 |
|
| General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:14:37 +0000, PENMART01 wrote:
> Maybe in your fercocktah *violent* part of the planet but not in the US. > In the US parents have no authority whatsoever, ALL authority rests > with the state. In the US parents are endowed only with responsibility. > The only reason children fail is because they have irresponsible > parents... parents (actually *cowards) who raise their children > authoritively rather than by example. And I don't care how many degrees > in child rearing one has (education is no proof of intelligence), > asserting authority over children is a euphemism for child abuse, both > physical and mental. Boy, I hope that was tongue in cheek.... Otherwise, you have a very warped world view. You equate authority with violence and abuse? You must be a lot of fun to supervise at work.... Basic management principles will tell you that authority and responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but responsibility rests with the person in charge. Authority is the projection of responsibility. I cannot be responsible for something without having the authority to do something about it. So, according to your world view, I have the responsibility to raise my kids but no authority to do so.... Bizarre. And a recipe for failure. I can exercise authority over kids and adults without resorting to violence or abuse. "Violence is the refuge of the incompetent." --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:14:37 +0000, PENMART01 wrote:
> Maybe in your fercocktah *violent* part of the planet but not in the US. > In the US parents have no authority whatsoever, ALL authority rests > with the state. In the US parents are endowed only with responsibility. > The only reason children fail is because they have irresponsible > parents... parents (actually *cowards) who raise their children > authoritively rather than by example. And I don't care how many degrees > in child rearing one has (education is no proof of intelligence), > asserting authority over children is a euphemism for child abuse, both > physical and mental. Boy, I hope that was tongue in cheek.... Otherwise, you have a very warped world view. You equate authority with violence and abuse? You must be a lot of fun to supervise at work.... Basic management principles will tell you that authority and responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but responsibility rests with the person in charge. Authority is the projection of responsibility. I cannot be responsible for something without having the authority to do something about it. So, according to your world view, I have the responsibility to raise my kids but no authority to do so.... Bizarre. And a recipe for failure. I can exercise authority over kids and adults without resorting to violence or abuse. "Violence is the refuge of the incompetent." --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:16:30 -0300, Gabby wrote:
> Oh yeah, great way to make a happy meal, threaten the kids with punishment > from the get go. That's like the boss cancelling vacations until morale > improves. It does sound like a bizarre way to instill responsibility in kids. You don't do what I say, you will be punished. I'd bet those kids will have hangups for life. Let's see.... Teaching my kid to ride a bike: "If you fall off again, you will be punished". Sounds like that would make the kid afraid to get on the bike in the first place and thus never learn to ride. --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 13:16:30 -0300, Gabby wrote:
> Oh yeah, great way to make a happy meal, threaten the kids with punishment > from the get go. That's like the boss cancelling vacations until morale > improves. It does sound like a bizarre way to instill responsibility in kids. You don't do what I say, you will be punished. I'd bet those kids will have hangups for life. Let's see.... Teaching my kid to ride a bike: "If you fall off again, you will be punished". Sounds like that would make the kid afraid to get on the bike in the first place and thus never learn to ride. --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Kamus of Kadizhar" > wrote in message news  > On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:14:37 +0000, PENMART01 wrote: > > > > Maybe in your fercocktah *violent* part of the planet but not in the US. > > In the US parents have no authority whatsoever, ALL authority rests > > with the state. In the US parents are endowed only with responsibility. > > The only reason children fail is because they have irresponsible > > parents... parents (actually *cowards) who raise their children > > authoritively rather than by example. And I don't care how many degrees > > in child rearing one has (education is no proof of intelligence), > > asserting authority over children is a euphemism for child abuse, both > > physical and mental. > > Boy, I hope that was tongue in cheek.... > > Otherwise, you have a very warped world view. You equate authority with > violence and abuse? You must be a lot of fun to supervise at work.... > > Basic management principles will tell you that authority and > responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but > responsibility rests with the person in charge. Authority is the > projection of responsibility. I cannot be responsible for something > without having the authority to do something about it. So, according to > your world view, I have the responsibility to raise my kids but no > authority to do so.... Bizarre. And a recipe for failure. > > I can exercise authority over kids and adults without resorting to > violence or abuse. > > "Violence is the refuge of the incompetent." > > --Kamus Nah. That's just Sheldon being himself. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Kamus of Kadizhar" > wrote in message news > On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:14:37 +0000, PENMART01 wrote: > > > > Maybe in your fercocktah *violent* part of the planet but not in the US. > > In the US parents have no authority whatsoever, ALL authority rests > > with the state. In the US parents are endowed only with responsibility. > > The only reason children fail is because they have irresponsible > > parents... parents (actually *cowards) who raise their children > > authoritively rather than by example. And I don't care how many degrees > > in child rearing one has (education is no proof of intelligence), > > asserting authority over children is a euphemism for child abuse, both > > physical and mental. > > Boy, I hope that was tongue in cheek.... > > Otherwise, you have a very warped world view. You equate authority with > violence and abuse? You must be a lot of fun to supervise at work.... > > Basic management principles will tell you that authority and > responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but > responsibility rests with the person in charge. Authority is the > projection of responsibility. I cannot be responsible for something > without having the authority to do something about it. So, according to > your world view, I have the responsibility to raise my kids but no > authority to do so.... Bizarre. And a recipe for failure. > > I can exercise authority over kids and adults without resorting to > violence or abuse. > > "Violence is the refuge of the incompetent." > > --Kamus Nah. That's just Sheldon being himself. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
