Overweight/underweight child.

Sambucus_Nigra

FBaby wrote: »

The responses are so depressing. virtually show why we've become a suspicious and paranoid nation, seriously overweight, raising spoilt and self conscious children.

maybe OP had nothing to hide and doesn't mind people she knows our not reading what she had to say. Its called confidence. OP loves her children and wants to make sure they are healthy and teach them habits so they remain so. She also wants to be fair, don't want her children to feel they are treated differently and build resentment between them. She is looking at strategies to deal with an issue rather than burying her head under the sand hoping it will get better on its own. She is what is called a good mother.

You just don't get it do you?

FBaby

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

You just don't get it do you?

Depends what you imply by 'it'. Stool waiting for someone to go over the official dangers OP was putting her children under.

Sambucus_Nigra

FBaby wrote: »

Depends what you imply by 'it'. Stool waiting for someone to go over the official dangers OP was putting her children under.

See post 69.

It's the basic reason we sign up with user names, not real names. And why our avatars are not all pics of us. And why our address is not published.

The point is there are no 'official' dangers. You have no idea who reads this. It's the same reason we ask people to remove identifying information on all sorts of things, like employment issues and personal issues. Remember when one user on here was Pm-ed by the lady who was having an affair with her husband? She had no idea she was being tracked and spied on through MSE.

peachyprice

FBaby wrote: »

Depends what you imply by 'it'. Stool waiting for someone to go over the official dangers OP was putting her children under.

I think the potential danger people are alluding to is the psychological danger to the child IF someone the family knows sees the pictures, sees OP calling her child chunky then spreads it around the neighbourhood which in turn gets back to the child, then ensues a whole raft of torment.

I don't in all honesty think there's any more danger from sexual predators by posting the pictures than there is from taking the children to the beach in their swimwear in the first place, infact the children are far more likely to unkowingly have their picture taken by a pedo on the beach than a pedo stumbling across them on a moneysaving forum.

Real danger or paranoia? By the time you find out, it's too late.

jellyhead

Deleted_User wrote: »

Out of interest, not yr 2? I thought it was for all the infants? I may be wrong, but I have assumed that reception, yr 1 and yr 2 get the fruit. Esp as it would look unfair on yr 2 when they are sharing the playground.

I don't want to take the thread off at a tangent, but our school rarely provides fruit for the year 2 children. Years 2 and above take their own snack, although sometimes fruit appears - my son reckons once a week at the most.

When they were in year 1 a teacher said that the fruit was only for 5 and under now, so they provide it to all of year 1 because it would be unfair to say no to the children in that year who have turned 6.

It may vary between LEA or school though.

Most of the year 2 children take crisps or chocolate. Mine takes chopped cucumber or blueberries, cherries etc.

mazza111

Sorry, I still don't see the need to feed up the boy and not the girl. They are both growing children. If it's hunger, give them both a low fat/sugar snack. Ok it won't help the boy put on weight, but it means the lass won't either. Sorry but after years of getting told my rather healthy son was underweight for his height/age and going to dietitians with him, I just don't see it as an issue. If he's seriously underweight them maybe the doctor could give him shakes, that obviously the lass wouldn't get, that way it's seen as medicine, but..... to go down that road...

Can I just ask OP, does your lad seem to eat more before a growth spurt? My lad was always starving, he'd be eating like a horse, get growing pains, then maybe a week later he'd shoot up in size again. You could visibly see the difference in him. This was a big bug bear in my house, especially with crisps etc. He literally thought he was starving constantly. Even at around 7-8 he would eat a dinner that an adult would have problems with. And he's finally finished with the dietitian at age 15. Approaching 16 now, he's still skinny! He's still underweight. He still eats like a horse. I think he's just an active child who will always be thin.


I know it's hard especially with 2 so close in age, but I still think puberty will sort a lot of it out, especially for your lass. As long as you're providing them with a healthy diet, I'm sure it will sort itself out.

LE3

three options for you OP:

1) give your daughter a little less dinner to save room for a bedtime snack -you can disguise this more by spreading it out on the plate & heaping DS dinner up more - seriously, if you give everyone's dinner piled in different ways they'll be fine - be less "neat" or precise in dishing up & nobody will realise that some plates have more & some less - change who gets which pile/spreadout food each day! (a meal with veg piled on top of the mash will look very different to the veg on the side next to the mash )

2) tell your daughter that DS is going through a growth spurt at the moment and needs a little bit extra food - when she has her next growth spurt then she will get some extra if she needs it - she may whinge & whine, but you need to discipline this as you would any other winging & whining and reinforce that all children go through growth spurts & she will get one soon and you will give her the fuel that her body needs at that time. She is old enough to understand - you just need to reiterate it again & again!

3) place a snack in DS bedroom for him to eat when he goes to bed, and don't put anything in DDs room - but go and spend longer with her reading stories etc whilst DS is eating his snack or simply give DS his snack when DD is in the bath!


Oh, and make sure that you aren't using food as treats - if you are she may see it as a treat/favouritism, in which case only ooption 1&3 will work!

jellyhead

mazza111 wrote: »

If he's seriously underweight them maybe the doctor could give him shakes, that obviously the lass wouldn't get, that way it's seen as medicine, but..... to go down that road...

My nephew gets ensure shakes, but there's a reason why he's so underweight (too much asthma medication and steroids) and he does sometimes lose weight and his appetite is poor.

My eldest is just as thin as my nephew but the dietician wasn't concerned. He's just naturally thin, and that was a concern when he was little and had no appetite and lots of food phobias (he was prescribed iron and vitamins but he wouldn't have drunk ensure), but now that he's older and has hollow legs he is still very underweight.

Some of my family are naturally very thin. Sadly I am not one of them ... I probably eat half of what my husband does yet I'm fat and he's not.

mazza111

Ditto Jellyhead. I think you've hit the nail on the head there, the medications being an underlying factor with your nephew. But because your son is healthy... I just hated the fact that I kept being told he was underweight bla bla bla. Everytime he had something like tonsilitis that needed an antibiotic we were referred back to the dietitian.:( He was eating as much as an adult from an early age, probably more than I was. We go to the all you can eat chinese buffet on occasion and he can fill his plate 3/4 times.

Really lost count of the different dietitians we seen with him. Suppose it was a good thing really that the docs picked up on it, I mean there could have been an underlying factor. But I'm talking years here.

Yes, I'm really jealous of my son and his hollow legs. If everything I ate could just get past my belly :rotfl: