This morning, as I ground up enough coffee beans to last my family probably through Spring, I got to thinking about families and food. My family has always eaten meals together, and made a point of sitting down for at least 20 to 30 minutes at dinnertime to talk about our days. I started thinking about how this had affected me throughout my life. Then I realized: oh wait! I've already written an essay about that. Haha.
This was my capstone essay for a writing class last year. After reading it through I've realized that my essay writing has improved significantly since then(yay), but the essay is no less fascinating. It deals with the "decline of the family" and its connection with family mealtimes. Although it is obscenely long, I felt the need to post it and get it out there. It is the product of about 8 weeks of research on a relatively quiet topic, and I learned a great deal from writing it. I sincerely hope someone else might take something from it as well.
The Decline of Family Mealtime
Over the last century, Western society has evolved at an almost dizzying rate. The United States, Canada, Australia, and most of Western Europe have undergone vast technological and cultural changes; similar values in these countries, such as family structures, religions, and even parallel cuisines, have made for comparable trends in their cultural shifts. Recently, discussion of one cultural phenomenon in particular, an issue commonly addressed as the “decline of the family”, has become prevalent. In the past century, the gender roles and parental superiority that were once the central components of a consistent family structure have been brought into question by numerous social movements (such as the women’s rights and youth movements), and the “traditional family”—a mother, a father, and their children, each with specific roles—has begun to change. It is also to be assumed, for the investigatory purposes of this essay, that a “traditional family” is one that is non-abusive and contains no extreme factors that would otherwise affect the family balance (e.g., severe illness, criminal activity, etc). In other words, if all else is more or less in place, time spent with one’s family is tremendously advantageous to promoting healthy family relationships. While modern equality, achieved by the aforementioned social movements, has been achieved in many societies today and is generally seen as a positive change in the social order, it has caused significant shifts in home life all over the world. Families are finding new ways to structure themselves, and often one of the first components lost in these new arrangements is family mealtime; a key constituent of the traditional family dynamic. This time is a healthy bonding experience between family members, one that strengthens relationships and promotes family. The questions asked in this research essay were these: What is the relationship between families and food? What social role does food play in strengthening or weakening ties between people, specifically mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters? Does family mealtime or a lack thereof impact the health of its members? Is the loss of communal mealtime the catalyst that sparked the “decline of the family”, or an unfortunate effect of an already broken system? Numerous sources were consulted and analyzed, and it was found that, as the traditional family has declined, so has this custom of participation in communal meals; they are deeply intertwined, and their slow disappearance has had a significant (and, for the most part, negative) impact on the health of individuals.
In 2009, a study (Socioeconomic Status, Youth's Eating Patterns and Meals Consumed away from Home) published in the Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences sought to determine whether a), the eating patterns of adolescents differed when away from home, and b), a disparity in socioeconomic class affected those eating patterns. Through a series of trials examining participating teenagers and their families, the former’s eating habits were found to be unhealthier when dining out (whether it was a fast food place or a sit-down restaurant), and to an extreme degree. Fat intake (measured in calories) was up to 17% higher than the recommended amount, and only about 1.5 servings of fruits and vegetables were consumed (recommended intake is 5-9 servings daily) (N. Hejazi and Z. Mazloom, 2009). There were no significant differences found between the number of meals consumed by low-socioeconomic class teens and high-socioeconomic class teens, although the sources of their fat intakes did vary slightly (N. Hejazi and Z. Mazloom, 2009). Clearly, when adolescents are without regular and structured family mealtime, their diets suffer and contribute to an overall decrease in health.
In 2004, an article titled Mealtime and meal patterns from a cultural perspective (Christina Fjellstrom) from the Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition investigated the meaning of a “meal” across cultures. It sought to shed light on the social aspects of food, a step further than its dictionary definition of “a certain amount of food eaten at a specific time”. Meals were found to be a very complex and delicate ritual, dependent on gender roles, family structures, and personal schedules. Of particular interest is Fjellstrom’s examination of the concept of snacking: she discusses its origins in the Industrial Revolution, when the population began to migrate to large cities and work in factories. The long and restrictive hours kept most workers away from home and the three hot meals a day they were accustomed to. Three meals were cut down to two, and workers were thus inclined to graze on items like sweet cakes throughout the day (Fjellstrom, 2004). This not only decreased family time, but also helped spark a new market for on-the-go foods, providing people with the choice to eat before and after meals. Additionally, in more modern times, a newfound glorification of independence and individuality has caused increasing disdain for structure and conformity, and there is some evidence that skipping scheduled mealtimes (an expression of traditionalism) is an effect of this phenomenon (Fjellstrom, 2004). Fjellstrom (2004) concludes that although evidence confirms an increase in “grazing” outside structured mealtimes, and thus a decline in the frequency and quality of these mealtimes, there is not enough data to confirm this development has led to the “decline of the family”.
In 2010, an article called Three Meals Per Day—No Longer by Sonia Brockington was published in the Australian journal Nutridate. She discussed the recent shift in Australian society from eating the time-honored three square meals per day to consuming up to nine. Brockington explains that this is not necessarily a negative change; studies have shown that those who eat more frequently throughout the day (5 or more meals vs. 2 or less) are healthier and less prone to obesity than those who ate less. To further examine the occurrence, she outlines five factors that influence eating patterns: cultural aspects, socioeconomic status, social aspects of food choices, globalization, and mass media (Brockington 2010). According to Brockington, these factors determine when we eat, how much we eat, what we eat, and who we eat with. As an example, a family with a higher disposable income will have the ability to stock their fridge regularly and with the items of their choice, regardless of price; this can then lead to eating more frequently and in larger amounts. In contrast, a family with a lower income might eat smaller amounts less often. The social aspects of food choices deal with the company one is in while eating, such as certain events (e.g., weddings, birthdays, other celebrations) and certain people (dining with someone who makes you feel self conscious might cause you to eat less than sharing a meal with someone who encourages seconds and thirds). Globalization does its part by providing increased availability of and access to food, regardless of the limitations of local producers; mass media heavily markets this food, and can cause us to purchase and consume the advertised products regardless of our original interests. Brockington applies these factors to the world today, and concludes that the current conditions have lead to increased availability of food (particularly unhealthy food—high in energy, fat, salt, and sugar (Popkin, 2006)) and thus increased snacking. Brockington maintains that our ability to eat at any time of day has downplayed the importance of eating whole meals at scheduled times, and has thus been detrimental to our health (2010).
In 2006, a study entitled Modern Meal Patterns: Tensions Between Bodily Needs and the Organization of Time and Space, by Lottie Holm, examined the relationship between eating habits and bodily needs (e.g., what our bodies require vs. what our bodies receive); specifically, how modern spatio-temporal structures affect eating patterns (Holm, 2006). Ever-increasing stress in most societies today leads to changes in work schedules and household chore distribution, and consequently, changes in where we eat, what we eat, and whom we eat with. As society increasingly supports the individual and the furthering of personal interests, there is a significant loss in the bonding time family meals provide (DeVault 1991; Holm 1996; Haastrup 1990). Family members each have their own agendas in their own outside worlds, and such disparities in scheduling seriously disrupt communal eating rituals (Warde 1999; Murcott 1997). For example, Holm notes how, in one family, meals are scheduled around the father’s work hours, and the mother and children compensate for these off-putting times by constantly snacking throughout the day (Holm, 2006). She maintains that there is a pattern: stress and disconnection contribute to poor eating habits, and poor eating habits contribute even further to stress and disconnection. Holm proves this through a series of interviews in which she encouraged subjects with irregular eating habits to eat regularly and observe any changes in their minds and bodies. The results pointed unanimously in the direction of improvement, proving that scheduled eating with those one considers dear (e.g., a mother with irregular habits made a point to have breakfast with her husband and children every morning at 7) contributes directly to health and happiness (Holm, 2006).
It is a well-known fact that the Western world has experienced vast industrial and technological innovations over the last century and a half or so. Although we have been advancing for millennia, the Industrial Revolution during the mid 1800s sparked a domino effect of improvements: factories, cars, telephones, and eventually computers. As the factory industry blossomed and more and more people moved from the countryside to large cities, cultural changes began to occur: notably, in the structure of the lower-and-middle-class family. Gender roles, workdays, and family relationships were all affected. Factories, as opposed to individual families, began to regulate workdays; a farmer once tended to his field when he deemed it necessary, yet now, a manager decided when his day started and ended. As result, both family mealtimes and family relationships experienced a transformation. Once, when workers had more control over their day-to-day routines, three hot meals a day were customary; yet as long, grueling workdays in factories became the norm, these meals were reduced to two, and snacking throughout the day became popular (Fjellstrom, 2004). Thus, time spent together with one’s family decreased, and it is likely that this distanced family members from one another. As Fjellstrom (2004) proves in her article, the origins of snacking can also be traced to this time period.
Yet another cultural revolution that affected family mealtime around the time of the Industrial Revolution was the Women’s Rights movement of the early 1900s. As the stereotypical housewife became a widely criticized role (at least by feminists) and women began to seek jobs outside the home, family structure changed once again. Eventually (it took decades), women were no longer the guaranteed homemakers. This occurred mainly for two reasons. Firstly, by choice: a feminist might find the traditional housewife role degrading and strongly oppose or neglect duties imposed upon her. Secondly, as women gained equal rights, they became more involved in events and goings-on outside the home, and whether or not they found the role of the “housewife” offensive, their schedules often prevented them from performing household duties such as spending the afternoon preparing dinner. For these reasons (and varying others on smaller scales), men began to take on roles that were once perceived as the “woman’s job” (Pleck, 1985, 1993, as cited in Butler and Skattebo, 2004). Yet even as responsibilities evened out, there was still the unsecured position of the meal provider. Often long work hours led to exhaustion by the time one reached home and left communal mealtime out altogether or shortened it significantly. Once again, the traditional family structure suffered along with the loss of regular family meals.
Changes outside the home altogether have also had an effect on family meals. Sonia Brockington (2010) cites Popkin (2006) in arguing that as society and technology advance, globalization of the food market has increased the availability of food, while widespread marketing has increased consumption. Thus, if there are means, one can essentially eat whatever they want at anytime. This can cause disparities in mealtimes: if a family member is hungry and has the option of eating at 3pm instead of waiting for family mealtime at 6pm, they can make that choice and do so. This often leads to a decrease in hunger later in the day, and can cause one to skip or shorten their stay at the family table. Increased availability of a variety of products also increases consumption of foods low in nutrition, which are often the most heavily marketed (page 2). Additionally, the aforementioned article published in the Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences can be cited to prove that when adolescents eat meals away from home (such as at a restaurant or fast food joint), they have more unbalanced diets and are at greater risk of obesity (Hejazi and Mazloom, 2009). The result of these occurrences is a loss of family mealtimes and a decrease in the health of family members.
Thus far in this essay it has been established that, over the last century, the length, quality, and frequency of family mealtime in the Western world have declined. It has also been proven that adolescents who eat away from home suffer from poor nutrition. The next step, then, is determining precisely why being away from one’s family during mealtimes is detrimental to one’s health. Conveniently—although unfortunately for their victims—eating disorders address this issue directly. Bulimia nervosa and anorexia nervosa are two such disorders, claiming more lives per year than any other mental illness on record. In a collaborative 2007 study investigating bulimia nervosa, it was found that the development of bulimic behaviors was inversely related to regular family mealtimes: the more frequently one ate in the company of one’s family, the less likely they were to develop an eating disorder (Ackard & Neumark-Sztainer, 2001, as cited in Munoz, Israel & Anderson, 2007). There are various reasons for this. Firstly, Munoz, Israel and Anderson (2007) argued that in the case of adolescents, shared meals gave parents the opportunity to provide nutritional structure and guidance. Secondly, two separate studies ((Fiese & Klein, 1993; Markson & Fiese, 2000, as cited in Munoz, Israel, and Anderson, 2007) have proven that “family rituals, including shared mealtimes, annual celebrations and shared events, are positively related to healthy adjustment in college students and lower levels of anxiety in children” (262). In conclusion, using the frequency of family mealtimes as a tool for measuring stability in the home, it was found that increased family stability led to lower numbers of reported cases of bulimia (page 263). Yet despite the proven decrease in health caused by the loss of family meals, there is also evidence pointing in the other direction. Brockington (2010) cites studies linking eating five or more small meals per day (as opposed to two to three large meals) to increased health and reduced risk of obesity (page 2). This could indicate that eating at one’s own convenience, regardless of familial company, positively influences one’s health and wellbeing (and this subsequently could lead to increased happiness and thus healthier relationships). However, Brockington (2010) found that after further investigation, “researchers found no effect on weight loss, fat mass, lean body mass and glucose control after 12 months” of studying the eating frequencies of various overweight subjects (page 5). Although it was therefore proven that altering meal patterns alone will not contribute to weight loss, other factors (such as the nutritional value and calorie content of food, or combining new meal patterns with exercise) were not examined, and thus the subject requires additional study.
Although the four articles examined—Socioeconomic Status, Youth's Eating Patterns and Meals Consumed away from Home, Mealtime and meal patterns from a cultural perspective, Three Meals Per Day—No Longer, and Modern Meal Patterns: Tensions Between Bodily Needs and the Organization of Time and Space—approach their studies with different perspectives, they all agree on a central theme: structured mealtime is essential, and it is in decline. As our society continues to question values and traditions that have been in place for hundreds, even thousands of years, we will also continue to experience the unintended side effects of changing these customs. Gender equality is close to being achieved, and it is certainly a positive change, but it has disturbed the (however unequal) household roles that once guaranteed family mealtime. This past century’s stand against conformity has encouraged independence and individuality, but with it have come disparities in both schedules and ideas of how family life should be structured. Eating smaller amounts of food more frequently is proven to improve health and reduce obesity, but it has all but eliminated a voluntary three sit-down meals a day. Although the family still exists, it has evolved (although perhaps regressively); thus, to answer the question of whether a decline in family meals has contributed to the decline of the family, we must, for now, rephrase our question and examine the decline of the traditional family. As our fast-paced society begins to move on from traditionalism, important elements of our past customs are often disregarded; as evidenced by these four studies, family mealtime is one of them. Now, to bring this research essay to a close: having examined these studies and formed several hypotheses, the conclusion to this investigatory essay is remarkably simple. It has been proven that, in the modern Western world, 1) there is more food available; 2) there is increased ease of access to food; 3) traditional, if degrading, gender roles have faded over the past century; 4) individuals are more independent (as society now allows them to be) and have more freedom to structure their own schedules; 5) adolescents tend to choose foods low in nutrition when eating away from home; 6) it has been suggested that eating smaller meals more frequently is good for one’s health, although limited evidence exists; and finally, 7), that the occurrence of bulimic and anorexic behaviors is inversely linked to spending more time eating with one’s family. The link between the decline of the traditional family and the decline of family mealtime has been seen repeatedly, and despite limited sources that claim eating small meals on your own time is advantageous, studies on eating disorders have proven that enjoying regular meals with one’s family is directly beneficial to one’s health. It is evident that there are two key advantages of family mealtime: firstly, it encourages guidance and structure relating specifically to food, and secondly, it provides a setting for the practice of spending ritualized time with one’s family. The former has been shown to maintain physical health, while the latter has been proven to promote mental and emotional wellbeing. Together, they help create a balanced environment that supports the health of both the individual and the family as a whole.
Bibliography
Hejazi, N., and Mazloom, Z. (2009). Socioeconomic Status, Youth’s Eating Patterns and Meals Consumed away from Home. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 9, 730-733.
Fjellstrom, C. (2004). Mealtime and meal patterns from a cultural perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Nutrition, 4, 161-164.
Brockington, S. (2010). Three Meals per Day—No Longer. Nutridate, 2, 2-5.
Skattebo, A. and Butler, A. (2004). What is acceptable for women may not be for men: The effect of family conflicts with work on job-performance ratings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 553-564.
Munoz, D., Israel, A., and Anderson, D. (2007). The Relationship of Family Stability and Family Mealtime Frequency with Bulimia Symptomatology. Eating Disorders, 15:261–271.
Holm, L. (2006). Modern Meal Patterns: Tensions Between Bodily Needs and the Organization of Time and Space. Food & Foodways: History & Culture of Human Nourishment, ¾, 151-173.
.bmp)