>PENMART01 wrote:
> > >> Maybe in your fercocktah *violent* part of the planet but not in the US. >> In the US parents have no authority whatsoever, ALL authority rests >> with the state. In the US parents are endowed only with responsibility. >> The only reason children fail is because they have irresponsible >> parents... parents (actually *cowards) who raise their children >> authoritively rather than by example. And I don't care how many degrees >> in child rearing one has (education is no proof of intelligence), >> asserting authority over children is a euphemism for child abuse, both >> physical and mental. > > You equate authority with >violence and abuse? You must be a lot of fun to supervise at work.... How do you determine that everyone in the US works for someone... In the US one is permitted to be self employed. Idiot. >Basic management principles will tell you that authority and >responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but >responsibility rests with the person in charge. Real cute/smarmy *******... mixing apples, oranges, plums, pears... stay on topic, if you can. Children are not adults, and perhaps on your violent/lawless portion of this planet employers have absolute authority but not in the US... in fact in the US employers and employees possess exactly precisely equal authority, each has equal power to terminate the relationship... and in fact far, far more employees up and quit than are dismissed (absent a contract, binding *both*). Not so between minors and and their respective adult legal guardians. Kamus the idiot, by his own words, proves that he considers children chattel. ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
>PENMART01 wrote:
> > >> Maybe in your fercocktah *violent* part of the planet but not in the US. >> In the US parents have no authority whatsoever, ALL authority rests >> with the state. In the US parents are endowed only with responsibility. >> The only reason children fail is because they have irresponsible >> parents... parents (actually *cowards) who raise their children >> authoritively rather than by example. And I don't care how many degrees >> in child rearing one has (education is no proof of intelligence), >> asserting authority over children is a euphemism for child abuse, both >> physical and mental. > > You equate authority with >violence and abuse? You must be a lot of fun to supervise at work.... How do you determine that everyone in the US works for someone... In the US one is permitted to be self employed. Idiot. >Basic management principles will tell you that authority and >responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but >responsibility rests with the person in charge. Real cute/smarmy *******... mixing apples, oranges, plums, pears... stay on topic, if you can. Children are not adults, and perhaps on your violent/lawless portion of this planet employers have absolute authority but not in the US... in fact in the US employers and employees possess exactly precisely equal authority, each has equal power to terminate the relationship... and in fact far, far more employees up and quit than are dismissed (absent a contract, binding *both*). Not so between minors and and their respective adult legal guardians. Kamus the idiot, by his own words, proves that he considers children chattel. ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:13:48 +0000, PENMART01 wrote:
> How do you determine that everyone in the US works for someone... In the US one > is permitted to be self employed. Idiot. And when you're self employed who pays you? Your clients, no? So don't you work for your clients? I certainly do, as I am self-employed. >>Basic management principles will tell you that authority and >>responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but >>responsibility rests with the person in charge. > > Real cute/smarmy *******... mixing apples, oranges, plums, pears... stay on > topic, if you can. Children are not adults, and perhaps on your > violent/lawless portion of this planet employers have absolute authority but > not in the US... You must be really befuddled by my nick.... (hint: it's a character from a sci-fi novel.) > in fact in the US employers and employees possess exactly > precisely equal authority, each has equal power to terminate the > relationship... Really? I have the same authority as my secretary? Over what part of the work? And the same authority as my clients? Boy, it must be confusing in your world. How do you decide who's in charge? Who does what? Who sets the rules? > and in fact far, far more employees up and quit than are > dismissed (absent a contract, binding *both*). Not so between minors and and > their respective adult legal guardians. Kamus the idiot, by his own words, > proves that he considers children chattel. Really? How did I do that? I think that parents have a leadership role in the family. I also think that kids should be given responsibility for the parts of their lives they can manage and the authority to manage them, along with appropriate reward / punishment for success and failure. Or are you advocating that parents relinquish family leadership to their kids? Should my 3 year old set the rules for me? Do you actually read my posts or just spout this nonsense for fun? :-) --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 20:13:48 +0000, PENMART01 wrote:
> How do you determine that everyone in the US works for someone... In the US one > is permitted to be self employed. Idiot. And when you're self employed who pays you? Your clients, no? So don't you work for your clients? I certainly do, as I am self-employed. >>Basic management principles will tell you that authority and >>responsibility go hand in hand. One can delegate authority, but >>responsibility rests with the person in charge. > > Real cute/smarmy *******... mixing apples, oranges, plums, pears... stay on > topic, if you can. Children are not adults, and perhaps on your > violent/lawless portion of this planet employers have absolute authority but > not in the US... You must be really befuddled by my nick.... (hint: it's a character from a sci-fi novel.) > in fact in the US employers and employees possess exactly > precisely equal authority, each has equal power to terminate the > relationship... Really? I have the same authority as my secretary? Over what part of the work? And the same authority as my clients? Boy, it must be confusing in your world. How do you decide who's in charge? Who does what? Who sets the rules? > and in fact far, far more employees up and quit than are > dismissed (absent a contract, binding *both*). Not so between minors and and > their respective adult legal guardians. Kamus the idiot, by his own words, > proves that he considers children chattel. Really? How did I do that? I think that parents have a leadership role in the family. I also think that kids should be given responsibility for the parts of their lives they can manage and the authority to manage them, along with appropriate reward / punishment for success and failure. Or are you advocating that parents relinquish family leadership to their kids? Should my 3 year old set the rules for me? Do you actually read my posts or just spout this nonsense for fun? :-) --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
