題:
即使已經吃飽了，也要讓孩子吃完飯
Zaenille
2014-11-06 13:25:23 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

小時候，即使我已經吃飽了，父母也總是讓我吃完飯。絕對不會這樣浪費食物，但是暴飲暴食也不好。

出於這個問題，不要理會孩子的食物偏好（即，他不會僅僅因為他不喜歡食物而吃完飯）

這裡似乎有很多變量。孩子首先控制吃多少食物嗎？這個孩子真的吃飽了嗎，還是他或她剛吃過垃圾？未能完成食物會帶來什麼樣的後果？
I would worry a bit about food being considered a 'discipline' issue.
I'm glad this question is asking *if* it's appropriate, and not immediately assuming that it is.
How old is this example child?
Mark, what do you mean by "making/forcing"?
AilihsggdkCMT let's say he's 3-14 years old (or so?). The important thing here is that he understands that his parents give off negative reactions with one of his behaviours, which is not finishing his food.
AiliukjxbsCMT although I meant this as a general question, I think the most common case would be the "do or be scolded" type of "making/forcing".
Now I remember what my mother used to always say when I don't finish my food. It's the typical "There are children out there with no food on their plates, and you should be grateful" argument. It's not like they'll stop being hungry if **I** eat this!
I see only two cases when this *might* be acceptable: 1: if THEY (the child) added more food than they can eat, as a reminder to not over-estimate how much they intend to eat, but even then you don't to force-feed them. 2: if they ASK for dessert/etc. before they are finished with their plate. There is a 3rd case, which is where the child may not be able to eat in the future, but I find this unacceptable and should not be "fixed" by force-feeding them.
六 答案:
user3326185
2014-11-06 14:22:42 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

優點....沒有

缺點...它與孩子產生了不必要的衝突，並損害了孩子根據營養需求自行調節食物攝入量的自然能力。只要為兒童提供健康食品（沒有垃圾食品），他們就自然會吃他們需要的東西，而不再吃。強迫他們完成自己的盤子可能會導致進食障礙和/或以後的生活中肥胖。它告訴孩子應該吃食物是因為那裡有食物，而不是因為他們需要食物。

這種防止食物浪費的觀念完全是胡說八道。如果孩子吃的東西超出了他們的要求，那麼食物將被浪費掉，因為身體無法有效利用食物。它要么將其存儲為脂肪，要么只是將其通過未正確消化的食物。

“我知道你已經吃飽了，但是我在盤子上放了太多食物，如果你沒吃完，這會讓我看起來很糟糕，所以請強迫自己吃掉多餘的食物……把它放在冰箱裡是太像辛苦了”。
Outside the scope of the original question, but this is not a great answer if the child is very fussy. They may then not eat "what they need and no more", which complicates the issue somewhat.
I'd say if its rice or potatoes are what left then its ok but if it's only broccoli is what's left in plate then that vegetable needs to be stuffed in even if there is "no space". Because if dessert was offered the stomach would definitely find some free space for it.
Self-regulatory function of food intake of body is a joke. It hardly ever makes you crave for proteins. It does however make you crave for sweets even though you don't need them and even though you already had plenty of it. The self regulatory function is the first thing which if not put under control will give you diabetes.
However well or bad self-regulatory food intake works or however much it needs to be controlled, what does "eat after you are already full" teach? Learning that may be useful if reserves are required (food-shortage possibly ahead), but with more food just a few hours away anyway, why bother teaching to eat more than your body wants? PS: I have had protein and vitamin cravings...
絕對有一個優勢：正如TRiG的答案所提到的那樣，他們將學會從鍋中攝取比他們需要的食物更多的食物。
我唯一要補充的一點是，如果孩子沒有真正吃飽，但會節省甜點空間嗎？使他們在吃甜食之前多吃一點是一個優勢，因為他們會得到更健康的食物。
AiliijtikkCMT The question is about a child not eating more because they're full, not because they don't like what's left on the plate. (Granted, it's hard for anyone other than the child to tell which is really the reason but, hey, if the child is full, they won't be wanting dessert, right?)
AilioyicjyCMT That's why you don't put sweets on the plate.
我一般都同意你的看法，但是“優勢：沒有人”對我不利。如果您不打算考慮雙方，並且可以自由選擇不這樣做，或者如果您真的認為沒有優勢，那麼請考慮人們這樣做的各種原因，並明確辯論它們。
AiliuoefriCMT but broccoli is the wrong shape to fit in the cake slice shaped hole in my tummy. :D
I have to agree with Joe, there are advantages. For example, food they've scooped out themselves. As a kid, we were broke. We couldn't afford to waste food, because this was tomorrows supper too. My mother scooped out a reasonable portion we had to finish, and except when sick or something, I never didn't finish it. It was small enough we almost always dished out a second helping. That second helping had to be finished because *we chose the size of the helping*. Knowing we had to finish whatever we took made us consider what the appropriate size was for ourselves, a valuable lesson to learn!!
TRiG
2014-11-06 20:47:20 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

這是我媽媽對我們所做的（對年幼的孩子不起作用；我不記得她那時所做的事情）：

我們從沒吃過飯。它用煮過的鍋來到桌子上，然後放在一塊木頭上（以免燒桌子）。然後，我們從那個鍋（或那些鍋，平底鍋，視食物的種類而定）中服務自己。並鼓勵我們採取小小的幫助：採取大的幫助，一半的食物在您吃之前是冷的。

總結一下：

您可以幫自己一個小

em>金額。然後吃。然後，您可以自由返回幾秒鐘。還有三分。有時也四分之三。但是，您始終要清理盤子。

好處：任何剩菜都還留在鍋中，沒有從盤子上刮下來，因此每個人在下頓飯時再次出現時都很高興。沒有浪費任何食物。

其他好處：您將學習判斷自己是否有飢餓感，並為自己提供適量的份量。

為我們工作。

+1 for practicality and not sticking to stupid preconceived notions for their own sake.
嗯，不是投票贊成還是投票反對，而是從心理學的角度來看，我*期望*（並不是說一定如此），如果您少吃很多，平均而言，您會吃得更多。但是，這很可能僅適用於習慣於大量進食的人。
+1，在浪費食物的文化中非常酷。它在“不要浪費食物”中添加消息“僅進食以保持健康”。沒有人會吃飽肚子的陳舊糖果（或純鹼），因為他們對“浪費”感到內feel。是的，我見過苗條的室友將它強加給超重的室友。
I like this for a lot of reasons and think I'm going to start doing this at my house. Doesn't work as well with hot dogs or other pre-sized servings, but that's not our mainstay anyway.
+1我還想指出，許多動物也只會殺死他們打算吃的東西，因此，這不僅是人類的最佳行為。
@DavidMulder,我從很多“專家”那裡聽到，僅僅花費更多的時間來進餐，就可以使您的身體有足夠的時間來表示吃飽之前已經吃飽了。在拋出較小的部分時，不得不返回更多部分只會增加時間。但是從心理學的角度來看，如果您有一堆東西，那麼浪費它會讓您感到內gui。您可能會急於完成它以繼續進行下一個（更好的）項目。
AiligyujkuCMT Regarding the first, the time it takes to get a second portion is at the most 2 minutes, that's not going to make any difference. And regarding your last point... don't think I even get it. If you have a large portion you *feel* like you ate lots, if you have lots of small portions you *feel* like you ate little... at least, as I said before, that's the case for some of us.
industry7
2014-11-06 22:26:03 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

查找有關此研究的信息非常容易。要點是，如果您強迫孩子吃盤子上的所有東西，那麼他們成年後更可能變得肥胖。搞砸了，所以...請不要對您的孩子這樣做。

“新發現表明，促使孩子們吃盤子上的所有東西都與肥胖直接相關。明尼蘇達大學一項研究表明，強迫飲食與孩子成年後不健康的飲食習慣有關。有趣的是，雖然這些孩子當時體重正常，但這種情況在以後的生活中會有所改變。” - http://www.dietsinreview.com/diet_column/04/forcing-kids-to-clean-their-plate-may-cause-obesity-study-suggests/#18YHSxWgA2Pqu83z.99 >

This was something that came in with rationing in WWII. Before that it was courteous to leave food on your plate (you are too generous!).
AilitmsttiCMT Wow I looked into this and apparently there was something called the "Clean Plate Club" in the 1940s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Plate_Club
@m-dudley-同時，科學的任務是生產更多的食物，更多的營養素（甚至卡路里），並持續更長的時間，然後教會我們始終清除盤子。難怪我們在第一世界發生了肥胖危機。
Joe
2014-11-07 00:56:36 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

