Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think your child doesn't need a snack in a 30-minute toddler class?

413 replies

Mummyreindeerlegz · 12/01/2017 12:10

Sorry for the long title.

Why is it some parents give their one year old snacks during really short classes (or at all during classes!)? A one year old wandering around with a soggy rice cake, dropping bits is grim. Wait half an hour or give them a snack before you come.

Please tell me why people think this is ok? Fully prepared to be told I am being unreasonable.

OP posts:
DoctorDonnaNoble · 15/01/2017 09:48

Yup. That was actually the first thing that jumped out at me.
I'm not sure what type of mistake it is to be honest. Regardless, I want to get my red pen out.

WellErrr · 15/01/2017 09:55

The word they wanted was 'refrain.'

MerchantofVenice · 15/01/2017 09:56

It's not unreasonable to be annoyed about something that genuinely affects you, such as kids leaving a revolting mess everywhere. That's just rudeness on their parents' part.

Similarly, if your child is in danger from bits of snacks left lying about - it's not unreasonable to be annoyed.

I'd say it's also perfectly reasonable to have an opinion on modern snacking culture and attitudes.

What I do find unreasonable and really unpleasant are the forthright opinions and judgements barked out by certain posters about how wrong specfic parenting choices are, and how some parents are practising 'lazy parenting' because they make a different choice.

There are some real know-alls on here - all those people who, apparently, sit open-mouthed while EVERY other parent at their group brings out an enormous hamper of treats. Really?? And those who quietly suspect that their friend's child doesn't eat a big lunch BECAUSE they have small snacks in between, but watch silently as their (presumably very thick?) friend scratches her head at the child's inexplicable reluctance to eat lunch. Again, really? ? My first question to these people might be why they, the obvious geniuses of parenting, are surrounding themselves with such fools?

DoctorDonnaNoble · 15/01/2017 09:58

Wellerr- I know they meant refrain. I just wondered if it was a typo, spelling mistake or if she didn't know the right word?

T1mum3 · 15/01/2017 10:15

"Toddler eats rice cake"
FFS no wonder some people think women are snippy and interfering.
A whole thread about someone else's child being subjected to a snack.

This.

OP if you are concerned about the effect of this toddler snacking on your DC's allergies, you need to raise it with the class leader. They will presumably know whether the other child may have a medical issue which necessitates them snacking. If it's more about the snacking being uncouth, then that's not your business.

Personally, when my kids were little, I wouldn't have wasted music class time on snacking unless I had to (e.g. if they hadn't managed breakfast for some reason), but a bag of rice cakes was definitely part of my bag of tricks (also including books, toys, singing, bubbles, pointing out colours, etc) that I used to keep my toddler twins entertained during long train or buggy journey. I think the world at large was probably grateful to me.

My son now has a medical condition which means, gasp, that he may need to snack, eat sweets, drink sugar sweetened drinks etc at inopportune times. I'm quite aware of the judgey looks if I'm shoving harribo in his mouth at a rate of knots or getting him to chug down lucozade. Fortunately, 10 years into parenting I've got quite a thick skin for this sort of stuff.

Bettersleepoutdoors · 15/01/2017 14:24

I disagree that my remark was misogynistic.
I dislike the stereotypes of women being gossipy and judgemental about other people's differences and I'm not keen on people propping them up tbh.
If you are a man or a woman and behaving in this way then I have no problem calling out the behaviour. It is what it is.

redrighthand · 15/01/2017 15:54

Does everyone have a medical condition these days? Or a hidden disability?

Rixera · 15/01/2017 16:35

Tbh maybe as many people do now as always did but we're better at detecting it...

CantReach · 15/01/2017 17:38

Probably more people do now, because there's more ways to treat things that may have killed us before.

T1mum3 · 15/01/2017 19:42

Well, as CantRead says, 100 years ago my son would have died from his.

I think it's more that they let them go to places that "normal" people go.

Our as we like to think about it, they've closed down Hogwarts so we need to make our way in the muggle world. FFS.

CantReach · 16/01/2017 22:31

I hope I didn't sound flippant, T1. I just find there is a bit of a 'we didn't have this in my day' about disability and often that's because we've come a long way.

T1mum3 · 17/01/2017 08:33

Can'treach - no, you didn't sound flippant at all. My comment was more at redrighthand.

KarenMFLP · 17/01/2017 17:29

I run Music for Little People Classes for toddlers and ask that parents don't feed their children during class. I have about £400 worth of instruments that are used during the class and introduced this rule after one particularly drooly child got Farley's rusk on absolutely everything - the mess was appalling and very hard to clean. Drinks and breastfeeding are obviously more than welcome.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page