> Amen! to you, sister. We seems to think along the same lines - I read ( or > have read ) both of those things. The Amy Dacyzyn article is called "War and > Peas" : ) People even rose up and called her a "child abuser" because she > requires that her six children try a little of everything - things like > oatmeal and beans - not kid "WoW!" food. They don't have to eat it, but > they're not allowed to make disparaging remarks, have to sit through the > meal, and are not allowed separate food or snacks in-between meals. And they > are all very healthy. Whoa! This is very different from the way Dacyzyn was represented before. Here's the way it read the first time: "She simply lets picky or slow eaters [know] that if they don't eat what's served, they will be punished - not merely ordered to eat the same food later." That's advice I can't agree with. Insisting that children eat food that they don't like even after they've refused it, serving it again at the next meal, that's all horrible, and while it doesn't fit the legal definition of abuse, it makes me cringe all the same. Insisting that children try a little of everything offered, not be allowed separate food or between-meal snacks, might not be exactly the way I'd do it, but it doesn't sound too bad. I'm in complete agreement that children should not be allowed to make disparaging remarks. A simple "no thank-you" is all that should be required. That's not being pushed around, and it isn't failing the children. So much of these arguments about child rearing stem from the 2 parties not talking about the same thing. So one person says something thinking about the 9 year old in the thread title and then gets told that her comments are all wrong because they don't apply to a toddler. Well, duh! --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
> Amen! to you, sister. We seems to think along the same lines - I read ( or > have read ) both of those things. The Amy Dacyzyn article is called "War and > Peas" : ) People even rose up and called her a "child abuser" because she > requires that her six children try a little of everything - things like > oatmeal and beans - not kid "WoW!" food. They don't have to eat it, but > they're not allowed to make disparaging remarks, have to sit through the > meal, and are not allowed separate food or snacks in-between meals. And they > are all very healthy. Whoa! This is very different from the way Dacyzyn was represented before. Here's the way it read the first time: "She simply lets picky or slow eaters [know] that if they don't eat what's served, they will be punished - not merely ordered to eat the same food later." That's advice I can't agree with. Insisting that children eat food that they don't like even after they've refused it, serving it again at the next meal, that's all horrible, and while it doesn't fit the legal definition of abuse, it makes me cringe all the same. Insisting that children try a little of everything offered, not be allowed separate food or between-meal snacks, might not be exactly the way I'd do it, but it doesn't sound too bad. I'm in complete agreement that children should not be allowed to make disparaging remarks. A simple "no thank-you" is all that should be required. That's not being pushed around, and it isn't failing the children. So much of these arguments about child rearing stem from the 2 parties not talking about the same thing. So one person says something thinking about the 9 year old in the thread title and then gets told that her comments are all wrong because they don't apply to a toddler. Well, duh! --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote:
> Dr. Rosemond, too. People are screaming "child abuse!" because these sorts > of parents simply refuse to be pushed around, and are being The Parents. > Funny, I'm in my thirties, but not very long ago, The Norm ( Norm! ) was > that Mom cooks and kids eat. Now everyone's trying to please their kids and > make pals of them. Kids have pals; they *need* parents. What these parents > will wind up with is a bunch of loose cannons, and they'll wind up punishing > themselves forever because they've somehow "failed" their children when they > grow up to be a mess. Some years ago I read an article that likened the two approaches to a car trip down the road of life. In the one case, the parents are driving the car, and the kids are along for the ride, observing and learning about life. In the other case (more like "modern" parenting), the kids are driving and the parents are being taken for a ride. I have a sister-in-law who from day one tried to be her kid's pal. The kid learned really quickly what he needed to do to get what he wanted. By the time he was a teenager, he essentially had his mother totally under his control. He knew how to push all the right buttons, and from my perspective he was emotionally abusing her. In a way many of the things the kid got away with were small potatoes, but taken together he was a totally out of control kid. One "small" thing I found particularly disturbing was when he became ill in school. The school would call my sister-in-law, she would bring him home, and he would rest at home in his bed... NOT... He would be out playing for the rest of the day within minutes of getting home. This scenario played out so many times just when I was visiting, who knows how often it happened in total. While this kid's antics may have worked with his mother, they didn't work with society as a whole. The last grade he completed in school was 7th. He's 18 years old now, and has spent the bulk of the last three years in one type of jail or another. He gets out of jail again next month (in all probability just temporarily). A big favor my sister-in-law did for her son, trying to be his pal. (Of course things are a bit more complicated than this, but this is the short version!) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote:
