From: judy@locus.com (Judy Leedom Tyrer)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: A Balanced Diet (Was Re: Halloween Stories)
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:22:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California

In article <TIGGER.92Nov10123903@satyr.Sylvan.COM> tigger@satyr.Sylvan.COM (Grace Sylvan) writes:

I have to post that while these may be good ideas for those who want to
regulate their children's diets, these are definitely regulations.  And
for those whose families have a history of eating disorders, these are exactly
the wrong thing to do (according to the method we are discussing here).

>It sounds like his eating habits have gotten out of sync with the
>family. He's not very hungry at mealtimes because of snacking, and
>he's gotten used to only eating a limited diet.
>
>I would try limiting times he can eat. Like, he gets 3 meals a day and
>2 or 3 snack times a day. And during meal times, he can eat what's
>served to everyone. Eventually, you might want to lighten up and also
>allow him to select a reasonable alternative - this is reasonable for
>you, like cold cereal or a sandwich or whatever *you're* willing to
>make/allow/have him make.

For those who have spent half a lifetime overcoming the "it's 6:00 I must
be hungry" mentality this kind of teaching creates, this is a big no no. 

People do not universally get hungry at 7, noon, and 6.  People with very
slow metabolisms often find they eat one very large meal a day and perhaps
a light snack or two at other times.  People with very fast metabolisms
find that they must eat every two or three hours.  (Generalizaions, here.
The point isn't to label metabolism eating styles, but that different people
have different needs based on their metabolisms).

I would definitely NEVER follow this advice.  I want my children to eat
when they are hungry and because they are hungry.  I want them to learn to
recognize hunger as opposed to desire (one is in your tummy, the other in
your mouth).  I want them to recognize when they are no longer hungry and
learn to stop eating (Mitchell learned this two nights ago when he ate too
much meat loaf and felt overly full).

>2) At meals he can choose to eat whatever's offered in whatever
>amounts. Perhaps he must sit with the family (even if not eating) for
>some amount of time (depends on his age) even if he chooses not to eat.

I believe that the child should be able to have input into what is offered.
So we always have options of cheese, crackers, salami, etc.   I know that if
you are serving shrimp, I will need an alternative.  I would not accept 
going hungry as an option simply because there is no food served I can eat.
>
>3) If he decides to live on snacks and not on meals, then you might
>need to limit the size and choices of his snacks (ie, 1/2 a sandwich,
>or 1 fruit, etc). If he decides to eat cheese every snack, you might
>limit it to 1 snack a day, when is his choice. You might need to
>temporarily eliminate junk food from your home, so that it isn't
>available as a choice.
>

Yes, if you are NOT following this method of teaching your children.  BUT,
the whole idea here is that you are not involved in their eating choices.
What difference does it make if the snack is 5 sandwiches?  Why are meals
so important?  Why do you feel the need to control when and what your child
eats?  

These are important questions.  Because if you are making food a battle of
the wills or an issue of control, there is a strong body of evidence that
you could be contributing to your child's future eating problems.  I found
it enough evidence to convince me.  

I'm not saying that Tigger must follow the "let your child choose" method
of nutrition.  But I am saying that what she is advocating under the heading
of "how do you implement this program" is NOT implementing the program.  It
is implementing a different program entirely.

>None of this is to punish him or other family members. Never force him
>to eat, but allow him to suffer the natural consequences of not eating
>the family meal (he might be hungry until snack time). 

Why?  Are you required to go hungry if you don't eat the family meal?  What
if you let your husband cook all the meals.  Are you going to eat what he
cooks or go hungry?  I doubt it.  My guess is that if it wasn't something you
enjoy, you'd fix yourself a snack.  Why not give your child the same freedom?

>                                                            ...After
>his new patterns are established, (1-2 months?) then you might be able
>to relax the routine again, like with stocking more sweets in the
>house, maybe lifting the cheese restriction, and loosening the
>regulated snack time - there might still be a restriction say, during
>the hour before dinner (*small* snacks only) or something. 

I'd do JUST the opposite.  Stock up on snacks.  Let him pig out.  I'll bet
you that within a week, those snacks will have lost their appeal and he
will find himself naturally selecting a wide variety of foods.  And I'll also
bet that he will be eating a nutritionally balanced meal on a week by week
basis.
>
>Often Katherine wants to drink juice or soda - and if she knows
>there's soda in the house, she'll often pick that. Sometimes when
>we're not willing to give her much caffine, we'll have a conversation
>like this:
>
>K: I'm thirsty
>M: There's juice or water
>K: I want soda
>M: It's getting late, how about some juice instead - let's see, we've
>   got apple or cranberry juice
>K: I want soda!
>M: Okay, you can have 1/2 a cup of soda, then, if you're still
>   thirsty, you can have some juice
>

But you are still controlling her.  From my point of view, this just seems
like added work.  Why not buy Caffeine Free soda for her and let her have
as much as she wants?

-- 
Judy Leedom Tyrer

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"	- William Blake
Newsgroups: misc.kids