WWYD - Other People's Kids

[kaytieeldr]

For goodness sakes, read the freaking thread or shut it! That has been discussed AT LENGTH. The point isn't that she MADE the sweet potatoes,

Okay, well, first - thank you for the suggestion, but I did ultimately read the entire thread, between 6:45 and 7:45 (i.e. posts 157 and 160).

However, may I please point out - what you quoted was a QUESTION? In addition, as stated above, my question was in response to the post stating, "...Also, I don't understand why you made something you knew she doesn't like...". Here's my guess: the OP made sweet potatoes because the niece wasn't the only person eating the meal and the other person/s dining do like, or at least eat, sweet potatoes.

 

[MushyMushy]

Who the heck is Kari?

I'm glad I wasn't the only one wondering who Kari is.

 

[HighClass]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one wondering who Kari is.

This happens on every thread that poster posts on

She should say "my friend Kari" .

 

[aprilgail2]

I honestly don't see the point of forcing a child to eat a food that they do not like.

Why would you tell a child the only way she could receive a treat is to eat something she doesn’t like?

What were you trying to prove?

I think you should just let it go and not play games with food in the future.

If my aunt made me eat three bites of something I didn't want *even if it was something I;d never tried and MIGHT like) I'd make sure she never babysat for me again. NEVER use food as a punishment, which is what you did by giving her the try it or get no dessert tactic.

My piece of advise is not to get into food battles with other people's kids. It's not up to YOU to make her eat "three bites" or anything else for that matter. You will NEVER win a food battle because the ability to eat or not eat anything rests with the child.

Yes. Yes I would have told the parents the situation. Because I would expect that, were the situation reversed, my child's caregiver would report any breach of our rules (such as no lying) to me. HOWEVER, as the parent I would also want to know both sides of the story before the word "lie" was ever used. Sometimes what we see as a lie, a child sees as a tough decision. As the caregiver, I would have told the parents in a simple way what happened, and let the parent make the judgment call.

"I thought you should know what happened with your DD. She did not care for one of the foods I served her at dinner. Even though I knew she did not care for the sweet potatoes, I asked her to eat three bites and told her that if she chose not to eat three bites, she would not get dessert. Later I found her sweet potato in the trash wrapped in a napkin."

See how that is non-confrontational? It doesn't put any blame on the child, the parent, or the caregiver (yourself). Simply present the facts. Let the parent do the parenting.

\.

I would have just laughed at that point if it had been my daughter. I know how picky she is and I warn people not to bother making things for her if she stays someplace, I will send her with a jar of peanut butter and some yogurt and that is what she will eat if I am not there to cook for her. She eats limited things like grilled chicken (she hates fried chicken and nuggets) and either artichokes, asparagus or snow peas...those are her veggies she likes. I would really hope that where ever she was eating they would not try to force her to eat things she does not like, if I thought the person would do something like that I would not send her there ever. As far as hiding it in a napkin, if someone put meat or fish or anything "raw" on my plate and told me to eat them or I couldn't get up I would hide them in my napkin or anyplace else I could just to shut the person up!
As far as the fruit salad, that is not a dessert here, its healthy and would be put on her dinner plate to eat with grilled chicken or something like that. Why not put that on her plate with her dinner rather than trying to force feed her a starch which really isn't as healthy??

 

[NHdisneylover]

I agree she's a picky eater (obvious from the OP's description ), but I disagree she ate the chicken to please her aunt. She ate it because it's (apparently) one of the few foods she will eat. Notice, the OP doesn't say anything about liking chicken thighs herself - she made them because she knows her niece will eat them.

OP said the girl only likes fried chicken and did not care for the way this chicken (not fried) was prepared but ate it anyway. I can see that being to please the aunt (or get the aunt off her back--depending on how you are reading the rest of the situation)

 

[lulu71]

Food should NEVER be a battleground issue with kids.

