to sit and eat at soft play

[SrAssumpta]

I spent the morning in a play centre with a few other mums and our 3-4 year olds, met at half 9 and stayed about two hours.
The children weren't even playing five minutes when the other parents were calling them back over "Simon, would you like a yogurt? Come down and have some grapes", "Lucy have some crisps", "Oh darling I've gotten you a slush puppy come down and have it before it melts"
I just don't get it? We met up to let them play, why couldn't they eat at home, it's an expensive play centre why can't they make the most of it? Then a huge platter of nuggets and chips was ordered and they were made sit and eat all the greasy food on their plate and coaxed with "Go on just two more nuggets then you can go back and play"

I find it so irritating, we could have just met up for breakfast or lunch but why take children somewhere they're supposed to have fun and force them to sit down and eat?

I think it's universally accepted in this country that passing the time with food eg in the buggy is acceptable as long as the food is seen as healthy, but empty stomachs aren't the only thing dc grow less able to cope with, the empty bits of time in the car or queuing up for things are not experienced without the crutch of something edible.
Boredom strikes, food alleviates boredom, parent satisfied that toddler must have been hungry because food cured it. I have a friend who's dc "always gets so hungry in the buggy"

Wideopen can your's read yet? I point to signs on the wall and say to dc "it says I'm not allowed, children only"

captain I cant believe that randomer at the bus stop, its like an outpouring of sympathy for the poor kids who's mums say no.

Ooooh.... rabbit I like it....

I spend my whole time at soft play telling my dd to 'GO AND PLAY'. She is desparate to get there to play with her friends, but as soon as we arrive she is sitting next to me begging for snacks and drinks. We usually do eat a meal there, (lovely food, reasonably priced), but I spend about an hour before that constantly telling her to play.

I often give in and bring/buy a little snack, once she's had that she's more likely to go off and enjoy herself and let me have some peace.

For 9.30 trips: Unlike me she is not a breakfast eater, so although i make sure she has something, it's not really usually enough. By the the time we have got everyone dressed and delivered to school and nipped to tesco, cos soft play opens 3/4 of an hour after school drop off she is usually ready for breakfast.

It's extremes as usual - the situation described in the OP is ridiculous for a 2 hour play session and inappropriate, but it doesn't then follow to the other extreme that no children require snacks and that those that do are trained into wanting them.

All children are different, as are adults. It's great if you can manage feeling hungry, but I can't. I never snacked as a child, used to have to wait hours between meals, used to have a lot of tearful meltdowns where I just couldn't cope. It got worse during adolescence. If I go too long without food I get dizzy, clumsy, get the beginnings of a migraine and feel nauseous. I'm not diabetic, neither am I overweight, but I am extremely affected by blood sugar dips, especially when hormonal. It is different than just feeling hungry, sometimes I don't even notice that's what it is and it takes my dh noticing that I am irritable and bringing cheese and crackers.

So I can imagine it might be the same for some small children. Not all, but some. My niece for example would go a whole day without bothering to ask for food, and can eat whenever, my dcs both need three meals at regular times with a little something at the mid way point or they would be distressed. Not whiny, not cross, not demanding. But upset and uncomfortable.

In that soft play situation, my dcs would manage for the 2 hours without a food break, but would have something before going home, with dinner another 11/2 to 2 hours away. It won't make them obese gluttons! Yes, you don't force food when they're not hungry, but on the flip side you shouldn't withhold it unnecessarily when they are.

As long as lots of exercise is going on, and the snacks are of a reasonably healthy nature, it's really fine.

YANBU OP.

The worst I saw was during baby / toddler rhymetime at the library. It was only 30minutes long. By the time the second song started, at least two children would be beckoned back from happy dancing to have a rice cake, or box of raisins, or a banana, which would then mean most children would follow them or return to their adult, hoping for some too.

30 freaking minutes total of rhymetime. I found it rather rude and inconsiderate.

