In Praise of Junkfood | healthy snacks | Parenting
Why giving kids only what's good for them is a bad idea.
I recently had lunch with my friend Amanda, who informed me that her one-year-old daughter had just discovered that the cookies she sometimes receives – when she’s cranky, after dinner – do not materialize out of the ether each time they’re presented, but come instead from a sacred source above the fridge, the cookie jar. This is a perfectly normal development for a toddler: when they reach a certain point, they begin to understand that life is not as a series of discrete events enacted upon them, but rather a interconnected web of objects, actions and decisions in which they are (in varying degrees) a functionary. The scientific term for this is “connecting the dots,” and once kids discover it, they begin to act on it. “Now, whenever we’re in the kitchen – or sometimes when we’re not,” Amanda said, “she’ll point toward the cabinet and make that little I-want-it grunt.”
I was psyched for this conversation. I’m not sure if it’s because of my fascination with how kids work, my drive to rectify the self-inflicted disempowerment felt by contemporary parents, or simply because I thrive on conflict, but there’s nothing I love discussing more than the intersection of children’s desire and parental efforts at control. But at the time of our lunch, I was consulting for some cookie-making conglomerate – I advise companies that make stuff for kids – and whenever I work on these projects I become (briefly) engrossed in consumer behavior within what we call “the category”: the product set being studied. So I sidetracked things to ask what kind of cookies Amanda was buying. “Some sort of Annie’s Organic,” she said. I must have pulled a face. “I know,” she said, “that I’m a stereotype of this kind of mom, but I just don’t want her to ingest preservatives or anything artificial. Ever.”
Suddenly, in this one conversation, we’d touched on every element that informs parental attempts to manage children’s intake of fun and compelling product – what I call “junk.” Be it sweets, salty snacks, videos or TV, it comes down to a few core issues:
1) Kids love junk.
2) Parents want to control the kinds of junk to which their kids have access.
3) Parents want their kids to learn to make healthy choices.
Now, we all personally know just how alluring junk can be, and how good reasonable indulgences feel. Why is this? Because life is a soul-crushing mission designed to destroy you, and moments of wanton happiness are our deserved refuge. If you think kids are immune to this feeling, you’re wrong. Being a kid is extremely hard work. In fact, it’s much like starting a new job every day: they’re exposed to an onslaught of fresh information that needs to be integrated and acted on immediately; rules are often unstated or unclear, and then suddenly and righteously enforced; and their direct supervisors are often inexperienced, overworked, and incapable of delegation. Imagine yourself in that position. During your lunch break, or after each brutal day, don’t you think you’d feel entitled to a quick burst of numbing relief? Well, kids do too. Which is why I offer the following thesis: Kids Deserve Junk.
The issue isn’t whether or not kids are going to get junk. Junk is compelling, ubiquitous and readily accessible. So you can probably give up on the idea that you – like my friend Amanda – are going to be able to fundamentally prohibit its entry into your child’s mind or body. More importantly, such a prohibition might actually work against you. Consider abstinence-only education, a teenage version of the same struggle. The scientific studies consistently show that attempting to place universal restrictions on a fun, pleasurable, and available action, without providing functional alternatives, is not only ineffectual, it’s actually counterproductive. Kids who are exposed solely to this kind of advice actually have higher rates of pregnancy and STDs than those who are given more practical skills.
Sadly, far too many parents end up locked in just this type of defeatist paradigm when they’re trying to deal with junk – attempting to deny their child’s yearning, and place absolute restrictions on their access, without comprehensible justifications or lessons. This often ends up backfiring for a few reasons:
1) Kids love a fight, as it provides them an opportunity and template for engagement.
2) Unqualified limitations create a countervailing, and often stronger, desire for transgression.
3) Enforcing limits without providing tactics for confronting the underlying desires hampers kids’ ability to make intelligent, informed decisions.
Your goal, therefore – as with most things with young children – should not be to attempt to completely quash this profound inclination, but to teach your kids how to deal with it in a way that fosters a healthy, lifelong relationship.
