Regular family meals have been touted as a preventive for all kinds of problems, including teen pregnancy, smoking and obesity. Recent research in the Journal of Marriage and Family, however, found that most of the benefits of regular family meals were not actually the result of eating together. Rather, social scientists Kelly Musick and Ann Meier found, they stemmed from other factors in the family environment that facilitated regular meals, such as sufficient income, strong family relationships and authoritative parents.
Instead of fixating on family dinners, Musick and Meier suggest, moms and dads should focus on building relationships with children at any opportunity, such as while driving in the car. A 2010 report by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University noted that teens were more likely to talk to their parents in the car than almost any other place. Being involved in a kid's life is extremely beneficial, scientists say, even if it doesn't happen over placemats.
This article was originally published with the title The Myth of the Family Meal.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
8 Comments
Add CommentOf course all single factor analyses are questionable. Isn't it obvious that other factors besides sitting together at a meal are involved? Myth? That's like saying that it's a "myth" to claim that a healthy diet affects longevity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe ate together as a family where we discussed current event's,school, we read, we received guidance on a variety of topics. We spoke of our hopes and dreams. We all have led successful lives, were as most of my friend's who lived in single parent or broken families became accomplished in drug use, prison and having children out of wed lock, they succeeded in raising the same families they came from.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnything can produce good young people if love is there. My parents came from impoverished backgrounds and were much older than my friends' parents; Dad was born in the 19th century, Mom in 1905. Both worked and I sensed early on that they needed an opportunity to speak together without interruption, as if I (an only child) was not present. I learned to read at age 2 and accommodated them by reading while I ate. Sometimes I listened--learning that my parents were good, caring people with strong opinions, and that their concerns were important, not trivial, gossipy or petty. Sometimes I was too engrossed in my book to pay any attention. Whichever way, I recall dinnertime as enjoyable, even the weirdly skimpy meals of WWII and, at times, our own poverty. I was glad that I was helping them get some quality time together since both were otherwise so busy. When Mom and I wished to talk we did so while doing dishes -- always in some outrageous theatrical foreign accent which made touchy conversation easier, somehow. If it was Dad, he and I usually brought up issues while he was driving me somewhere when no one else was with us--or were doing a quiet home improvement project like house painting. Lawn moving and hammering were too noisy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd sometimes all three of us sat together, turned off the radio, and had a great conversation.
My husband, who was 10 years younger than I, was raised in the household anarchy of the Boomer generation, had no understanding of regular mealtimes, so our son learned that he could sit at our table or take food elsewhere and watch TV. I learned to accept it as just another kind of custom. My husband and I stayed up late talking--and we had many wonderful, memorable conversations. While my son found it hard to communicate with his father, he and I had many exchanges on vital issues of politics, religion and ethics, which his present opinions reflect. He sometimes bared his soul even as a teenager. Maybe it was because I nursed and cuddled him for his first 18 months, or just luck, but now that he's 41 he is a very caring husband and father, approaching the 14th year of marriage to a deeply ethical, intelligent woman. In the beginning they had a profound language and custom barrier to overcome, but they seem to have done so. "All you need is love," sang the Beatles, and the Fab Four were right.
@Jose Martinez - As a widow raising two young children I am very offended by your comment. It is absolutely possible that a single parent can raise children just as capable of discussing their hopes and dreams, current events, etc. I am very sorry for the single parent families you knew that weren't able to accomplish this, because it's not easy, but I am just as capable of having these meaningful discussions with my children around the dinner table or in the car as your parents were, with or without my husband by my side. And my children have the added benefit of seeing what a woman is truly capable of in this society. I lead by example and am proud of the people I am raising in my husband's honor.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat's it. From now on the kids can fend for themselves on food, thank God.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen I was teaching at a school for teens from screwed up family backgrounds the kids enthusiastically responded when a female teacher and I spontaneously started showing them how to cook some simple healthy meals. They loved the cooking and the sit down meal we had when the cooking was done. You never know.
My parents were what you might call déclassé. We were raised in relative poverty but the parents were well read and were able to quote a good deal of literature from memory. We had two meals, with one parent and some kids at one, another parent and the other kids at another. Different food too. We also had tea around 9 at night, with neighbors visiting and talking, usually with great fun and wit. I was never interested in success but I did get a good education on scholarship and did ok. My siblings did very well financially.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think you are confusing cause and effect. Junkies and criminal abusers tend to end up in single parent situations. The victims of spouses/partners that are junkies/abusers also end up in single parent families. The former are lousy parents, the latter are generally not. The simple fact that single parents rarely get down time away from the kids makes the long term outcomes slightly less positive but not in a significant way. You must not have been much of a friend if you didn't help your friends stay clean regardless of family background.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJose Martinez- Is this supposed to be funny? Saying that your friends became accomplished at drug use or prison? Succeeded in raising families like the ones they came from?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHave you seen so little of the world that you know of no individuals who have broken the cycle of poverty and criminal behavior?
I was married. My educated husband and I were both from two parent, sit-down-together families. I did my best to prepare nutritious meals and set a beautiful table. My husband insisted that our children be seated and behave at the table, while he typically criticized the food. And the our children. And eventually, you guessed it, he got physically violent with us.
I am a single parent now. My kids are well fed but I don't always eat with them. Sometimes I just two tired. Sometimes my older son cooks for the younger one. He enjoys taking the responsibility of caring for someone; and I know he will become a loving father one day. Both enjoy meals free from being seeing anyone berated or abused. They both enjoy having a mom who, however tired and worn out, is able to sleep safely. In my "broken" home, we all feel safe and loved. Eating meals together does not guarantee this bond. When I was married, family dinner was the scariest time of day for us all.