Yes rabbit and along with eat because you are bored, eat because you should find it fun, eat to prevent hunger later some people also spend inordinate amounts of time discussing what to eat next. Not in a looking forwards to a treat way or I'm starving hungry way, but as though it's the most important thing on their mind. Yes I ask what my dd ate for lunch, but not in great detail as soon as I see her as a prelude to discussing what after school snack she can eat and what we should eat for dinner.
Feed your toddlers constant snacks, entertain your kids with crisps, ply your teens with pizza and then when they're adults tell them all the pseudo science crap about all carbs being bad. Too much of a culture of live to eat, instead of eat to live

All kids are different - some mornings 10.30 is 5 hours after wake up... most people will want something to eat 5 hours after breakfast.

YABU just by going to softplay. Those places are bacteria-filled shitholes.

I still remember the HV asking me what snacks I have my small DC and me having a panic because I didn't!. I'd be feeding them all day!

DS gets a drink at soft play and if we are there at lunchtime we have lunch as the food is good and cheap. Now he's bigger I always go out with some fruit (he loves it, I have to hide it at home) as he gets very grumpy when hungry but I would never drag him away from playing to eat.

Soot- I agree. I feel sick and eventually faint if I am without food too long. DS has healthy snacks when he asks for them, and a unhealthier "treat" one too, on most days (as we don't do puddings, have no weight issues and are trying to foster a "everything in moderation", "no food is bad/forbidden" approach) . TBH, I am not that bothered whether he has 5 small healthy meals or 3 bigger ones. Why would I be?

I've never got in to the habit of giving snacks mid-morning and the DC don't seem to need them. They always get given snacks at school/nursery though!

I know someone like this. Every time you look in her direction she's asking her nearly 2 year old if he wants food- it's constant. At first we used to laugh about it- now I'm worried that because he's part of a family of fatties he's doomed to a lifetime of obesity- seriously it's continual - he's never allowed to understand hunger. She parents according to the NCT style of parenting

I sit down for a coffee (and sly biccy/cake) they smell it like sharks and bloomin start circling me. So they get a quick and very small biscuit and told in the nicest way to go play. Though did give up soft play for a year as Ds2 and ds3 just wanted to sit at table with me

Because on MN it's quite common to read people saying, "I'm overweight because I was made to clear my plate as a child."

I wonder if the future generation of MNetters will be saying, "I'm overweight because I was taught to snack/constantly eat as a child"?

It's quite possible I think.

I would not say 3 meals and two snacks cause obesity. It's what and how much. You can eat twice a day and still become obese, surely. Everyone is different.

Bollocks teatowel. My sister regularly used to have a meltdown if her blood sugar was low between meals when we were kids in the 80s. A snack fixed it, and was sometimes pre-emptively administered. She has a faster metabolism than average I suppose, but no medical issues, just prefers to eat little and often. Something which is perfectly normal in humans.

I can see your point but I do think it's down to the individual child's parent as they have a complete perspective on their child and what works for them. I have a 4 year old preschooler and an 8 year old boy who I do provide snacks after school for but they do have to walk almost 2 miles, when the 4 year old is not in nursery, she will walk up to 4 miles to collect my son with me. Equally, she is a very animated 4 year old so is constantly moving and playing inside - hurling herself around, doing forward rolls, climbing in boxes etc. she is not sedentary in the least so probably works up a hunger quicker than a child who sits still a lot.

I don't think nursery helps though as she expects a lot more snacks than she used to as they sometimes have sandwiches, a biscuit and fruit at 10.30 am and have their packed lunches at 12. The teachers tell me that she's hungry by home time as she hasn't liked her packed lunch and eaten one piece of cheese- funny that? I think it's ultimately down to the 'snacking'. All the same lunches she would eat at home but won't touch at nursery due to snacking. Last week, I was told that she didn't like the chicken sandwich I provided so they made her a jam one? She always likes chicken at home so the snacking had definitely had an impact. Equally, although they are
fun, they regularly have a pretend party, e.g teddy bear's picnic and this involves lots of sugary snacks which again are far more appealing than my sandwiches or wraps!

