Megan Hall

Factors That Influence What Parents Choose to Feed Their Children Over the Course of American History

Megan Hall

Nutrition is crucial for the development of children. It aids them in growth and immunity and prevents developing disorders early on. However, many different factors impact what children actually intake. Children’s diets are heavily reliant on their parents. Throughout history, Americans have experienced different factors that affect their choices in what they feed their children. The effect of disease has lessened since Colonial America; however, it is still prevalent in food safety. Additionally, the introduction of the refrigerator significantly changed Americans diets and gave them the ability to store nutritious foods for longer. The Great Depression created economic and physical barriers to nutritious food that can still be seen today. Social influences that originated in magazines and advertisements have become even stronger with social media. Class has consistently had an influence on parents' decisions throughout American history. American parents' decisions on what they feed their children aren’t based on nutrition but are instead based on scientific factors, social influence, and identity.

Scientific Factors

Throughout history, different scientific factors have affected what parents feed their children. One example is disease. Society frequently learns new things about disease prevention and treatment, meaning that disease has become less of a factor than it used to be. However, in Colonial America, disease was a large factor in nutrition. If parents were fighting a disease, they would have less money and physical ability to provide nutritious food to their infant. Illnesses that are common now, such as a cold or flu, were more significant. Additionally, if a child was sick, parents might not have the ability to buy food to help heal the child. Furthermore, if a parent died from disease the child would have to be placed with family members, another family, or in some cases almshouses or orphanages. Living with a new family could stretch the families' resources. Almshouses were designed for poor people and had horrid conditions which led them to be considered one of worst places for children to end up (1). If a family or a child by themselves ended up in an almshouse, they would likely be malnourished. They had little choice in food and the conditions contaminated the food. Therefore, disease greatly affected the food parents would provide their children.

However, disease is not completely eradicated as a factor in food. The food production industry has a lot of power in American politics and society. To save money, they reduce food quality and safety checks. This can lead to E. Coli outbreaks that are deadly. In Figure 1, a parent share’s that they bought contaminated food that killed their son. The parents had no idea the food was contaminated when they made the decision to buy it. The meat wasn’t recalled until twenty-six days after he was hospitalized. So, more families unknowingly poisoned their children during that time. To some extent, the food industry has more control over children’s health than parents do. The food industry highlights how hard it is for parents to provide their children nutritious food, because they can’t even trust that all the food, they buy is safe.

Figure 1: Clip from Food Inc. (2008).

“Kevins Law.” YouTube. YouTube, May 11, 2010.

Scientific inventions are another factor that has affected parents' decisions in what they feed their children. The refrigerator was invented and widely distributed in the early twentieth century, which significantly changed Americans' diets, especially children. People who had refrigerators spent more on dairy products and eggs, which need refrigeration and help with child growth and development (2). Once refrigerators became common, children's nutrition improved because parents could store more nutritious food for longer, making these foods more available. Results in the Maternal and Child Nutrition journal indicated that the effect of a society “acquiring refrigeration led to a 0.17 SD increase in height-for-age which translates into a 1.2-cm average increase in height over roughly 30 months” (2). There was a direct correlation between acquiring refrigeration and height development in children. Refrigeration gave parents the ability to choose to provide their children with better nutrition.

Social Influence

Another major contributor to parents' decisions is social influence. This is seen in advertisements. Baby food has been around since the nineteenth century but commercially took off in the early twentieth century. Advertisers capitalize on trends to promote their products and convince parents that their food is the best option. For example, in Figure 2, a 1939 Clapp’s Baby Food advertisement promotes that they had different products for different ages of young children. They depict a young girl growing up happy and healthy. This promotes sticking with the same company’s products throughout the child’s development, which reflects the family and loyalty values of the time period. The rise of compulsory heterosexuality in the early twentieth century created these values. Heterosexual couples were given benefits through government policies such as tax breaks. This created strong family values in American society on the outbreak of World War II (3). By playing up this value, Clapp’s is convincing parents to feed their children Clapp’s food. The parents’ decision is influenced more by the brand than by the nutritional benefit provided to the child. Later, as shown in Figure 3, Heinz promotes their baby food as “natural” and instant.” In the late twentieth century, natural foods were becoming more popular. So, promoting food as natural had some nutritional influence on parents' decisions in feeding. However, another key part of this advertisement is the word instant. By the 1980s, it was common for American mothers to work. The economic conditions of the 1970s along with a dissatisfaction with housework lead to women entering the workforce. With both parents working, both were busy and household tasks became more rushed. The convenience of instant baby food was appealing to busy parents. Therefore, while the decision on what food to buy was partially determined by nutrition it was also heavily influenced by convenience.

Advertisements, by nature, influence what food parents buy for their children. Baby books often suggest when starting solid foods, beginning with cereal is a good start. Specifically, rice cereal because it is the least allergenic (4). However, most cereal now is filled with high amounts of sugar. Advertisers of other cereals market them as good sources of energy and target children and parents in their advertisements. Kids get hooked on sugar early, which makes them want it more when they’re older. This has led to a growing trend in childhood obesity since the 1980s. However, in the 2010’s parents began to have a better understanding of the effect of sugary cereals and the tricks of advertisers. It was reported that “the percent of parents who reported feeding their children sugared cereals daily declined significantly, from 27% in 2009 to 22% in 2013” (5). In 2010, President Barack Obama introduced “Let’s Move!” a program aimed at reducing childhood obesity. First Lady Michelle Obama played a large role in leading the public awareness campaign (6). Her work influenced the change in parents' purchases. The influence of advertising has decreased slightly in regard to sugary cereal. However, advertisers still have a large influence on the food parents buy their young children today instead of nutrition.

Figure 2: Clapp's baby food advertisement from 1939.

"Advertisement: Clapp’s Baby Foods." Good Housekeeping, 11, 1939, 85.

Copy of Advertisement: BABY FOOD

Figure 3: Heinz advertisement for natural instant baby food from 1984.

"Advertisement: Baby Food." Chatelaine, 06, 1984, 1.

ProQuestDocuments-2023-02-07 (dragged).pdf

ProQuestDocuments-2023-02-07 copy (dragged).pdf

ProQuestDocuments-2023-02-07 (1) (dragged).pdf

Figure 4: Question and answer column in Good Housekeeping 1988.

Gutrecht, Norah, Robert Mendelson, and Micki Siegel. “Your Child’s Nutrition.” Good

Housekeeping, 09, 1988, 106-106, 108, 110.

Magazines also served as a source of influence on parents, especially mothers', decisions in what to feed their children. In the second half of the twentieth century, magazine question and answer advice columns increased in popularity. In Figure 4, Mothers would ask questions like “would adding a little honey help her like (vegetables) better?” and “my 15-month-old is on formula, but I’m concerned about fats. Isn’t it time to put him on skim milk?” Previously, simple questions like these were directed towards parents or grandparents, but in the twentieth century doctors became more prevalent, so parents turned to pediatricians instead (7). Doctors consulted with these magazines which gave the magazines credibility. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, as seen in Figure 5, magazines began to promote the idea of making your own baby food. Since the 1980s there has been a shift in how Americans view children. Parents have gone from safety first to safety only (8), which caused a greater focus on the ingredients they were feeding their kids. Parenting magazines reflect these trends and promote them to parents. According to the Pew Research Center, in 2015, “43% of moms said they turned to parenting websites, books or magazines at least sometimes for parenting advice” (9). Mother’s look to these resources for advice and to see examples of what other mothers did or what “experts” suggest. This in turn impacts what they feed their children and what nutrition they receive. The magazine’s authors and publishers have a significant influence on what food parents provide their children.

HOMEMADE BABY FOOD

Figure 5: Page from Parents magazine in 2001.

Kuzemchak, Sally. "Homemade Baby Food." Parents, 08, 2001, 51.

Following magazines, the rise of social media at the beginning of the twenty-first century has had a large impact on mothers' judgements in food. Social media influencers and advertisers shape people's opinions and choices. A 2022 ScienceDirect study indicated that “mothers like sponsored Instagram posts better when they are posted by a mom influencer compared to a brand” (10). American mothers shifted from looking to family, to magazines, then to mom influencers for examples and advice on how to raise their children. When a mom influencer promotes a product mothers are more likely to purchase it than when they just see an ad. Mothers start to build a relationship with the influencer and trust their judgment. The influencer determines what food the mother feeds her kid. Additionally, some influencers and advertisers take advantage of this dynamic. The same study looked at one case which included “the promotion of an unhealthy snack, which indicates that mom influencers promoting unhealthy food may affect mothers’ unhealthy food choices for their children, thereby even contributing to the unhealthy diet of children” (10). In this case, nutrition is completely disregarded when making the decision and is completely based on the influencer.

Additionally, the internet has led to a severe amount of judgment from parent to parent. People fall into communities that believe one thing and see other approaches as wrong. A 2017 study pointed out that “readers used blogs for reassurance” but on one mom blog “this reader agency was challenged when mothers who did not conform faced negative judgment or even harassment from other users” (11). Mom’s use the internet and these mom blogs to judge other mothers for not following the same path as them. This judgment places pressure on other mothers to follow the same path, meaning that the decisions they make about their own children are based on other mothers, not what food they feel is best. Additionally, the blogs themselves are a source of influence on the decision parents make in what to feed their children.

Identity

The last major factor that impacts parents' decisions in what they feed their children is identity. Race, location, and class all affect the nutrition the child will receive. In Colonial America, slaves were malnourished. They were not given enough food and what they were given was not nutritionally dense. Additionally, they were provided food and not given a choice. Furthermore, children were often separated from their parents, therefore, the choice was taken away from enslaved parents. After emancipation, society quickly turned to the Jim Crow era. In the early twentieth century, racist evolutionary theories impacted African Americans' thoughts on the role of food and nutrition. They believed:

The food they fed their children influenced the structure of their faces: if a child’s chin looked too big, then parents should give the child less starch, and if parents considered a child’s lips too full they should provide less sugar. ‘Food–reasonable food’ was what African Americans needed to ‘win health and efficiency,’ not eugenic breeding. (12)

During the eugenics movement, African Americans knew the views many people had about them were wrong. However, they still believed they should change some aspects of themselves. They believed food could do this. So, they began changing their children’s diets to attempt to alter their appearances. Nutritional components were involved in the decision-making process in this case; however, it was for physical appearance rather than the nutritional health advantage.

Location also impacts parent’s choices on nutrition throughout history. For example, during the Great Depression, the Children's Bureau reported that “relief given in some communities has been so low that only a very inadequate diet could be provided with little, or nothing left for clothing, shelter, and medical care. In many regions, however, the level of relief has gradually been raised” (13). The report mentions that the areas where the relief had been raised were urban areas. People in rural areas were receiving less aid causing a worse diet for their children. Furthermore, urban areas have more stores, and more options for food, providing easier access to and higher quality store bought baby food or ingredients for homemade food. In Figure 6, Purdue University explains that as recently as 2022, people in urban areas still experience food security at higher rates than in rural areas. Urban residents also experience higher overall contentment with their diet than those in rural areas. Finally, trends show that people in urban areas are more likely to buy organic foods due to higher budgets and availability. People in urban areas are at an advantage when it comes to nutritional food choices. Parents in rural areas have fewer options in what foods they can provide their children, so some of the choice is taken away from them.

Figure 6: Consumer Food Insights - April 2022, from Purdue University Agriculture.

Consumer Food Insights - April 2022. YouTube. YouTube, 2022.

