I am the worst mum in the world - just sent ds2-2y 4mo to bed hungry

[BlueSmarties]

I'm not fussy about food, never try to force feed or anything like that. we just have one rule in this house. If you don't eat your dinner there isn't anything else.

So ds1 [4] sat in front of his dinner sulking for approx 10 mins then tucked in heartily and had his after dinner treat.

ds2 [2] not interested even with gentle persuasion. So he went up for his bath,no fuss or anything. Came downstairs and said he was hungry but still wouldn't eat his dinner. I relented and gave him a banana but once he started asking for biscuits it was time for bed.

I feel like such a b1tch. he's never seen it all the way through to bed time before. Last time he did this was at my mum's and he sat and watched everyone eat an ice cream but he didn't get one coz not eating dinner - went up for his bath then came down and ate his v.cold roast dinner - then had an ice cream. Thought he'd learnt his lesson then.

Anyone else out there that mean. Only want to hear from those that are - not anyone looking to bash me and make me feel worse than i do already.

[juuule]

I'm not that bothered which order they eat dinner or pudding. They've had their pudding before dinner before now and still eaten their dinner. I also don't have a rule that it must be finished within a certain time. If a 2yo wasn't finished when everyone else was I've left it for a while as I've found they sometimes get down for a while and then go back and finish it later. It all evens out as they get older and hasn't caused any problems.

[oneopinionatedmother]

i think there is a confusion about what getting kids to eat dinner before puds means- it doesn't necessarily mean any additional attention (as where poss, i put the food in front of her and ignore until its gone, then give milk for afters. there is no attention to be gained by meal-refusing - i think whichever method you go for this is one thing commentators agree on)

though this is more difficult with spoon-fed meals, i just try to look out of the window whilst waiting for her to finish each mouthful.

i think you get a pretty good idea of how much is enough over a week or so (given that this amount isn't constant given growth spurts) Plus, if i think a meal isn't going to be finished, i'l sneak a bite or two myself whilst she's not looking to ensure the end amount is eaten without a fuss.

ime making kids eat dinner before puds makes for better eating, less fuss.

of course if someone else want to do different, who am i to say they are wrong? after all, even if on average kids just overeat when allowed to, it doesn't mean everyones will.

[juuule]

That's what mine have done, k999

[K999]

Juule..I had exactly that same problem with dd1 when she started school! Sometimes dd1 would only eat some of her packed lunch and then eat the rest walking home from school. Didnt bother me.

[Scarletibis]

I don't think you're being mean - you gave him a banana, so he won't be starving hungry. Personally I think to give nothing before bed would be mean, but a banana will keep a 2yo from going to bed hungry.

[juuule]

I must be lucky then in that my children do seem to be able to control their intake. Whatever they have access to they don't seem to overdo it.

Only time we've had a problem was at lunchtime when a dinner lady kept insisting that dd ate everything in her lunchbox. Dd ended up in tears and started trying to hide her lunch on the way out of the house to pretend that she'd eaten it all. Took a while for her to settle down again after I'd been in to discuss.

[ArcticLemming]

There was some research done recently that found children are not good at regulating their intake (this was on primary school age). The conclusion was that parents need to play an active part in portion control. Will try and find a link. I certainly don't think my DD1 is - if she ever gets unlimited access to biscuits (e.g at a party) she'll eat a ridiculous amount unless stopped.

[cktwo]

My mealtimes are relaxed and happy and if they don't eat their meal they don't go without pudding and I don't insist on a clear plate. However if they don't eat any of their meal but ask for something 30 mins later then like bluesmarties they get offered fruit and milk but nothing else. Mealtimes are for eating, not 30 mins afterwards.

[mananny]

I hate it when children are told "if you don't eat this you won't get that" - it teaches them totally the wrong message about mealtimes IMHO. Mealtimes should be relaxed, social occasions where the children learn from watching the adults how to have a healthy relationship with both food and each other. My now ex- charges (boo hoo I miss them!!!!) aren't forced to finish their plates, they get fruit and yoghurt most days for pudding. They are a bit picky about some foods but FGS they are 3.5yrs old and should not be expected to like everything on their plate, as we adults don't always lick our plates clean either. They are encouraged to try new foods, no fuss is made if they aren't in the mood to eat, healthy snacks are available if they are hungry later. As a result (and it has been hard work to not get frustrated with them on some days when they are little monsters at the table!) they generally eat a wide and varied diet, there are no tantrums (99% of the time LOL) about food/mealtimes, they will sit nicely and chat about their day with any adults joining them at that meal, and are always complimented on their manners etc. They are healthy and happy and that's way more important than stressing about whether or not they finished their plate. Food is enough of an issue in adulthood, let the petites enjoy it while they can!