 

[allison443]

And, to the PP, the foods she eats are: chips, popcorn, plain white bread, and fried chicken (the chicken I made was baked and she even fussed over that because it wasn't what she was used to). So while it is technically more than chips, there will never be a dinner I make that she will willingly and readily eat unless it is only chicken fingers and chips.

Well, she eats fruit too, right, because you said she ate fruit salad... So that night she ate baked chicken and fruit. That's not bad for a picky eater!

OP maybe you could check with the parents if they want a three-bite rule enforced. If this thread is any indication, many parents have strong opinions on that rule and it would probably best if it were consistently applied.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

You asked for help so don't be offended with my answer. You said that you knowingly prepared something that a child would not eat. You (the older and larger person) put a child in a position where she was backed into a corner. How would you react when backed into a corner by a more powerful person? I know that I would do whatever I had to do to get out of that corner!

You were right in not "calling her out" or in telling her parents that she lied. You created the situation that caused her to lie.

My MIL played the mind games with food with my DD#2 (picky eater). It turns out that DD's aversion to tastes/textures was a result of undiagnosed allergies. I'm not saying that is the situation with your cousin but it is in NO WAY your place to manipulate a child's behavior with food. If her eating or lack of eating is causing "stressful moments" then you may want to reconsider watching this child. This could potentially cause damage to your relationship with her in the future just as it did with my MIL and DD.

The last time my MIL used food to bully my child was the last time my child was ever alone with MIL. DD was 4. MIL prepared a dish she KNEW DD would refuse. She did it intentionally to teach DD a lesson and to prove that MIL was the boss. DD refused. MIL yelled at her, denied her dessert but required that she watch my other DD eat dessert, and then sent her to bed outrageously early. MIL to this day will talk about how funny it was when DD refused to eat. MIL is quite proud of how she treated DD.

I hope she continues to hold that proud feeling close to her heart because she traded that proud feeling for a relationship with her DGD. My DD at age 12 refuses to have anything to do with MIL because in her words she is "a bully". One food battle over 8 years ago is still a reason for DD to resent and have no trust in MIL. DD may not remember specifics but she does remember how MIL made her feel.

MIL won the battle that night but lost any and all respect my DD will ever have for her. I think it's kind of sad. I don't wish the same on you.

Ok, I really have to call you out on this.

What you're telling me is that your mother in law made a mistake with your daughter over 8 years ago and that's the reason you are encouraging your daughter to not like her grandmother and call her a bully?

My MIL makes mistakes with my daughters all the time. I try really, really hard to communicate with her and to continue to foster a good relationship between her and my daughters, despite attitudes and behaviors she has that I don't agree with.

My MIL used to say "We don't get up from the table because we're members of the Clean Plate Club" to my kids. I explained to her that it's not good for them to be forced to clean their plate-that they can stop eating when they're not hungry, as long as they're clear that if they get hungry an hour later, then we pull the plate out of the fridge and let them eat that, not be short order cooks. She was willing to come to that compromise-the Maybe Eventually Clean Plate Club.

My point is here that your MIL may not understand that her attitudes hurt your child. It is YOUR obligation to bring your MIL around to parenting the way YOU want your child parented, she's doing what she thinks is right, and unless you communicate with her in a supportive and caring way, she will continue to behave the way she always has.

Your attitude towards your MIL certainly IS hurting both your child and your MIL. (and let me put a disclaimer here that I am not an MIL myself-I'm 39).

**Disclaimer: I have not nor will I go back and read the last 47,000 pages***

Lord, don't even freaking get me started with this issue again.

 

[GoldieSaysMeep]

Wow.

I only read the first page of replies but wow...

How many of us were forced to eat stuff we didn't like as kids? I sure was. And dessert was withheld if you didn't eat your veggies. It was just how it was.

Kids are coddled way too much today, IMO. If you tried to tell my mom or any of my friends moms that kids should get dessert even if they don't eat their real food, they would laugh out loud at the idea.

