Should a perfectly normal 4.5 year old manage to sit at the table for maybe 45 mins or an hour for a meal?

[MNersanonymous]

Had lunch yesterday with a dear friend and her ds who is 4.5.

Between courses he'd get down from the table at the (thankfully child friendly) restaurant and go off e.g. for a walk with his dad. Ds (2.10) meanwhile has been happily sitting in restaurants since he was well under 2 because we have taught him getting down is not acceptable - and he does still get toys or crayons whilst we wait for the first course.

DF is entitled to have different rules but this time my ds started asking if he could go off for a walk too.

Now I know all kids are different but isn't it fair to think that by 4.5 a child should manage a short meal in a restaurant WITH toys and crayons might I add without getting down? And by short meal I mean maybe 45 mins or an hour?

Am I being unreasonable in my expectations and also what should i say to ds now he has started wanting to copy the other little boy?
I managed a 'in our family we stay at the table' but that was only ok as my friend wasn'tthere by then - if she had been it would have sounded really rude.

How can I get ds to stick with our rules without it looking like I'm slagging off theirs?

LOL at Widgypog leapfrogging the varous experiences on this thread and awarding herself suppernanny status

NO WAY would ds have done so at this age
Dd is 4.5 and she will sit quietly and happily for an hour and is happy to do so in a restaurant

luck of the draw mainly I think and type of child etc.

I agree with you, widgy.

We put a lot of emphasis on our children behaving well in public, and they do so 90% of the time. They do have their moments, and home is completely different.

I don't really get the defeatism that you can't have your 5 year old behave. You just have to work at it and insist on it. Who is the adult?

well unlike most respondents my answer is a resounding yes

yes a 4.5 year old should be able to sit at a table for 45 mins to an hour when being served food and being part of the meal

mine can (at 7 and 3) and their friends can too

am surprised the consensus is that most can't to be honest

Me too, Twiglett

I'm the adult. we work on it. We insist upon it. I could take him to a restaurant where he would be expected to sit for an hour, no problem. But I would have to sit ON HIM.

Put it this way.

Would you expect your child to be thought a miserable wimp because he/she cries about things my son wouldn't murmur at?

Would you expect your child to be thought blatantly unfit because he/she is incapable of RUNNING the mile home from school on a Friday afternoon aged 4.5, because mine is capable?

Would you expect your child to be considered tight fisted because he/she wouldn't willingly hand over half a gingerbread man to a crying toddler he/she didn't even know?

Because my son does all those things, he does them well, and he does them without asking, and he does them happily.

What he does NOT do happily, without asking and well is sit still.

They are all different.

Maybe this is a classic nature nurture issue. I don't believe it is solely about personality or about what parents do.

I know this child very, very well and to be honest he is not particularly spirited and lively now. He WAS a typical boy at 2 and I think what has happened is that they used to take him for a walk at that age between courses or let him get down and give food by the toys/ watch TV through every meal etc but they could have stopped him doing it by the time he calmed down at maybe 3ish.

He is a really good boy generally, sits still and plays well, well-behaved so I think IF they wanted to they could tackle this. Obv it is their choice whether they want to or not and they seem happy with the situation so I shall not be saying anything to them.

My DD would have been able to manage it at that age; still does. But she is used to going out for lengthy mels. We have always taken soome form of entertainment for her, esp when she is the only child.

However many children I know couldn't deal with that length of time.

DD follows our rules regardless of what others do.

DS can, he's 4, as he loves his food and he likes listening and talking and talking. It's a social occasion & he's always been like this.

DD (nearly 2) on the other hand has the manners of a goat. She probably can sit there for 45-1hr but whether I want the food debris scattered in a 50 yard radius is another matter.

My dd was a baby who would never lie flat on her back or sit in a stationary buggy or even a moving one for very long. Does not really watch TV/DVD even now. Could not sit for a meal, even though we eat out as a family a lot.

I think it was just frustratingly boring for her.

But now at 4.7 I think she can sit for a meal in a restaurant, particularly if she is hungry. She would not sit nicely with a napkin on her lap. She might sit on her knees and fiddle with the forks and knives. If she wants to get down, I let her but not if it means she runs around like a looney. If she did, we would take her out. This only happens for ds 1.7 though.

We don't take the dcs to posh restauarants anyway, ds being too young.

If we were eating with another family, I find that the general behaviour of the children tends to drift towards the lowest common denominator. I don't really have any rules that I am wedded to (like sitting for a whole meal) which I could not bend for a guest. I'd rather be gracious than point out to my dd she had to adhere to ours (which the other family will hear) rather than embarrass with the implication that the other family was lax.

I suppose my philosophy is that I want my dd to behave out of her own volition. If she is not ready or cannot in that specific circumstance, then either dh or I will take her outside if she is being particularly anti-social. All in good time. Agree that personality plays a big part.