So I really think if parents were to relax a bit more about food and their children, there would be way less issues. No child ever starved themselves from missing a meal if they weren't hungry. And parents/nannies shouldn't pile the pressure on a small child to eat something if they don't want it as then food becomes an issue and it really needn't be that way. If they just finish their plate to please you/get desert and not because they are hungry, that's a life lesson that will affect other areas of their lives later, surely? I'll probably throw all this psychology stuff out the window when I have a child myself, but in the meantime I would rather my charges have a relaxed and enjoyable meal than it be fraught with threats and punishments and the use of sweet foods as a reward for going against their own wants and needs.

[cktwo]

round of applause to bluesmarties

I'm sick of seeing children dictating to their parents about what they eat and when. As parents it is our job to prepare our children in life and by giving in to 2yo food demands I don't think we're teaching them the protacol and etiquette around meal times.
If bluesmarties have given in, then her 2 yo would think it's ok not to eat his meal but demand food afterwards. And it would go on day after day after day.
Yes as a grown-up you can snack 2 hours after a meal but you are capable of reasoning that.
At the end of the day, if a child is hungry they will eat their dinner.

BTW my 2yo is more than capable of grasping the concepts here. They are not babies anymore.

[bubblagirl]

havent read all of thread but i do not make meal times an issue either and do not insist on plates being cleared either eating and being comfortable at meal times is more important

for the 2 yr old are the meals too big portion should be 2 tablespoons per portion for his age and that would total 6 tablespoons of food and this is more than sufficient maybe your putting too much food on the plate and its daunting put less on you can always add more if they want it

but if your over loading and then expecting them to clear plate couldn't think of anything worse

ive always used the tbsp rule and my ds has always eaten all his meals with no problems but if he didnt i wouldn't punish for it

any new foods i try at lunch times so meals are not affected at night time

[HappyMummyOfOne]

I was made to eat food I didnt like when I was younger and grew to hate mealtimes. Luckily I have no lasting food issues.

I dont expect DS to eat foods he doesnt like or to clear his plate if he is already full. I tend to cook foods I know he likes and sometimes it will be different to our meal.

I wouldnt eat something I dont like and dont intend to go down that path with DS as I know what its like from past experience.

[FabBakerGirlIsBack]

I think children are much better at regulating their food intake. They eat when they are hungry and no by the clock. Making them eat some more when they have said they have had enough is over riding their natural instinct to stop eating once they feel full.

I have major food issues and try really hard not to make food an issue with my children.

[oneopinionatedmother]

That's an interesting insight into the mindset in play here. Of course they wouldn't eat bread and fruit until they burst.

wouldn't they (or at least, until very full?)

kids will overeat. we used to supervise mealtimes in school - some kids would just keep on coming back for more after having maybe twice an adult portion. We started refusing those kids that got too large as they obviously didn't need it.

other kids would sit over their still-full rice bowl telling you they weren't hungry. Then eat the fruit on offer after the meal.

i would also go to bed 'hungry' myself. That urge to snack isn't necessarily to do with a physical need.

[MilaMae]

Blue smarties I don't think you're the worst mum in the world,far from it.We have the same rule as you with the only difference being we started it when the dc were 3.

I cook the same for all of us as I don't run a cafe. My dc are now 5,5 and 4. If they don't eat their tea(which are mostly meals I know appeal to them)they don't get more food. Sorry I don't have the money to throw good food away only to replace it with snacks.

I have 2 fab eaters and 1 fussy eater who is smart enough to know he could just not eat his tea every night in order to get a snack he does like.

The fussy eater used to go to bed hungry most nights often still does and misses out on desserts we all eat frequently. I don't feel a pang of guilt. If he's hungry he'll eat and often does when he realises actually he is hungry. He has a huge breakfast to make up for it,is in the peak of health and heavier than his twin who eats everything.

Often the fussy eater will just eat his chicken out of the roast and reject everything else(roast potatoes,stuffing veg of his choice) well sorry that isn't acceptable and he can't expect anything else when there is perfectly good food in front of him. I never make an issue of it and would never force any of them to eat when they didn't want to. It's their choice but they aint getting anything else. I serve dessets for those of us who are still hungry after the 1st course,if the 1st course is still sat in front of you you aren't hungry.

I can't stand seeing parents cajole,coax,rage,threat over food. If they don't want it they don't want it. If they choose to go to bed hungry that is their choice and something they are entitled to make.

Have to say my fussy eater is slowly(very slowly) but surely getting better, we never have upsets about it(never did really) he just accepts it and is starting to eat half of his tea most nights.

I think your rule is good but your ds 2 is probably still a little too young,they are naturally picky at this stage. I've no idea how you could deal with it fairly though as your 4 year old will understandably get riled if he has to stick to the rule and his brother doesn't. My youngest is my best eater so it was never an issue.

[oneopinionatedmother]

I wonder how the eating of the children in that trial had been managed to date though? Were they all allowed to regulate their own eating and appetite from weaning until the trial? If not then your evidence may be illustrating the converse of the point you are trying to make.

the point was the trigger is not enough. though yes, if those kids were conditioned into eating all in front of them that would be a factor, conversely, they didn't magically ting 'full' (Tom and jerry style) and stop.

it wasn't a scientific trial to be fair - i saw it on tv though the kids were told to leave whatever they didn't want.

The way to activate the "stuff yourself, you might be hungry later" mechanism you allude to is to feed children at rigidly set times and outlaw supplementary snacking.

but isn't snacking habit-forming also? can you not equally snack when you don't need to?? lots of current thinking in diet points to it being important to acknowledge you have eaten (ie sit down, go through a ritual etc) so that your brain is content that you have in fact eaten properly.

isn't it easier to work to a pattern of meals (i don't believ in three meals for grown adult either - i get by fine on 1.5small wheras DH did well on 2 large meals)
just to keep track of it all (once you have found the meal pattern that works for you?)

a close friend of mine went through hell with her food addiction and it made me really conscious of how difficult knowing how much food is enough can be. (she went to foodies anonymous and used a diet that involved weighing everything to the gram!)

her childhood regime was large meals plus snacks - though also i think other psychological factors were at play to be fair.

of course, there are people out there that get away with snacking endlessly and eating meals also, but that's metabolism for you.

[Greensleeves]

That's an interesting insight into the mindset in play here. Of course they wouldn't eat bread and fruit until they burst. And bread and fruit are perfectly good foods.

I think it's strange that you would send a child to bed hungry, having asked for a reasonable snack (apple, bread etc) just on principle. Do you deny yourself food when you're hungry too?

[LadyHooHa]

Greensleeves - you ask: If your child asked for an apple or a piece of toast an hour after dinner, would you refuse?

Well, yes as we have dinner late!

But if we didn't, then it would depend on whether they'd eaten their dinner or not. If they'd eaten everything and were still hungry an hour later, then yes. If they'd left their meal and then came asking for toast/an apple an hour later, then no. Though that may be because my children would eat bread and fruit until they burst, given half a chance!

[LadyHooHa]

Smarties - I don't think you are using food as a punishment (contrary to what other people have said), and I think a banana was a fair deal in the circs. If he'd been hungry, he would have eaten his dinner. I say good on you for sticking to your guns. Knowing where he stands with you will pay off in all sorts of ways that are not connected to food!

I think the problem with snacking, Greensleeves, is that it's not a great habit for children to get into. Friends' children snack pretty much non-stop, then won't eat meals. This might not matter when they're five, but it will matter more when they're 15 and have got into the snacking habit (which is likely to be a constant stream of junk by then).

[Greensleeves]

but it's not mean if you are giving her milk and toast so she doesn't go to bed hungry!

I think there are two very different arguments here.

[jemart]

Yep - I am also this mean.
Have picky 2 year old dd who has gone to bed without really eating much on several occaisions.
I do fret about it though and try to atleast get some milk and toast down her.

[Greensleeves]

I wonder how the eating of the children in that trial had been managed to date though? Were they all allowed to regulate their own eating and appetite from weaning until the trial? If not then your evidence may be illustrating the converse of the point you are trying to make.

I don'[t think human beings are hard-wired to binge in case there is no food later - that ancient instinct infterfaces with many others and effects of recent evolution and modern conditioning.

The way to activate the "stuff yourself, you might be hungry later" mechanism you allude to is to feed children at rigidly set times and outlaw supplementary snacking.