Unless there is a certified food allergy, the kid should eat the healthy food.

As for the real issue, the lying, I would certainly tell the parents that the child lied. Lying needs to be addressed because if she starts lying now, who knows what she'll lie about later. Of course, if the parents let her live off of chips who knows if they'll care.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Sorry kickapooo, but IMHO you have NO right call anyone out.

The poster clearly explained the situation, and she wrote:
The last time my MIL used food to bully my child was the last time my child was ever alone with MIL. DD was 4. MIL prepared a dish she KNEW DD would refuse. She did it intentionally to teach DD a lesson and to prove that MIL was the boss. DD refused. MIL yelled at her, denied her dessert but required that she watch my other DD eat dessert, and then sent her to bed outrageously early. MIL to this day will talk about how funny it was when DD refused to eat. MIL is quite proud of how she treated DD.

This is NOT a mistake, this is an unacceptable, purposeful, cruel, toxic, controlling, disrespectful (of both the child, and the OP as the parent)

As another one of those people who have had to limit my DS one-on-one time with my MIL, I can say, without a doubt, that there is such a thing as toxic relatives/inlaws, and that what was described is the perfect classic example.

There are two issues here.
1. Food, and forcing one to put something into their mouth/body, should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER become a control issue.

2. NOBODY, not even (and especially) grandparents and inlaws, have the right to purposefully go against a parents wishes... Not your child, not your right, not your jurisdiction, period.

 

[Wishing on a star]

It is YOUR obligation to bring your MIL around to parenting the way YOU want your child parented.

This has got to be one of the very worst comments on this thread, or anywhere on the DIS.

And, boy is it ever bass-ackwards.
It is anyone else's responsibility to respect a parents wishes.

Nobody can, or should, try to control another persons actions or attitudes. (or what they put in their mouth!!!)
Only their reaction to them.

(Which is exactly what this poster did, after trying to communicate her parental wishes to her MIL)

If MIL's attitudes and actions regarding the child are not appropriate (which they clearly were not) then the OP's choice was to limit her child's exposure and the MIL's opportunity to mis-treat her child.

Been there, done that... the MIL instituted a toxic and negative power struggle with the child, and with the poster as the parent.
This poster absolutely did the right thing.... when communication/negotiation failed, simply withdraw from the battle.

Been there, done that...
My life is NOT a battlefield with my MIL.
Nobody should have to live like that.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

This has got to be one of the very worst comments on this thread, or anywhere on the DIS.

And, boy is it ever bass-ackwards.

Nobody can, or should, try to control another persons actions or attitudes. (or what they put in their mouth!!!)
Only their reaction to them.

(Which is exactly what this poster did, after trying to communicate her parental wishes to her MIL)

If MIL's attitudes and actions regarding the child are not appropriate (which they clearly were not) then the OP's choice was to limit her child's exposure and the MIL's opportunity to mis-treat her child.

Been there, done that... the MIL instituted a toxic and negative power struggle with the child, and with the poster as the parent.
This poster absolutely did the right thing.... when communication/negotiation failed, simply withdraw from the battle.

Been there, done that...
My life is NOT a battlefield with my MIL.
Nobody should have to live like that.

If the poster thinks that sacrificing a familial relationship was worth it, then that's fine. I just don't think that people are aware of exactly what they're sacrificing.

I also believe that a lot of times people don't realize how their actions affect others-many, many people who have posted on this thread have had problems with relatives and food.

If we don't work to correct this behavior in a calm, friendly manner, then it will be perpetuated.

And wishing on a star, your manner is neither calm nor friendly.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

Wow.

I only read the first page of replies but wow...

How many of us were forced to eat stuff we didn't like as kids? I sure was. And dessert was withheld if you didn't eat your veggies. It was just how it was.