That's true Toys but as you can see from this thread and many others, it's not always 2 snacks.

I meant more the idea of giving your kids snacks to tide them over when bored/upset/in the buggy/to keep them quiet etc.

And parents making sure they have a snack at all times in their bags 'just in case'.

Something like 1 in 5 kids start primary school overweight/obese now and the figure rises when they're leaving - aged 11.

I know there are many reasons for this, but I genuinely don't think this constant snacking thing is helping.

I used to think the low blood sugar thing was a myth. Then I had ds2. At preschool age he had breakfast at 7am. If he didn't eat again by 10.30 (and I mean a hearty snack, not a biscuit) he would have the most godawful meltdown by 11am. Soft play was the worst, cause he was more than usually active and didn't want to stop and eat. I soon learnt to make him.

This year (age 7) is the first year he's been able to get from breakfast (huge bowl of porridge) to lunch with just a piece of fruit in between. He's never been anywhere near overweight.

I'm sure many (if not most) people who offer snacks or "push" them on toddlers and young children have a good reason to do so. They might not. They might think you do something else that is bad. Or maybe they aren't so judgy. However, IMO it is a bit OTT to get angry about a few crisps or half a kitkat being offered to children by their friends (or even the odd stranger!) in between meals on occasion. If they don't eat a meal after that, they must not have been that hungry in the first place.. Some people take this "absolutely no snacking" thing far far too seriously.

I do see what you're saying about 'not being hungry in the first place' but if my DD doesn't eat the packed lunch I've provided which is 'balanced', the snack 'is' lunch, so biscuits, more often than not cake the manager has made or someone has brought in for their birthday. Seen as she is there for lunch three times a week does it matter - I'm not really sure. She's small so its not a weight thing, it's a 'I'm not sure about this?' thing.

I think the catch 22 thing is correct. DH and I eat low carb, have done for years. The kids eat almost no refined sugars. With exceptions for parties/treats here and there.

They eat 3 times a day. All meals have lots of fat and protein in them.

They don't snack, they don't crash because there is nothing to crash from.

If they do have sweet treats nothing much happens and we don't labour the point. But it does constantly amaze me how often people are eating/feeding their kids.

DS1 plays soccer after school. He eats a big lunch, goes to soccer training with his water bottle and by the time he gets home around 6ish he is ravenous. So he eats a solid dinner.

The times I have been to training with him most of the kids are just being fed a constant supple of sugar to 'give them energy' cereal bars and sports drinks. I just don't get it.

If blood sugar doesn't go up, it doesn't crash down.

In that kind of regular, or daily, situation it's a bit different, I guess. Cake for snack every day is a bit needless and boring IMO. I could, and do, give DS a bit of something nice like a cake, ice cream, chocolate etc. every day, but would not like nursery to do that routinely when they could offer veg, fruit, cheese cubes or plain toast. Also wouldn't like them making a jam sadwich as an alternative lunch. Maybe say that you would like for them to refrain from doing so in the future, as you provide a lunch that DD likes and eats at home. So, then, if she does not eat much of her lunch at nursery, she can just have a bigger dinner at home. DS eats very little at school (sometimes nothing at all-he has anxiety issues, asc/asperger traits), so has a late lunch/early dinner at home instead. I don't sweat it.

There's nothing wrong with eating 40 snacks a day if you are that hungry and you are slim and healthy. What is wrong is learning to eat when you aren't hungry.
Dd and I both eat loads quantity wise, with no thought as to calories, fat or carbs, we eat because we need to, and because that's why make the correct choice about what food type we do need, whether it's glucose or carbs or protein or something fatty. And since puberty I've quite often used the feeling faint as a reminder I am hungry. What we don't do is eat because its a pastime or because habit tells us we are hungry. My plaster cast, as well as being responsible for my sudden desire to share my opinion on a range of subjects all over the shop, has massively curbed my activity and as a result I'm not only eating less in quantity but less carbs, but not through any conscious decision, just through eating for the right reasons