Teenagers stealing food

Raksha

ceridwen wrote: »

I had been wondering how Christmas is likely to be - as its so often a flashpoint time in many households anyway....

I apologise Raksha that I went so "steam coming out of my ears" earlier about the use of the "stealing" word about the food - though I still think that that is/was totally the wrong word to use. I just had this feeling there was more to this than was meeting the eye - with a word like that getting used in the circumstances and at least it has now become clear this is more likely to be OH's description of events than yours in the event. Things are maybe becoming a bit clearer to you now - and hopefully your own "version of events" will be quite clear to you by the end of the Christmas period - rather than going along with his view on things.

Sadly Slinky, we don't have such a programme in our area. There was a similar one, but it took place during working hours, and as OH also works shifts, there would be no way he could attend each meeting, which is something they ask you to commit to..

Apology accepted.

For those who struggle with the term 'stealing' - would you feel any different if he was (and he has) taken money from my purse? What is the difference between this and taking food - it all has a value and taking it means it is no longer available to the rest of the family.

shellsuit

Raksha wrote: »

Sadly Slinky, we don't have such a programme in our area. There was a similar one, but it took place during working hours, and as OH also works shifts, there would be no way he could attend each meeting, which is something they ask you to commit to..

Apology accepted.

For those who struggle with the term 'stealing' - would you feel any different if he was (and he has) taken money from my purse? What is the difference between this and taking food - it all has a value and taking it means it is no longer available to the rest of the family.

A child should have free reign in the kitchen and help themselves to something to eat if they are hungry.

A child should never have free reign over your purse.

That's the difference.

rachbc

My son is 13 and jsut starting on 'hollow legs' - he has certain foods he has free access to and others he is 'rationed' on

toast, ham, crackers, fruit, yog, nuts, dried fruit are all free for all

crisps, choc, biscuit are limited and he has to ask

This is based on health rather than costs though. If I'd bougth something for a particular recipe I'd mention it - though in fairness its more likely to be dh who eats soemthing out of bounds as he doesn't have to ask!

Perhaps a more reasonable/ fitting consequence than no interent for a year might help focus his mind - so paying out of his pocket money, an extra hsouehold task.

Ddraig

Where is the harm in a child being brought up to say.May I have....such and such.I have 4 children and at the moment they are all so young.But already the 6 year old will want because the 8 year old wanted.If I let them have free reign in the kitchen they would raid everything.
My mother still has some of my siblings at home and she has same problem as the OP.They dont want to eat the stuff you need to cook.Teenagers are lazy.They want the stuff they can grab and eat.But the 15 year old has also taken things because they are in cupboards and had them ,that were meant for presents for the grandchildren.Such as Easter eggs.
If a family is of a decent size and on a tight budget them it is just curteous to ask if you want something.Even me and my husband will pass by each other ,and just state we are having something incase the other was going to use it for a lunchbox or meal etc.
Its very rare the answer is no.But I think it is just good manners.

lostinrates

shellsuit wrote: »

A child should have free reign in the kitchen and help themselves to something to eat if they are hungry.
.

There is a possibility, though its not clear, that this child may be overweight. If this the case then OP would NOT be helping her child by allowing him free rein in the kitchen.

It seems reasonable and MSE to be able to plan meals and snacks in advance which OP is trying to do. A child shouldn't be too hungry, but again, if this child is not underweight this probably isn't the case.

Again, the weight issue in the family considered I think if OP had posted saying, she was overweight and had a son that was overweight and she couldn't stop him eating between meals then people would be being harsh about her not standing up to the children for helping themselves! Because the weight issue is not clear ..i.e. we know at least one child is overweight but not definitively whether its the same one...its not so easy to draw conclusions.

A parent trying to enforce healthy eating patterns and plan her food budget doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Slinky_Malinky

One thing I had forgotten to mention in my post. If your boys like a chocolate fix, have you tried the chocolate Weetabix? Far more filling than a bar of chocolate and at £2 for a box of 24 works out a pretty cheap and not too unhealthy snack. Plus even the laziest teenager should be able to throw a couple in a bowl and splash some milk on.

Oldernotwiser

shellsuit wrote: »

A child should have free reign in the kitchen and help themselves to something to eat if they are hungry.

A child should never have free reign over your purse.

That's the difference.

That may be the way things run in your family but it's not some kind of definitive truth.

I wasn't brought up that way and neither were many other people, so you shouldn't generalise.

ceridwen

shellsuit wrote: »

A child should have free reign in the kitchen and help themselves to something to eat if they are hungry.

A child should never have free reign over your purse.

That's the difference.

I am assuming the children have free rein over getting some food of some description whenever they are hungry....

...and I would agree with this sentiment - food in a communal room and cash in a personal purse/wallet are two different things.

It's certainly simply not in me to see anyone under my roof going hungry - so I assume this isnt the case ever - I'd much rather they walked out "clutching their stomach" because I'd overfed them personally (...and that has happened before now....:)..the stomach-clutching that is...).

My personal experience (though not with children admittedly) has been that if I shove loads of food in front of them/tell them to help themselves to whatever they want - then no-one has ever "abused" that and I often find they take less food than I am expecting them to (just because they are so well aware that they genuinely do have "open access"). A more typical scenario in my house is "Okay - you're a friend staying the night. Theres where I keep all the food in the kitchen. So have some juice/cereal/eggs - whatever you like for breakfast" and I get up to find they've helped themselves to just a couple of slices of toast...

Oldernotwiser

ceridwen wrote: »

I am assuming the children have free rein over getting some food of some description whenever they are hungry....
.

Why would you make that assumption? It's obviously true in some families but not in others.

There are still some families that have meals at mealtimes and don't spend the day snacking.

ceridwen

....but if you're hungry you're hungry....

I wouldnt argue with a growling stomach and say "But its not mealtime - so you cant have anything".

My family and - on from there myself - dont go in wholesale for snacking..BUT its recognised that someone may well feel hungry in between mealtimes and, if that happens, then you eat.

What's the big deal to that?

No-one should ever go hungry - and its fair enough to expect that the person themselves is capable of judging whether they are genuinely hungry or eating just because they're bored/it's there/etc.