通常，“致”的原因是在很大程度上處於抑鬱症的擔憂中，即您將來可能沒有足夠的營養/卡路里。從字面上看，您需要吃掉它，否則您可能會餓死。這在30年代是一個問題，後來養育的人們經常將其牢記在心，並在孩子出生的50年代和60年代將其保留下來。

也就是說，還有一個值得解決的問題。孩子們通常不喜歡吃晚餐，因為：

  • 他們想玩
  • 他們想吃甜點
  • 他們不想嘗試新事物

所有這些事物都很重要，需要作為單獨的問題來解決（我們對此有很多疑問）。不過，“您必須完成一頓飯”不可能是正確的答案。

我們有兩個健康的孩子（既不胖也不苗條，身高在其年齡的80-90％內），請參見其他答案。除非有甜點，否則我們大多不擔心他們吃多少東西。在那種情況下，我們強制執行最低要求，但是最低要求卻相對較低-根據原則（我們告訴他們），如果他們根本不餓，他們也不應吃甜點。

這不是最佳選擇，但我們不希望他們跳過所有的營養食品。但是，幾乎不需要做這件事，因為我們a）給他們吃美味的食物，b）努力教給他們為什麼吃晚餐。我們還要求他們在用餐期間一直在飯桌上吃飯，無論他們吃多少，這有時可能很麻煩，但對我們來說還可以。

+1是關於甜點的評論，您不希望他們跳過所有的營養食品。
Marc
2014-11-07 00:18:18 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

您將與孩子有糾紛。那是不可避免的，因此您應該避免在不必要的時候創建它們。

我經常問自己：“這是一場值得贏得的戰鬥嗎？”如果答案是否定的，那麼我認為這不是問題。我認為“清潔盤子”就是這種情況。

Jason
2014-11-07 00:34:27 UTC
view on stackexchange narkive permalink

我們與我們的兩個孩子（吃了兩歲的孩子仍在爭奪更多食物）進行了激烈的鬥爭，我們不得不偶爾強迫這個問題。請記住以下幾點：

  1. 我們的孩子都非常苗條，被認為體重很輕。他們的醫生鼓勵我們竭盡所能，以獲取更多的卡路里（如果我們有時讓他們早點停止，他們通常會抱怨後來餓了）
  2. 即使如此，我們從來沒有強迫他們“清理自己的盤子”。與他們的身體正常運作所需的營養量相比，食物中的食物量是任意的。
    3. ol>

    因此，讓孩子多吃的“好處”是有時候，您比孩子知道更多對他們的身體真正有益的東西，但是除非您得到醫生的建議，否則您不必假設這是什麼。 。如果他們有足夠的營養並且吃飽了，沒有理由強迫孩子吃東西。

Depends what you mean by "force the issue". Hoping you don't mean literally force-feeding. "Force-feeding includes a spectrum of methods to get children to eat against their will. Tactics range from restraining the child's arms, forcing the spoon/food onto the lips or into the mouth, feeding while the child is sleeping, to tricking a child to open his/her mouth. In such cases, children don't have the opportunity to assess their hunger to guide their feeding choices." http://www.parkhurstexchange.com/clinical-reviews/ud_08_vol14
“強迫餵養的問題是，這最終會導致不健康的飲食習慣。一項對100多名在孩童時期被強迫餵養的人進行採訪的研究發現，強迫餵養給孩子造成了心理傷害。這些人被強迫餵食已經有20多年的事實了，他們是成年人，在進行這項研究時，他們顯然可以回想起情感上的痛苦。” http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sapient-nature/201403/the-nurturers-curse
I understand both of your points, and don't disagree. It's an extremely delicate issue and we treat it as such. The lack of true brute force (in this and so many other areas of dealing with a 2 year old) is part of what makes this a true battle and not just a "disagreement". The situation, also, might not be what you're thinking... our son tells us he's hungry, unprompted, when it's dinner time, he sits down, takes one bite and then wants to be done with dinner. Regardless, I appreciate your concern but I think we're OK.
That's all right then. :)


ⓘ
該問答將自動從英語翻譯而來。原始內容可在stackexchange上找到，我們感謝它分發的cc by-sa 3.0許可。
Loading...