To have a 'cut-off' for breakfast

[DominiqueBernard]

Last night, the DC (12 and 11) went to bed at 9pm to read then lights out at 9.30pm as usual at weekends. We had said we would go to Mass this morning at 9.30am.

At 9am DS11, DH and I were all awake and had eaten breakfast and got dressed. DD12 was still asleep so we decided not to wake her and we went to Mass at 9.20am, leaving her a note. We got back at about 10.45am and she was still asleep. She woke up at 11.45am. She came into the kitchen where DH, DS and I were preparing lunch. We had cleared away her breakfast place to make room (our kitchen diner is small). She helped herself to a glass of juice and then DH said, lunch is at 12.30pm, implying that she could wait until then to eat. I agreed with DH and still do.

However, I wonder if others might say we were being mean?

If it's relevant, we come from a culture where it's very unusual to eat between meals.

Don't be so rude. Even if you're not religious you can at least respect those families that are.

It depends. I think perfectly fine in theory to say wait 30 minutes or so for lunch. However, she went to bed at 9pm so hasn’t eaten for 15+ hrs at this point, so could be very hungry. In that case I would either offer her a light snack whilst she waits for lunch or just let her dive into breakfast.

I don’t think you can really be stringent about meals but relaxed about sleeping / waking hours. One impacts the other. My mum would have made me get up for whatever the morning commitment was (though o would have loved to be allowed the lie in!).

Hah. No, I think that there is a perception that religious families are overly strict, and that that might be influencing people's views on whether this family's meal arrangements are overly strict.

If not that, then I'm surprised by the number of posters who think it's mean to make a 12 year old wait 45 minutes between waking up and eating - in my book that's barely enough time to shower and have a coffee! And even Jesus made the crowds wait til he'd finished healing the sick, IIRC the disciples had to go and remind him it was dinner time 😁

If we went out I was not allowed snacks outside as it was apparently‘common’ to eat in public?? But my siblings were allowed a carton of juice I was told I had to wait to learn control as I was apparently a ‘non compliant child’ and I had to earn the privileges

Do people really think it is "batshit" to have family meals, presumably with nice, planned, nutirious food rather than drifting about raiding cupboards and leaving crumbs?

This country has a real problem with food.

When I said it’s batshit- it’s not that making her wait 45 minutes will kill her without food.

it’s the rigidity and being controlling for the sake of it. Just seems like making a mountain out of a mole hill!

A glass of fruit juice is about 200 calories, so she should easily survive 45 minutes till lunch.

Her lunch was about half an hour away and her parents made her wait. That's not the same as banning eating between meals. She's not going to suffer waiting that short time. Ditto a teenage boy.

I just don't understand these bloody threads. I'm from a generation that grew up healthy and happy without constant snacking between meals, without 'snacks' handed over at school pickup and with a little bit of discipline about not emptying the cupboards of food. It seems that as soon as older children start to push the boundaries many parents just put their hands up and go 'Oh! They're at that age, we just have to put up with it'.
No wonder so many are growing up overweight.

Might not be relevant but my DM was also very religious. I frequently had ‘GLUTTONY’ screamed in my face if I said I was still hungry after a meal and told about the ‘sins’

The whole thread is a mountain out of a molehill. There is nothing to suggest the daughter even wanted to eat before lunch time. It’s just one of those threads designed to get people frothing over a non issue.

This. This is such a non issue I can’t imagine giving it any mental energy.

💐 Sounds like you had an awful childhood.

What struck me about your post is the 9pm bedtime with 9.30pm lights out, that’s a very early time for a 12 yo at the weekend.

Well considering she slept until 11.45am, it wasn’t too early for her, was it? If that’s what time she has to go to bed to get the amount of sleep she needs, it’s a perfectly suitable bed time

It’s 45 minutes, it’s fine. She won’t starve to death.

No wonder so many kids are fat nowadays. Feeling a bit hungry before meals is normal and healthy and it is not cruel to let them experience mild hunger.

It was not the feeding of the 5,000 in today's gospel OP

How desperate can someone who's literally just tumbled out of bed be? If she was that desperate she would have made it to the breakfast table. You say she wasn't given a choice, but that was her choice and she chose to stay in bed. Besides, this is the western world, I doubt her daughter was "desperate" in any true sense of the word.

I think it’s unreasonable to have a cut-off for breakfast at weekends for teens. No need for that amount of control as long as they help themselves, clear away properly and don’t waste food. I wouldn’t make a battle out of a long sleep in.

But I do think your DH was wise to alert her to the fact that lunch would only be another 45 minutes, so that she could make up her mind to wait or otherwise. I would also have hoped she could read the room and see the kitchen was busy and that this wasn’t the time to start a fry-up. If not, I would have been compelled to kindly spell that out.

I would have made her get up for church.

Isn't it a religious requirement for Catholics to ensure that their children over seven attend Mass?

12 is perfectly old enough to decide if she wants to follow her parents’ religion, or not.

i wouldn't have let mine sleep in that late, but that is partly because the one never does, and the other has medication to take with breakfast.

10:30 is the latest time for sleeping. so 'breakfast' cut off is about 11am.. we're also flexible with lunch and eat it any time from 1-2.30pm

I'd have gone and woken them up when we got back to make sure they ate.

That being said, in the OPs case i'd have asked if they wanted to eat lunch 'early' or wait... i wouldn't have offered 'breakfast' at that point.

I voted yabu purely because you don't want to get into a situation where your Dd is skipping meals. Try and get three meals a day in them as a habit whilst still allowing them autonomy over food decisions ...tricky enough! It will only get worse as she becomes a teen otherwise. .

I think it was reasonable to expect her to wait, it was only 45 minutes. If she had breakfast at that time, she might not want the lunch.