This is not to say that you shouldn’t have rules. You should. You can even have ones that place off-limits specific categories of, or locations for consuming, junk: only buying foods whose colors exist in nature; only eating bacon at Grandma’s; only watching Caillou when Mom is out of the room. They should just be proactive, logical, proscribed and realistic.
Rules should just be proactive, logical, proscribed and realistic. The goal here is, instead of creating unconditional and unachievable rules, to form functional ones based on kids’ innate desire for structure, consistency, and independence. I therefore suggest what I call the Co-Option Option (COO)? The COO works like this: instead of engaging in immature, futile, and degrading head-to-head battles with your young child about things you can’t wholly control, and aren’t, objectively, all that important – splashing in the bathtub, playing with food while consuming it, watching the occasional episode of Boohbah – you take the fight out of the situation by redefining it so that you are in charge, while also offering your child the sense that they’re getting what they want.
For the tub, the COO would work like this. Instead of constantly trying to preclude your child’s desire to splash (in a room which is, by design, fully waterproof) you tell them they are allowed to wallow to their heart’s content for the first and last two minutes of their bath, but need to cooperate during the middle portion when you’re helping them get clean. You provide clear indications of when their water-play period begins and ends, complete with markers (One more minute.) And you have repercussions – connected to the situation, and laid-out clearly and in advance – if they don’t conform (removal of a favorite bath toy).
For junk, it’s pretty much the same drill. Make clear protocols about when and in what amounts treats like candy, snacks, and television can be consumed; provide indications of clear and actionable repercussions if these protocols are not followed; and then simply stick to what you say. If kids know that dessert comes only on weekends, that they can watch fifteen minutes of Dora as soon as they get home from preschool, or that they can eat their fill of Cheetos when they visit their Gay Uncle – and that these are the only times that such things are generally allowed – they’ll be much more likely to understand that these are controlled substances/”treats,” and much less likely to ask for them on occasions when these requirements aren’t met, and much more likely to learn the balance and abstemiousness that will help prevent them from becoming obese couch potato diabetics later in life.
The question then becomes, what kinds of junk are okay? As someone who’s worked for the past ten years helping people design media, toys, and foodstuffs for young kids, I have a pretty good sense of what’s out there. I’ve had the pleasure of helping folks make some truly junky stuff more wholesome – giving a show about talking fire engines a “social/emotional curriculum,” lending cheesy snack crackers a sense of “optimism,” or suggesting that assembling discs of meat and cheese onto crackers is “self-empowering.” I’ve worked on stuff that’s truly good for kids – electronic literacy toys, whole-wheat breakfast cereal, and some of the best-respected educational TV shows. And I’ve helped develop the burgeoning Better For You (BFY) market, trying to make things like watered-down juice, baked crackers, or a singing toothbrush feel healthful without being branded good for you (which alienates kids.)
Your goal is to teach kids that they’re in charge of junk, not the other way around. So what does this mean for what you should let your kids have during their regulated, co-opted, scheduled junk time? Well, I’m of the mind that pretty much anything is acceptable as a treat, as the very category implies that it is something that is a) consumed only occasionally b) consumed in moderation and with supervision and c) intended to feel a bit indulgent. The important thing is not to confuse the issue. An Oreo is quite overtly a treat. A handful of Newman’s Own Chocolate Alphabet Cookies contain extremely similar ingredients, but because the brand holds what we call a “health halo” – the perception of being BFY – people make the mistake of treating the product differently, allowing kids to have them more regularly, an action which can actually muck things up. Kids make sense of the world through categorization, so imagine your three year old trying to sort out how some chocolate cookies are a treat, and some are okay for every day. No matter how organic the ingredients may be, I promise you that consuming a bag of Newman’s each week will never be healthier for your child than eating four Oreos.
The other important thing to be aware of is what I like to call your Junk Practice: what you use Junk for, and how it’s implemented. Junk can be a reward, and its withholding part of a punishment. But dessert as a prize for finishing your dinner – eat more to get more? – feels counterproductive, and the wavering negotiation that often surrounds it (“Three more bites of broccoli and you can have cake. Fine, one more.”) only deepens the confusion.