Kids are coddled way too much today, IMO. If you tried to tell my mom or any of my friends moms that kids should get dessert even if they don't eat their real food, they would laugh out loud at the idea.

Unless there is a certified food allergy, the kid should eat the healthy food. As for the real issue, the lying, I would certainly tell the parents that the child lied. Lying needs to be addressed because if she starts lying now, who knows what she'll lie about later. Of course, if the parents let her live off of chips who knows if they'll care.

I totally agree that too many kids run the show these days. However, the child does not like sweet potatoes. The OP deliberately made them knowing the kid doesn't like them and then forced her to eat them. There are plenty of other healthy options out there. The dessert in question was fruit salad not chocolate cake. The fruit is much healthier than the potato. I would have given the kid the fruit as part of dinner.
My kids will try anything on the table. That is OUR rule. If they are at someone else's house they can decline eating something politely if they want. I do not want any person to insist that my kids eat anything they don't want to. It is not their place to police their food. This was the OP's way of trying to show the parents that she knows better than them and will get their kid in control.
As for the lying- I do agree that lying needs to be addressed but why does the adult get to be a bully and the child has to suck it up? I would never support lying but I feel the child had no other choice. The child made it very clear that they did not like one of the items that was served yet she was still forced to eat it. That is bullying. YMMV.

 

[WriteDisney]

This has got to be one of the very worst comments on this thread, or anywhere on the DIS.

And, boy is it ever bass-ackwards.
It is anyone else's responsibility to respect a parents wishes.

Nobody can, or should, try to control another persons actions or attitudes. (or what they put in their mouth!!!)
Only their reaction to them.

(Which is exactly what this poster did, after trying to communicate her parental wishes to her MIL)

If MIL's attitudes and actions regarding the child are not appropriate (which they clearly were not) then the OP's choice was to limit her child's exposure and the MIL's opportunity to mis-treat her child.

Been there, done that... the MIL instituted a toxic and negative power struggle with the child, and with the poster as the parent.
This poster absolutely did the right thing.... when communication/negotiation failed, simply withdraw from the battle.

Been there, done that...
My life is NOT a battlefield with my MIL.
Nobody should have to live like that.

I totally agree with this!!

 

[sbell111]

If the poster thinks that sacrificing a familial relationship was worth it, then that's fine. I just don't think that people are aware of exactly what they're sacrificing.

I also believe that a lot of times people don't realize how their actions affect others-many, many people who have posted on this thread have had problems with relatives and food.

If we don't work to correct this behavior in a calm, friendly manner, then it will be perpetuated.

And wishing on a star, your manner is neither calm nor friendly.

I disagree with Wishing on a Star somewhat often, but this time, I think he (she, they, it, whatever) is right on the money.

As parents, it is our responsiblity to ensure that our children are being treated in a manner that we believe is appropriate. If someone (anyone) fails to treat our children as we prescribe, it is our duty to try to get them to change their behavior. If they fail to get in line, it is our duty as parents to remove that person and their harmful behavior.

I reject the idea that a parent who protects his/her child from this bad behavior is at fault for 'sacrificing the familial relationship'. The fault lies with the individual who refused to curb his/her bad behavior.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

If MIL's attitudes and actions regarding the child are not appropriate (which they clearly were not) then the OP's choice was to limit her child's exposure and the MIL's opportunity to mis-treat her child.

There is a third option, one which, given the tone of your previous posts, you clearly do not choose to employ.

It is to communicate calmly and supportively with the MIL about your feelings on the subject and how you would like your child to be treated, without being confrontational or shaming the mother in law.

The mother in law's beliefs and opinions are valid *to her*. The problem lies not in the mother in law, but in the disconnect between her beliefs and yours.

If the PP wants to have a good relationship with the MIL and her daughter, then she needs to do work with the MIL to rebuild a relationship where she, the daughter, and the MIL all feel validated and supported.