> Dr. Rosemond, too. People are screaming "child abuse!" because these sorts > of parents simply refuse to be pushed around, and are being The Parents. > Funny, I'm in my thirties, but not very long ago, The Norm ( Norm! ) was > that Mom cooks and kids eat. Now everyone's trying to please their kids and > make pals of them. Kids have pals; they *need* parents. What these parents > will wind up with is a bunch of loose cannons, and they'll wind up punishing > themselves forever because they've somehow "failed" their children when they > grow up to be a mess. Some years ago I read an article that likened the two approaches to a car trip down the road of life. In the one case, the parents are driving the car, and the kids are along for the ride, observing and learning about life. In the other case (more like "modern" parenting), the kids are driving and the parents are being taken for a ride. I have a sister-in-law who from day one tried to be her kid's pal. The kid learned really quickly what he needed to do to get what he wanted. By the time he was a teenager, he essentially had his mother totally under his control. He knew how to push all the right buttons, and from my perspective he was emotionally abusing her. In a way many of the things the kid got away with were small potatoes, but taken together he was a totally out of control kid. One "small" thing I found particularly disturbing was when he became ill in school. The school would call my sister-in-law, she would bring him home, and he would rest at home in his bed... NOT... He would be out playing for the rest of the day within minutes of getting home. This scenario played out so many times just when I was visiting, who knows how often it happened in total. While this kid's antics may have worked with his mother, they didn't work with society as a whole. The last grade he completed in school was 7th. He's 18 years old now, and has spent the bulk of the last three years in one type of jail or another. He gets out of jail again next month (in all probability just temporarily). A big favor my sister-in-law did for her son, trying to be his pal. (Of course things are a bit more complicated than this, but this is the short version!) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote:
> Dr. Rosemond, too. People are screaming "child abuse!" because these sorts > of parents simply refuse to be pushed around, and are being The Parents. > Funny, I'm in my thirties, but not very long ago, The Norm ( Norm! ) was > that Mom cooks and kids eat. Now everyone's trying to please their kids and > make pals of them. Kids have pals; they *need* parents. What these parents > will wind up with is a bunch of loose cannons, and they'll wind up punishing > themselves forever because they've somehow "failed" their children when they > grow up to be a mess. Some years ago I read an article that likened the two approaches to a car trip down the road of life. In the one case, the parents are driving the car, and the kids are along for the ride, observing and learning about life. In the other case (more like "modern" parenting), the kids are driving and the parents are being taken for a ride. I have a sister-in-law who from day one tried to be her kid's pal. The kid learned really quickly what he needed to do to get what he wanted. By the time he was a teenager, he essentially had his mother totally under his control. He knew how to push all the right buttons, and from my perspective he was emotionally abusing her. In a way many of the things the kid got away with were small potatoes, but taken together he was a totally out of control kid. One "small" thing I found particularly disturbing was when he became ill in school. The school would call my sister-in-law, she would bring him home, and he would rest at home in his bed... NOT... He would be out playing for the rest of the day within minutes of getting home. This scenario played out so many times just when I was visiting, who knows how often it happened in total. While this kid's antics may have worked with his mother, they didn't work with society as a whole. The last grade he completed in school was 7th. He's 18 years old now, and has spent the bulk of the last three years in one type of jail or another. He gets out of jail again next month (in all probability just temporarily). A big favor my sister-in-law did for her son, trying to be his pal. (Of course things are a bit more complicated than this, but this is the short version!) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:37:38 GMT, Julia Altshuler
> wrote: >Insisting that children try a little of everything offered, not be >allowed separate food or between-meal snacks, might not be exactly the >way I'd do it, but it doesn't sound too bad. I'm in complete agreement >that children should not be allowed to make disparaging remarks. A >simple "no thank-you" is all that should be required. That's not being >pushed around, and it isn't failing the children. > > >So much of these arguments about child rearing stem from the 2 parties >not talking about the same thing. So one person says something thinking >about the 9 year old in the thread title and then gets told that her >comments are all wrong because they don't apply to a toddler. Well, duh! > Right! And a lot of the comments are about child-rearing, when the OP was asking about someone else's child who will be visiting. Sue(tm) Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:37:38 GMT, Julia Altshuler
> wrote: >Insisting that children try a little of everything offered, not be >allowed separate food or between-meal snacks, might not be exactly the >way I'd do it, but it doesn't sound too bad. I'm in complete agreement >that children should not be allowed to make disparaging remarks. A >simple "no thank-you" is all that should be required. That's not being >pushed around, and it isn't failing the children. > > >So much of these arguments about child rearing stem from the 2 parties >not talking about the same thing. So one person says something thinking >about the 9 year old in the thread title and then gets told that her >comments are all wrong because they don't apply to a toddler. Well, duh! > Right! And a lot of the comments are about child-rearing, when the OP was asking about someone else's child who will be visiting. Sue(tm) Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
wff_ng_6 wrote:
> Some years ago I read an article that likened the two approaches to a car > trip down the road of life. In the one case, the parents are driving the > car, and the kids are along for the ride, observing and learning about life. > In the other case (more like "modern" parenting), the kids are driving and > the parents are being taken for a ride. The trouble with analogies like this and labels like "modern parenting" is that they don't give enough real information about real situations to do much good. This thread is a prime example. I went into some detail about what I thought would be best for the original poster's 9 year old niece. That included not giving her have junk food but letting her refuse food, politely, that she didn't care to eat. A lot of people agreed with me or gave variations on the same advice. I'd call my advice good consistent discipline in which the parents (aunt and uncle in this case) make the lion's share of the decisions and the girl doesn't run the show. Other people don't see it that way. They look at my advice and think it is permissive. I love the idea of the parents driving the car instead of the kids taking the parents for a ride, and I think letting the children say no thank-you at the table and make other minor decisions for themselves is exactly that. That's a shame about your sister-in-law and nephew. My best to them both. --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