Life works best with young kids when they’re made aware of your expectations, parameters, and repercussions in advance – and these things are linked directly to the situation at hand. Sadly, junk often ends up getting used in just the opposite way: ad hoc and as a sudden bribe or penalty. Abruptly precluding your kid from watching Handy Manny because they’ve dropped their toast on the floor jelly-side down at breakfast is neither concrete nor grounded. Whereas if you have a standing plan to allow Handy Manny viewing each morning, so long as your child get dressed and eats something, your response to transgressions of these rules can be direct, comprehensible, and transparent.
Remember, your child is not born with an innate understanding of how junk operates. Your rules, provisions, and actions give them the tools – ones they’ll use for the rest of their life. Your goal should thus be to teach them that they’re in charge of junk, not the other way around, and in order to do this, you have to know how to be in charge of it first. To get you started, I’ll give you the same advice I gave Amanda: Stop worrying so much about what kind of cookies you buy, and worry more about when, where and to what end you’re distributing them. As with most things with young kids, what it is is far less important than how you handle it.
We are living in a country in which 2/3 of the population is either overweight or obese. Most parents give little to no restriction on junk food for their kids, in part because they see it as “food” rather than “junk food”. Cookies are still cookies even if they are organic and trans-fat free. Read other parts of this website and you can also gather that no one thinks it’s a good idea to bribe your kids by begging for a few more bites of veggies in exchange for dessert later.
I was going to criticize this article but I had the sense to re-read it and I give you props for any advice that can help teach parents and children moderation with junk.
I found this article put things in a good perspective. As a mother of a daughter under 1, I’m just beginning to enter the trenches of food and treats. My thinking tends to fall into the category of BFY food, so it’s good to have tips to just put rules around all junk food. Cuz I know it’s coming in one way or another! Thanks for the advice.
I have a friend who started out many years ago with the basic theory that sugar was bad and her children got none – she hid grapes at Easter time instead of chocolate. I attended her eldest child’s 5th birthday party where her parents were presenting her with her first bike, but prior to the bike presentation, her Auntie (who obviously had issues with the “no sugar” rule) had gift wrapped a box of Fruit Loops cereal that this little girl was totally enthralled with. When the glorious bike, complete with pink helmet and sparkly streamers, was unveiled, this wonderful child was so busy eating her Fruit Loops straight from the box that she didn’t even give it a second glance. It took a lot of waiting and coaxing to get the cereal away and have her try the bike out – I thought it was hilarious and a good example of going too far with an idea. I believe her parents loosened up shortly thereafter…
I’m growing weary of this backlash. The fact is kids don’t love “junk.” Kids love sweet, and plenty of healthy things can be eaten to satisfy sweet. My daughter prefers a bowl of frozen blueberries to cookies any day of the week. I don’t object even to giving kids actual junk for an occasional treat, special event etc. What I object to is the assumption that if I give her healthy food now, she will binge on fruit loops the minute she’s out from under my lock and key. And what if she does? One fruit loop binge is a lot healthy than fruit loops for breakfast every day.
I resent the assumption that I’m depriving my daughter because I don’t feed her actual junk. Yes, she is exceptionally excited by the occasional birthday cake–because it’s a special treat! I’d hate her to get so used to it that it wasn’t exciting anymore.
I also don’t see why a parent has to be a provider of junk, even if kids will eat it inevitably. Reducing it is not a bad idea. Especially compared to the way I grew up eating little other than junk 90% of the time. I rather think the companies that make “junk” for kids (whom the author freely admits to being in bed with) would really like us to give up trying to get our kids to eat better than we did when we were children.
I thought this was a hilarious article, and I love the toggle between GFY and BFY. Reminds me of the time I ate a bunch of fat-free cookies and then shamefacedly realized they had loads of calories.