It's too easy to just label people bullies and monsters and throw them away.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

I disagree with Wishing on a Star somewhat often, but this time, I think he (she, they, it, whatever) is right on the money.

As parents, it is our responsiblity to ensure that our children are being treated in a manner that we believe is appropriate. If someone (anyone) fails to treat our children as we prescribe, it is our duty to try to get them to change their behavior. If they fail to get in line, it is our duty as parents to remove that person and their harmful behavior.

I reject the idea that a parent who protects his/her child from this bad behavior is at fault for 'sacrificing the familial relationship'. The fault lies with the individual who refused to curb his/her bad behavior.

I agree with you. But at no point did WOAS suggest this option to try and get them to change.

I agree that your ultimate priority is protecting your children. Anybody who has read other posts by me knows that I am fiercely protective of my daughters.

However, assuming from the get-go that MIL's bad behavior is motivated by an evil desire to destroy your children is ignorant and selfish.

Re-read cathy_s's post, she mentioned that her MIL was "proud" of the incident. Nowhere does it mentions where cathy_s took that opportunity to have a dialogue with the mother in law to correct that impression.

You can't assume that people know what you're thinking; if you don't clearly say "MIL, I need to talk with you about that incident, I know you meant well by trying to teach DD the eating habits you taught DH, but I need you to understand that DD was very hurt and upset by the incident, and I want to talk with you more about it so we can make sure that everyone's happy," then MIL will never have an inkling that what she did was not a triumph of old school parenting.

 

[sbell111]

I agree with you. But at no point did WOAS suggest this option to try and get them to change.

I agree that your ultimate priority is protecting your children. Anybody who has read other posts by me knows that I am fiercely protective of my daughters.

However, assuming from the get-go that MIL's bad behavior is motivated by an evil desire to destroy your children is ignorant and selfish.

Re-read cathy_s's post, she mentioned that her MIL was "proud" of the incident. Nowhere does it mentions where cathy_s took that opportunity to have a dialogue with the mother in law to correct that impression.

You can't assume that people know what you're thinking; if you don't clearly say "MIL, I need to talk with you about that incident, I know you meant well by trying to teach DD the eating habits you taught DH, but I need you to understand that DD was very hurt and upset by the incident, and I want to talk with you more about it so we can make sure that everyone's happy," then MIL will never have an inkling that what she did was not a triumph of old school parenting.

We are both making assumptions. You are assuming that Cathy or her husband never spoke to MIL. I assume that they did.

You also appear to be taking the position that MIL's motivations for her bad behavior matter. I submit that they do not.

 

[ols386]

Wow.

I only read the first page of replies but wow...

How many of us were forced to eat stuff we didn't like as kids? I sure was. And dessert was withheld if you didn't eat your veggies. It was just how it was.
Kids are coddled way too much today, IMO. If you tried to tell my mom or any of my friends moms that kids should get dessert even if they don't eat their real food, they would laugh out loud at the idea.

Unless there is a certified food allergy, the kid should eat the healthy food.

As for the real issue, the lying, I would certainly tell the parents that the child lied. Lying needs to be addressed because if she starts lying now, who knows what she'll lie about later. Of course, if the parents let her live off of chips who knows if they'll care.

This is exactly the way it was at our house when I was growing up!

 

[GoldieSaysMeep]

Who the heck is Kari?

I think Kari is her partner or roommate, not sure which. I assume girlfriend. I assume an adult.

IMO, when I read this:

To this day, if we go some place new or I cook something different, I will make Kari try it. And I have to lay down the rules, you must chew it at least twice, and it must be swallowed. Then she make take the biggest drink possible to get the taste out of her mouth. And surprisingly enough she has discovered two things she likes, 1 corn and 2 chedder cheese soup from canada.

I tried to imagine my bf's reaction or my reaction if we ever pulled this on each other. We'd just look at the other, blankly. Then again, we wouldn't do this. IMO, there is a difference between a child being fussy and an adult.