Another "yes" here. We've taken ours out to restaurants since they were very young (dd1 was a week old the first time!); nowhere really posh but lots of different kinds of places.

They have always sat still; we would never let them run around, even if they seemed to have an inclination to.

They often used to colour whilst waiting, or munch on breadsticks or something. Small magnetic noughts and crosses sets etc used to be quite useful too. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to expect children to sit still for a while, providing you don't expect them to occupy themselves entirely, or to just sit there without anything to do/look at/talk about etc.

Fortnuately our friends are all of this mindset too; don't know what I'd do if I had a friend who allowed the children to wander around - I suspect we wouldn't eat out with them to be honest. Sorry if that sounds draconian but ...........

Message withdrawn

agree with colditz. Ignoring ds1 for the moment as he is a law unto himself. DS2 always has been able to sit nicely for however long he's asked. That's how he was born. DS3 is a totally different kettle of fish. Sitting still/doing as told/ etc etc just does not come easily to him. He likes colouring so it might be possible (ds2 will sit because he's told to, ds3 might sit for colouring) but I wouldn't bet money on him.

I think if I'd just had ds2 I would have been terribly smug (very easy child).

I think that it is perfectly possible if you include them in the conversation the whole time. However it also depends on the personality of the DC. I know some parents who have been incredibly smug about their 'good'parenting skills and then they have had a second DC who is a breaks all the rules!

MNAnonymous - perhaps it is the DAD who can't sit still?

Going off for a short walk between courses doesn't sound that bad, tbh. It isn't as if the child is screeching and yelling and racing amongst other people's tables.

DS has actually behaved 'well' in restaurants since he was about 4.5...I just find it a bit smug when parents put their own children's good behaviour down to immaculate parenting rather than luck - and more energetic behaviour down to slack parenting rather than natural inclination.

DS does not badger for sweets, I can leave them all over the kitchen and he doesn't eat them. That is NOT down to the superior mindset of my parenting - it is because he's no more fussed by sweets than any other food. I don't go around bemoaning the mindset of the parents of the majority of DS's friends who all try and wheedle as many of these on-display chocs as possible. (I have however started putting them out of sight and reach - just as the parents of these 'greedy'? 'undisciplined'? children do - because it is NATURAL for these children to want to scoff sweets. Not a defect of character or parenting!

completely agree with cod. I took ds1 when he was tiny repeatedly. Sunday lunch out was our thing. He sat like an angel and we had lots of compliments (and yes we were smug- passive PFB what a combination). mwah ha ha people flinch when we take him into eateries now. Next time I'll tell them we've been taking him since he was tiny so he must be OK.

Wish I hadn't said anything now. I was just making conversation, not trying to prove anything at all.

Sitting still in restaurants just happens to be something I've expected from them, so have worked on with them - I've probably been lax on other things that some people would care more about but that doesn't mean I feel justified in mocking anybody for thinking differently.

And there are things we hate that we just have to get used to - going to the dentist for example: so do I say, oh you hate it, don't worry, darling, I won't make you go?

ah ha I am still basking in the dental success. A dentist saw inside ds1's mouth for the first time in 7 years a month ago (and no decay ). He used to clamp shut and bite them if they tried to prise his mouth open. But he suddenly decided (insisted even) that his mouth was checked and he sat on the chair and opened it beautifully.

Agree with CrossnessMaureen. Parents who take the credit when their dc behave well or achieve highly must, logically, also take the 'credit' when the same dc behave badly or fail at something.

How many parents actually do both....?!

Janeite - what many people on this thread are trying to say is that they DO think behaviour is important, they HAVE spent sustained energy attempting to instil it, they do talk to their children at a table, have taken them out regularly etc etc etc - and STILL some children find it physically hard to restrain / contain their energy or focus their attention for a whole hour doing something (eating etc) which is not of interest to them.

My dd(7) sits down in restuarants ok (bar visits to the toilet) but it's at home I find it hard to make her stop at the table. I think sometimes having school dinners doesn't help as they're encouraged to eat up quickly to maximise playtime afterwards. I'm not blaming school since she only eats there 5 times a week but it's an influence. In restuarnts, I'm armed with comics or books to look at plus I always pick a child-friendly restaurant (Frankie & Bennies being one of my favourites for both child and adult friendly meals).

I was beside myself on Friday night watching a truly awful piece of theatre. I was hot, desparately uncomfortable and bored stupid. I just couldn't keep still - i know i was fidgetting, sticking my leg out to stretch it, shuffling - I only namaged to actually stay sitting down because I am grown-up.

I can claim some responsibility for that bk but will leave my fragrant pal to explain
Have you had any steam up this weekend CM?