I’m frequently arguing with my husband to let our daughter have more treats, because she never eats any candy and rarely any cookies, cake or sweets. Obviously, you want to restrict your kid’s junk intake — especially if that “junk” is made with ingredients that make you nervous. But I don’t really think the point is to increase or decrease junk food. I think the author’s point is that you want to teach your kids to make good decisions for the rest of their lives, not just avoid the issue. If a kid binges in ecstasy every time she’s allowed sweets, that’s not a great precedent for her decision-making abilities.
But maybe that’s easy for me to say — my kid has a taste for salty and sour, so I’m not fighting over the cookie jar.
This article touches on something I struggle with all the time. I try find a middle ground between my complete distaste for TV and the overindulgent and inappropriate viewing that I see among my child’s peers. Evidently I haven’t found the middle ground yet, because whenever we are at a friend or family member’s home and the TV is on, my daughter is glued to it.
As far as junk food consumption is concerned, I was reminded of some unconventional advice from Ellen Satter’s book ‘Child of Mine.’ Satter suggests offering an appropriate portion of dessert with the meal and allowing kids to eat dessert when they choose. We don’t usually eat dessert with meals at our house (snack time is when we indulge in treats). However, on the odd occasion when we do have a meal and dessert, I put Satter’s advice into practice. My child will ,obviously, start with the dessert, but after a couple bites will move on to the other food. Once the dessert is finished she eats her fill of the meal. The logic is that pressuring kids to eat food (i.e. ‘Eat your veggies and you can have dessert’ ) is not only overly controlling, but it encourages kids to ignore their cues of hunger/satiation and overeat.
This is the best parenting article I have read anywhere ever, ever, ever, ever. It takes a premise, which many a modern parent subscribes to, and tells us how to work around it. We’re fighting a really hard battle — one that the author wages as our opponent during his 9 to 5 — but now have a little insight in how to win. It’s like jailed burglars acting as consultants for security alarm systems.
I, too, hate total abstinence–in sex ed AND junk food — but have felt inconsistent in how we manage it at home. Berk’s expertise and advice is perfect. So thanks.
And Shannon, the author isn’t predicting your daughter will binge, since you make it clear “junk” isn’t verboten in your home. She’s allowed to choose, as you seem to indicate when you say she prefers blueberries to cookies (which, I promise you, won’t last. Food is social for kids as well and just wait until she sees her friends eat and enjoy crap.)
This article is ridiculous and really condescending.
I pick organic foods for my family because they are healthier for them
and the environment. Many organic brands contain less sugar and
processed ingredients. I have noticed during the years that I have switched to organics, my sugar craving have completely disappeared. I only eat chocolate/cookies/cake when other people bring them into my home. I don’t agree with this concept of teaching children limitations through telling them they can only have bad food at certain times. For most families, that is completely crazy anyway, about 90% of what they are eating is processed, canned, frozen or meat. By picking organic food for my family, I feel more comfortable letting my child have a cookie or a piece of chocolate knowing that our food for breakfast, lunch and dinner is not filled with sugar and salt, along with other bad stuff. We had this limitation rule growing up and I would steal my moms chocolates from her room, my brother once stayed home and ate all my Halloween candy while I was at school. Our household rule was that we could only have candy after dinner. We broke that rule time and time again. Not surprising, because our bodies can easily become addicted to sugar and our normal food was filled with it. Sugar in our cereal, tons of carbs on the white bread sandwiches we would eat for lunch, sugar in our juice/Koolaid, added sugar in our canned peas or tomato sauce, the sugar in the candy we were allowed to eat. Parents would be surprised by how much sugar is in what they consider normal, healthy everyday foods. If this mom doesn’t want her child to eat tons of cookies later in life, she should just make sure her child is eating healthy, whole, fresh, sugar free foods during the day. She also lead by example by cutting back and eating something healthy instead. Your talking about parenting, but ignoring our body chemistry. No wonder everyone is so unhealthy.
All you haters, please reread this article and think about what most Americans eat and feed their children. This is not advice for those of you who love to cook and eat healthy food that you share with your children. You are part of a very, very small minority in this country (sadly).