wff_ng_6 wrote:
> Some years ago I read an article that likened the two approaches to a car > trip down the road of life. In the one case, the parents are driving the > car, and the kids are along for the ride, observing and learning about life. > In the other case (more like "modern" parenting), the kids are driving and > the parents are being taken for a ride. The trouble with analogies like this and labels like "modern parenting" is that they don't give enough real information about real situations to do much good. This thread is a prime example. I went into some detail about what I thought would be best for the original poster's 9 year old niece. That included not giving her have junk food but letting her refuse food, politely, that she didn't care to eat. A lot of people agreed with me or gave variations on the same advice. I'd call my advice good consistent discipline in which the parents (aunt and uncle in this case) make the lion's share of the decisions and the girl doesn't run the show. Other people don't see it that way. They look at my advice and think it is permissive. I love the idea of the parents driving the car instead of the kids taking the parents for a ride, and I think letting the children say no thank-you at the table and make other minor decisions for themselves is exactly that. That's a shame about your sister-in-law and nephew. My best to them both. --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
Curly Sue wrote:
> Right! And a lot of the comments are about child-rearing, when the OP > was asking about someone else's child who will be visiting. I did catch that distinction. The reason my posts on the subject have been about child rearing in general rather than entertaining guests in general have been because: a) The guest is a close relative, a niece. Presumably her parents have left their daughter in the hands of the aunt and uncle with the assumption that they'll act like parents towards her. I see this as no different from mother and father having slightly different rules for the kids. Kids adjust to that as they do having different rules at school. b) The original poster said they have their niece for the summer. That's a good chunk of time which further lets me think they're to act like parents during that time. --Lia |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
PENMART01 wrote:
> Real cute/smarmy *******... mixing apples, oranges, plums, pears... stay on > topic, if you can. Children are not adults, and perhaps on your > violent/lawless portion of this planet employers have absolute authority but > not in the US... in fact in the US employers and employees possess exactly > precisely equal authority, each has equal power to terminate the > relationship... and in fact far, far more employees up and quit than are > dismissed (absent a contract, binding *both*). Not so between minors and and > their respective adult legal guardians. Kamus the idiot, by his own words, > proves that he considers children chattel. I actually feel dumber after reading this... ~john |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
PENMART01 wrote:
> Real cute/smarmy *******... mixing apples, oranges, plums, pears... stay on > topic, if you can. Children are not adults, and perhaps on your > violent/lawless portion of this planet employers have absolute authority but > not in the US... in fact in the US employers and employees possess exactly > precisely equal authority, each has equal power to terminate the > relationship... and in fact far, far more employees up and quit than are > dismissed (absent a contract, binding *both*). Not so between minors and and > their respective adult legal guardians. Kamus the idiot, by his own words, > proves that he considers children chattel. I actually feel dumber after reading this... ~john |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:09:08 GMT, Julia Altshuler
> wrote: >Curly Sue wrote: >> Right! And a lot of the comments are about child-rearing, when the OP >> was asking about someone else's child who will be visiting. > > >I did catch that distinction. The reason my posts on the subject have >been about child rearing in general rather than entertaining guests in >general have been because: a) The guest is a close relative, a niece. >Presumably her parents have left their daughter in the hands of the aunt >and uncle with the assumption that they'll act like parents towards her. We wouldn't know that unless the OP said so. Maybe they assume they'll act like aunt and uncle. Of course that role is open to interpretation :> My interpretation is that visiting me is as much a vacation for the kids from their parents (and chores) as it is to give the parents some relief. I let them stay up as long as they want, buy whatever snack foods they want, watch TV and videos ad nauseum, go to toy stores, pick the outings, veto what they don't want to eat, and generally spoil them. That includes doing things that the parents won't let them do at home (eg. buying long false nails for my 10-yr old niece). My other siblings do the same for nieces and nephews. When my nephews start to act up I just whip out the camcorder, tape them misbehaving, and tell them I'm going to show the evidence to their parents. That takes care of the problem! Anyway, the kids go home with it all that stuff out of their systems, although it takes a few days to adjust to their normal routines :> I have an advantage in that we usually work out the timing of the visit so that I'm not overly caught up in work. I have the time to adjust my schedule and menus. I can see how it would be more difficult if the child was visiting when time is tight. > I see this as no different from mother and father having slightly >different rules for the kids. Kids adjust to that as they do having >different rules at school. b) The original poster said they have their >niece for the summer. (The time frame was "for a few weeks (each summer).") > That's a good chunk of time which further lets me >think they're to act like parents during that time. Ideally one would ask the parents what to do about potential problems with visiting kids or any routines that should be enforced (eg. bedtime). But for this thread, it's kind of hard to say "I think you've screwed up parenting your kid and I plan to correct it while she visits me for a few weeks." Sue(tm) Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Curly Sue" > wrote in message ... > On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:09:08 GMT, Julia Altshuler > > wrote: > > >Curly Sue wrote: > > >> Right! And a lot of the comments are about child-rearing, when the OP > >> was asking about someone else's child who will be visiting. > > > > > >I did catch that distinction. The reason my posts on the subject have > >been about child rearing in general rather than entertaining guests in > >general have been because: a) The guest is a close relative, a niece. > >Presumably her parents have left their daughter in the hands of the aunt > >and uncle with the assumption that they'll act like parents towards her. > > We wouldn't know that unless the OP said so. Maybe they assume > they'll act like aunt and uncle. > > Of course that role is open to interpretation :> My interpretation is > that visiting me is as much a vacation for the kids from their parents > (and chores) as it is to give the parents some relief. I let them > stay up as long as they want, buy whatever snack foods they want, > watch TV and videos ad nauseum, go to toy stores, pick the outings, > veto what they don't want to eat, and generally spoil them. That > includes doing things that the parents won't let them do at home (eg. > buying long false nails for my 10-yr old niece). My other siblings do > the same for nieces and nephews. When my nephews start to act up I > just whip out the camcorder, tape them misbehaving, and tell them I'm > going to show the evidence to their parents. That takes care of the > problem! Anyway, the kids go home with it all that stuff out of their > systems, although it takes a few days to adjust to their normal > routines :> > > I have an advantage in that we usually work out the timing of the > visit so that I'm not overly caught up in work. I have the time to > adjust my schedule and menus. I can see how it would be more > difficult if the child was visiting when time is tight. > > > I see this as no different from mother and father having slightly > >different rules for the kids. Kids adjust to that as they do having > >different rules at school. b) The original poster said they have their > >niece for the summer. > > (The time frame was "for a few weeks (each summer).") > > > That's a good chunk of time which further lets me > >think they're to act like parents during that time. > > Ideally one would ask the parents what to do about potential problems > with visiting kids or any routines that should be enforced (eg. > bedtime). But for this thread, it's kind of hard to say "I think > you've screwed up parenting your kid and I plan to correct it while > she visits me for a few weeks." She would be doing that fat child a favor if she did... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote in message hlink.net>...
> > Or maybe she has different goals for her children. I suppose if your > > major goal is children who do what you tell them to and never make up > > their own minds even about the most personal of decisions about what to > > put in their bodies, then she's got it right. If the goal is to create > > children who enjoy food and eating and are independent thinkers based on > > information, then she's going about it all wrong. > > Nonsense. Children do not have the wisdom to "choose what to put into their > own bodies". I cannot imagine a toddler that has more knowledge that his 30 > year old mother who's "been there, done that". "Independent thinking" comes > later, once they've been taught by their parents what is right, and what is > not. A lot later. Are you going to "punish" a toddler for not eating his Cheerios? C'mon! I can see removing a whiney or disruptive child from the table, but associating punishment with food is probably one of the worst things you could do to an child - or any animal, for that matter. That's totally ridiculous. -L. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote in message hlink.net>...
> > Or maybe she has different goals for her children. I suppose if your > > major goal is children who do what you tell them to and never make up > > their own minds even about the most personal of decisions about what to > > put in their bodies, then she's got it right. If the goal is to create > > children who enjoy food and eating and are independent thinkers based on > > information, then she's going about it all wrong. > > Nonsense. Children do not have the wisdom to "choose what to put into their > own bodies". I cannot imagine a toddler that has more knowledge that his 30 > year old mother who's "been there, done that". "Independent thinking" comes > later, once they've been taught by their parents what is right, and what is > not. A lot later. Are you going to "punish" a toddler for not eating his Cheerios? C'mon! I can see removing a whiney or disruptive child from the table, but associating punishment with food is probably one of the worst things you could do to an child - or any animal, for that matter. That's totally ridiculous. -L. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote in message hlink.net>...
> > Sorry you're not her parent. Otherwise, I'd recommend the section on picky > > eating in "The Complete Tightwad Gazette" by the mother of six in Maine, > Amy > > Dacyczyn (pronounced "decision"). She simply lets picky or slow eaters > that if > > they don't eat what's served, they will be punished - not merely ordered > to eat > > the same food later. The point, she says, is that the children do not get > to > > dominate the parent's attention at the meal and they are forced to > overcome > > their hang-ups for the general good of the family, for the sake of > respecting > > the parents' work in the kitchen, and for the sake of making the meal a > happy > > one because all are free to talk and laugh without getting stuck on petty > > issues. Oh, and she DOES praise kids for eating their most-hated > vegetables and > > she DOES give them small portions. Eventually, they all learned to enjoy > what > > they were served. > > > > Also, Dr. John Rosemond's method was to give one small spoonful of each > food on > > the plate and then tell his daughter that she had to eat everything before > she > > could have seconds of anything. I think the same pattern would then > repeat. > > Eventually, she stopped balking at vegetables. > > > > Lenona. > > Amen! to you, sister. We seems to think along the same lines - I read ( or > have read ) both of those things. The Amy Dacyzyn article is called "War and > Peas" : ) People even rose up and called her a "child abuser" because she > requires that her six children try a little of everything - things like > oatmeal and beans - not kid "WoW!" food. They don't have to eat it, but > they're not allowed to make disparaging remarks, have to sit through the > meal, and are not allowed separate food or snacks in-between meals. And they > are all very healthy. Oh, yeah. I'll bet they are all *really* healthy, mentally...I'm glad I was never her kid, LOL! > > Dr. Rosemond, too. People are screaming "child abuse!" because these sorts > of parents simply refuse to be pushed around, and are being The Parents. > Funny, I'm in my thirties, but not very long ago, The Norm ( Norm! ) was > that Mom cooks and kids eat. Now everyone's trying to please their kids and > make pals of them. Kids have pals; they *need* parents. What these parents > will wind up with is a bunch of loose cannons, and they'll wind up punishing > themselves forever because they've somehow "failed" their children when they > grow up to be a mess. You can do that without punishing your children over food. Meal time should be as stress-free as possible. Far too many Americans have issues with food already. -L. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"Marie in ME" > wrote in message hlink.net>...
> > Sorry you're not her parent. Otherwise, I'd recommend the section on picky > > eating in "The Complete Tightwad Gazette" by the mother of six in Maine, > Amy > > Dacyczyn (pronounced "decision"). She simply lets picky or slow eaters > that if > > they don't eat what's served, they will be punished - not merely ordered > to eat > > the same food later. The point, she says, is that the children do not get > to > > dominate the parent's attention at the meal and they are forced to > overcome > > their hang-ups for the general good of the family, for the sake of > respecting > > the parents' work in the kitchen, and for the sake of making the meal a > happy > > one because all are free to talk and laugh without getting stuck on petty > > issues. Oh, and she DOES praise kids for eating their most-hated > vegetables and > > she DOES give them small portions. Eventually, they all learned to enjoy > what > > they were served. > > > > Also, Dr. John Rosemond's method was to give one small spoonful of each > food on > > the plate and then tell his daughter that she had to eat everything before > she > > could have seconds of anything. I think the same pattern would then > repeat. > > Eventually, she stopped balking at vegetables. > > > > Lenona. > > Amen! to you, sister. We seems to think along the same lines - I read ( or > have read ) both of those things. The Amy Dacyzyn article is called "War and > Peas" : ) People even rose up and called her a "child abuser" because she > requires that her six children try a little of everything - things like > oatmeal and beans - not kid "WoW!" food. They don't have to eat it, but > they're not allowed to make disparaging remarks, have to sit through the > meal, and are not allowed separate food or snacks in-between meals. And they > are all very healthy. Oh, yeah. I'll bet they are all *really* healthy, mentally...I'm glad I was never her kid, LOL! > > Dr. Rosemond, too. People are screaming "child abuse!" because these sorts > of parents simply refuse to be pushed around, and are being The Parents. > Funny, I'm in my thirties, but not very long ago, The Norm ( Norm! ) was > that Mom cooks and kids eat. Now everyone's trying to please their kids and > make pals of them. Kids have pals; they *need* parents. What these parents > will wind up with is a bunch of loose cannons, and they'll wind up punishing > themselves forever because they've somehow "failed" their children when they > grow up to be a mess. You can do that without punishing your children over food. Meal time should be as stress-free as possible. Far too many Americans have issues with food already. -L. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:46:30 +0000, Marie in ME wrote:
> Nonsense. Children do not have the wisdom to "choose what to put into their > own bodies". I cannot imagine a toddler that has more knowledge that his 30 > year old mother who's "been there, done that". "Independent thinking" comes > later, once they've been taught by their parents what is right, and what is > not. A lot later. Actually.... Given a choice of decent foods, kids do in fact have the wisdom. My 3 year old can choose between carrots and apples, cauliflower and broccoli. He can go in the fridge and get a cup of yogurt. The key is that as parents we have to present them with a variety of good alternatives, and set the example. If I snack on chips, pork rinds, and soda, and tell my kid he has to eat carrots because "they're good for you", he's going to refuse. But if I eat carrots, he'll eat carrots, and won't even think about it. But give your kids choices, then let them choose. In my house, it doesn't matter what they snack on, because we don't have chips and soda in the house. All we have for snacks are fruit, veggies, yogurt, and the occasional 'cookie bar' - a granola and fruit bar of some sort. So we let them choose their own snacks. That develops independent thinking. Independent thinking doesn't descend from on high when they hit puberty; it's developed and nurtured by allowing decision making within the scope of a child's ability. --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 18:46:30 +0000, Marie in ME wrote:
> Nonsense. Children do not have the wisdom to "choose what to put into their > own bodies". I cannot imagine a toddler that has more knowledge that his 30 > year old mother who's "been there, done that". "Independent thinking" comes > later, once they've been taught by their parents what is right, and what is > not. A lot later. Actually.... Given a choice of decent foods, kids do in fact have the wisdom. My 3 year old can choose between carrots and apples, cauliflower and broccoli. He can go in the fridge and get a cup of yogurt. The key is that as parents we have to present them with a variety of good alternatives, and set the example. If I snack on chips, pork rinds, and soda, and tell my kid he has to eat carrots because "they're good for you", he's going to refuse. But if I eat carrots, he'll eat carrots, and won't even think about it. But give your kids choices, then let them choose. In my house, it doesn't matter what they snack on, because we don't have chips and soda in the house. All we have for snacks are fruit, veggies, yogurt, and the occasional 'cookie bar' - a granola and fruit bar of some sort. So we let them choose their own snacks. That develops independent thinking. Independent thinking doesn't descend from on high when they hit puberty; it's developed and nurtured by allowing decision making within the scope of a child's ability. --Kamus |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
So, I have been trying the "eat from whats on the table" approach. It
seems to work as advertised. Hunger is indeed powerful. Of course the kid avoids veggies as much as humanly possible-- to the point of attempting to pick out chopped up peppers mixed-in with soy chili (which she believes is meat). I try not to make faces. The new problem is that because she eats so little, she is now ravenous between meals and demands snacks-- usually soda and sweets. I don't give in unless it is veggies. On the plus side, she is eating things like naan and whole wheat bread-- last summer she would have shrieked at the sight. Now I am thinking that if I can get her to like a few new foods, it will work in her "affective domain" and allow her to try more new (and hopefully healthier) foods in the future. Thanks again to all, -H. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