Growing up, we never had any junk food in the house. I had never seen a bag of oreos, instant mac and cheese, velveta, potato chips, or fried chicken in our house. Going to my friends’ houses was a special treat where they had lots of junk food and I would pig out. So when I went to college far away from home, I of course put on the freshman 35 immediately. I went to the cafeteria every day where there was unlimited portions of all this “forbidden food”. There was real peanut butter (not that nasty smuckers crap)! Ice cream! Pies! Chips! Hamburgers! Fries! Yeah, I think moderation is the key. I’ve since lost all the weight with excercise and a diet that includes junk food in moderation. Yes, I occasionally buy a bag of oreos, but it takes me a month to finish it. But I think the author is right, moderation is the key here, and you have to let kids learn to make healthy eating choices themeselves, instead of controlling every morsel that goes into their mouthes. Otherwise they go nuts at the first opportunity.
I think this article is fun to read, although it also makes me think that this is another area where parents just can’t win. Give your kid too much good food? They’ll get fat because you didn’t give them junk. Give them too much junk, that is bad too. It seems like parents need to perform this perfect balancing act or else they will absolutely be failing their kids.We need to give ourselves a break. I think a big thing is, if you go against your own nature, it will be difficult. That is – if you eat a lot of junk food, it will be nearly impossible to get your kids to not do the same. Maybe this is the problem. I do know some parents who impose crazy restrictions on their kids’ food, while they themselves eat junk. What kind of message is that?I myself do not eat a lot of junk food, mostly because I just don’t like the taste. We hardly ever have desserts in the house (except fruit) and practically no processed foods. I am not saying I am any better than anyone else. This is just because of my and my husband’s personal preference for taste. (We both absolutely love great food, and we love to cook, we just don’t like sweets so much.) However, since I am not exposing my son on a regular basis to junk, does this mean he is going to have a problem? To be frank, I do allow him to eat whatever when we go to parties, grandparents, etc., but so far he just does not like to eat desserts, candy, junk himself. He will take a bite, make a face, and then put it down. I would like to think he is imitating us, but who knows why? Also, who knows if this will continue as he gets older? It is just easier for us to make what we like to eat and share it with our son.
I think the author’s point is that any extreme isn’t good in the end, and can’t that be applied to just about anything?!!
Not once did she demonize the parent that buys organic and makes much more available a diet of healthy choices– she simply said that doing only that all the time can be a problem. Doesn’t that just make sense? I love it.
I assumed the author was a woman– my apologies and my lesson learned.
Organic Mom – It’s unfair to compare your adult palate to that of a small child, for whom sugar is a transcendent experience. Kids need carbs to do all the crazy things they do, and they are hard-wired to love the simplest form of them all – sugar. Providing a variety of fresh, whole foods at every meal is the best way to ensure kids eat well but not currently possible in every household. It is great that you are able to feed your family with organic foods — your kids are so lucky to have such a great model! Many parents keep junk in their kitchens for themselves, try to restrict their children from eating it, then give up and buy more when they eat it anyway. How confusing is that? My husband surpisingly (and at great sacrifice) gave up soda recently, so he could stop lying to our 2-year-old about soda tasting yucky. I’m pretty sure that’s an exception to the norm. Eventually he’ll have his first taste of soda – whether he loves it or not, at least he’ll know it’s not an everyday drink. I agree that the important thing is to be consistent and make sure you are in control of the junk — if you were able to break your mother’s rule of ‘candy only after dinner’ again and again, she must have decided that it wasn’t important to enforce it. Temptation is all over the place. It’s why we need the police. It’s why school cafeterias are now the focus of the war on childhood obesity, and you can’t bring cupcakes on your birthday anymore. Wouldn’t it be better if we were taught to regulate our own behavior? It’s why parents need help from people like Brett.
My son’s daycare feeds the kids there a lot of junk. I saw the food calendar and was aware that cookies is a regular snack. After that I began to make regular surprise visits to daycare at snack time. Oreos, chocolate chips, animal crackers, etc. are the typical snack. First I had a discussion with the daycare director who seemed very uninterested. Fruit is expensive and takes a lot of fridge space. I began searching for a better daycare. I went to every daycare in this area and all of them serve “junk” every day and quite a lot of it. I was really upset at first because my sweet boy who would ask for fruit as a snack was now asking for cookies. But, as time has worn on, he has gotten tired of the junk and cookies. Now if I give him a cookie for dessert he will take one bite and be done. If I give him fresh fruit he’ll gobble it down. Every day we go outside and look at our blueberry bushes and I can see that gleam in his eye as he can’t wait for harvesting time. I think in the long run the daycare is doing me a favor as he thinks fruit and other wholesome snacks are a treat and prefers them to “junk”. I’m also working on getting good stuff to be his go to comfort food. So far it seems to be working.
I think denying your kids junk only hurts them in the long run. I am a soda junkie. Soda was forbidden in the house I grew up in. As soon as I started making my own money in high school, I couldn’t get enough of it. My soda addiction is something I struggle with every day. I’m not going to forbid “junk” and soda from my child. I will teach him to enjoy it in moderation.
I generally applaud the content of the article – and I think the strategies are great ones. But you’re breaking my heart with the “obese couch potato diabetics.” Diabetes is a genetic condition – both types. And I’m a type 1 who works out at least twice a week and is healthy. This disease is hard for me to live with and manage – it requires as much attention as a toddler does. I hate it, and the threat it poses to me. It’s not my fault I have it – nor is it the fault of any diabetic that he or she has the disease. Sometimes, exercise and diet can help someone manage the diabetes they have. Sometimes not. But please, please stop blaming us for our illness. It hurts, and it’s not factually founded.
Although Type II Diabetes has a genetic companent, that only increases your risk for developing the disease. Environmental factors need to be present to trigger it. Obesity creates changes in the way the body works which can cause tyoe II diabetes. Teaching our children (especially the ones with a higher genetic risk) behaviours that will stave off obesity will reduce their risk of the disease. So, yes, “obeses couch potato diabetics” is a fair term to use in warning parents of the dangers of an unhealthy diet. An unhealthy diet it also bad for people with Type I, but it can’t cause that disease.
First off I applaud this article, it comes out at a wonderful time when most families/parents are trying to figure out how to afford day-to-day groceries and still eat nutritiously.
Personally I find it a struggle. Especially when you’re feeding four mouths, on a small income and still survive. There are those out there who will tell you that the only way to eat is organically and simply. Well how so? Because when I go to the store the organic foods are triple the amount of the same non-organic foods(produce especially!!). Now granted I understand that this article is addressing sugar items but the fact of the matter is, junk food nowadays is cheaper then eating a bunch of organic grapes(oh and “regular” grapes are still sky high price wise) and that’s sad.
I try my darndest to label watch and keep certain foods out of my family’s reach. However, treats are not one of them. As long as they’re decent and not eaten six times a day. Now I have always had a sweet tooth. My husband and our children do as well. Not one of us is obese and I could lose ten lbs sure, but that’s mainly because of a health condition that kept me rather immobile for a few months. Now that I’m up and moving the weight is coming off, and I STILL eat sugar regularly.
My parents never hid or restricted food and my siblings and I have all had pretty healthy attitudes for it. I agree that the more you restrict ANYTHING the more it is wanted.
An interesting note: I have come across many mothers who are all organic, no processed foods or sugar, you name it. And it’s fascinating to me that they preach this yet they themselves are extremely overweight. Some of them obese. It’s an interesting paradox if you ask me.
Brett Berk here, author of this piece. I was going to jump in earlier to take on the issues raised by other commentators concerning organic food and diabetes, but you smart Babblers took care of all of that for me. So, thanks! I’m thrilled that so many of you enjoyed and appreciated my piece. I write often for this site about issues connected to child development and contemporary parenting, so be sure to check out my other articles here (just enter my name in the search bar, and all my wisdom will pop up.) Also, feel free to visit me on my own site, which is updated constantly with new ideas, thoughts, and actionable ideas for rescuing yourself from the insanity induced by bringing up kids in our contemporary culture.
http://www.askgayuncle.com
Hope to see you there.
“Uncle” Brett