So, I have been trying the "eat from whats on the table" approach. It
seems to work as advertised. Hunger is indeed powerful. Of course the kid avoids veggies as much as humanly possible-- to the point of attempting to pick out chopped up peppers mixed-in with soy chili (which she believes is meat). I try not to make faces. The new problem is that because she eats so little, she is now ravenous between meals and demands snacks-- usually soda and sweets. I don't give in unless it is veggies. On the plus side, she is eating things like naan and whole wheat bread-- last summer she would have shrieked at the sight. Now I am thinking that if I can get her to like a few new foods, it will work in her "affective domain" and allow her to try more new (and hopefully healthier) foods in the future. Thanks again to all, -H. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
(H) wrote in message om>... > Hi, > > My 9 year-old niece is visiting us for the summer. She has always been > an active and skinny kid, but this year I noticed that she gained a > lot of weight-- not obese, but definately a big belly for her age. > > We have her for a few weeks every summer. What strategies can we try > to at least get her to try some good foods? Recipes, perparation > ideas, etc..? > Is she constipated? Pregnant? Hey, it happens, yanno. http://www.shortnews.com/shownews.cfm?id=40574 If she's not pregnant (and I doubt she is), her fat tummy may merely be a sign of prepuberty or puberty. People get so freaked out about !!!fat!!! these days, they forget that weight fluctuations are often a normal part of a child's development, especially as puberty nears. Just a thought. As for getting her to try some "good" foods or at least expand her eating horizons for the short term, I'd suggest getting her involved in the menu planning, shopping, and food preparation. For ideas, check out some healthy eating web sites. This one is for younger children, but you might find some ideas you both can live with the http://www.healthyweightforkids.org/eat.htm There are also cookbooks aimed at families with kids. I think Emeril has one. Good luck. Have fun. Agnes (whose 7-yr old who abhors condiments and loves broccoli only recently decided corn is edible) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
(H) wrote in message om>... > Hi, > > My 9 year-old niece is visiting us for the summer. She has always been > an active and skinny kid, but this year I noticed that she gained a > lot of weight-- not obese, but definately a big belly for her age. > > We have her for a few weeks every summer. What strategies can we try > to at least get her to try some good foods? Recipes, perparation > ideas, etc..? > Is she constipated? Pregnant? Hey, it happens, yanno. http://www.shortnews.com/shownews.cfm?id=40574 If she's not pregnant (and I doubt she is), her fat tummy may merely be a sign of prepuberty or puberty. People get so freaked out about !!!fat!!! these days, they forget that weight fluctuations are often a normal part of a child's development, especially as puberty nears. Just a thought. As for getting her to try some "good" foods or at least expand her eating horizons for the short term, I'd suggest getting her involved in the menu planning, shopping, and food preparation. For ideas, check out some healthy eating web sites. This one is for younger children, but you might find some ideas you both can live with the http://www.healthyweightforkids.org/eat.htm There are also cookbooks aimed at families with kids. I think Emeril has one. Good luck. Have fun. Agnes (whose 7-yr old who abhors condiments and loves broccoli only recently decided corn is edible) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
> If she's not pregnant (and I doubt she is), her fat tummy may merely be a sign > of prepuberty or puberty. People get so freaked out about !!!fat!!! these > days, they forget that weight fluctuations are often a normal part of a child's > development, especially as puberty nears. Just a thought. Fat is unhealthy, unappealing, nasty, and socially devastating. She'd be doing that fat child a favor if she put her foot down. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"G. Wood" > wrote in message news  > > > If she's not pregnant (and I doubt she is), her fat tummy may merely be a > sign > > of prepuberty or puberty. People get so freaked out about !!!fat!!! these > > days, they forget that weight fluctuations are often a normal part of a > child's > > development, especially as puberty nears. Just a thought. > > Fat is unhealthy, unappealing, nasty, and socially devastating. She'd be > doing that fat child a favor if she put her foot down. > Bingo. Tell the little tart that she will eat what's on the table, or she won't eat. Don't cave in to any whining and crabbing. And while you're at it, you might have a talk with her about fatness. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
9 year old won't eat healthy foods
"G. Wood" > wrote in message news > > > If she's not pregnant (and I doubt she is), her fat tummy may merely be a > sign > > of prepuberty or puberty. People get so freaked out about !!!fat!!! these > > days, they forget that weight fluctuations are often a normal part of a > child's > > development, especially as puberty nears. Just a thought. > > Fat is unhealthy, unappealing, nasty, and socially devastating. She'd be > doing that fat child a favor if she put her foot down. > Bingo. Tell the little tart that she will eat what's on the table, or she won't eat. Don't cave in to any whining and crabbing. And while you're at it, you might have a talk with her about fatness. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Healthy Foods you can Fry | General Cooking | |||
| Healthy Foods to Prevent Diabetes | Diabetic | |||
| healthy foods | Diabetic | |||
| delicious and healthy foods | General Cooking | |||
| about 9-year-old who won't eat healthy food | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