Finally, class and wealth determine the decision parents make regarding food. Starting in Colonial times, discrepancies in class affected nutrition because “impoverished families (could not) afford adequate diets or good medical care, and additional income improved health through improved nutritional intake and better control of infectious diseases” (14). Better foods were more expensive, so families experiencing poverty could not afford nutrient dense foods to feed their children. In this case, price impacted the decision on what to feed children rather than nutrition. This problem has withstood the test of time. During the Great Depression, the Children’s Bureau advised on the importance of protective foods but acknowledged that they were more expensive. They wrote that “in general these protective foods are more expensive and in some communities more difficult to obtain than the foods which supply chiefly energy” (15). Foods that promote health were harder to get and a lack of money prevented parents from being able to provide them to their children. Their only option was cheaper, less protective food. This trend continued into the twenty-first century as prices of sugars and fast or instant foods are cheaper than foods with better nutritional value. There has been a constant class barrier impacting the food parents are able to provide their children. Additionally, this goes along with the idea that race impacts nutrition because American history reflects a trend with race and poverty. People of color have a harder time escaping poverty in America. This leads to them having less money and ability to prioritize nutrition in the decision on what food to buy for their children.

Some might argue that parents are starting to care more about nutrition, especially with new programs looking at child obesity. A 2016 study in the International Journal of Consumer Studies found that “parents have a strong interest in functional nutrition for their children, even if their level of familiarity with these products is still low” (16). While parents might acknowledge and care about the nutrition of their children, it ultimately does not end up being the final motivator when it comes to purchasing the food. Access to nutritious food is a big barrier whether it be from lack of storage in the past, or a class barrier throughout time. These wedges ultimately prevent parents from prioritizing nutrition when choosing what food to provide their children.

American’s decisions on what they feed their children have been changed by a multitude of different factors. Scientific developments have weakened the effect of diseases and given the ability to store perishable nutritious foods. Magazines initiated a trend of seeking advice from the media which took off even further with social media. People make careers in mom content which has cultivated a culture of judging other mothers. Advertisements take advantage of trends to promote their products. Factors such as race, location, and class have provided difficulties and discrepancies in what impacts different people’s decisions on what to feed their children. Mothers entering the workforce created demand for instant foods and the shift in children’s safety during the 1980s created a larger focus on children’s food and ingredients. Overall, Americans have shifted from knowing very little and caring little about nutrition to putting a hyper focus on what they are feeding their own children as well as what other people are. This array of factors has a greater influence on American parents' choices in what they feed their children than nutritional benefit does. Settling some of these inequalities will help parents be able to provide their children more nutritious foods.

Endnotes

1. Myers, John E. B. “Child Protection in America: Past, Present, and Future.” OUP Academic. Oxford University Press, July 13, 2006. https://academic.oup.com/book/2504/chapter/142791520v.

2. Martinez, Sebastian, Juan M. Murguia, Brisa Rejas, and Solis Winters. "Refrigeration and child growth: What is the connection?" Maternal and Child Nutrition 17, no. 2 (2021): NA. Gale Academic OneFile https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.bu.edu/apps/doc/A731519882/AONE?u=mlin_b_bumml&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=8a8bac2b.

3. Brooke Blower, “Self Discoveries” (lecture, Boston University, Boston, MA, February 28, 2023).

4. Shelov, Steven P. The Complete and Authoritative Guide Caring for Your Baby and Young Child. Bantam Book, 1991.

5. Harris, Jennifer L, LoDolce, Megan E, Schwartz, Marlene B. “Encouraging big food to do the right thing for children’s health: a case study on using research to improve marketing of sugary cereals.” Critical Public Health, 2015 Vol. 25, No. 3, 320–332, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2014.957655

6. National Archives and Records Administration. National Archives and Records Administration. https://letsmove.obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/.

7. Brooke Blower, “Historicizing Your Life” (lecture, Boston University, Boston, MA, May 2, 2023).

8. Brooke Blower, “Learning to Cope” (lecture, Boston University, Boston, MA, February 7, 2023).

9. “Parenting in America: Outlook, worries, aspirations are strongly linked to financial situation”Pew Research Center. December 17, 2015.

10. Beukels, Emma, De Jans, Steffi. “‘My Mom Got Influenced by Yours’: The persuasiveness of mom influencers in relation to mothers’ food assessments and decisions” Appetite, Vol. 178, No. 106269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2022.106269.

11. Orton-Johnson, K. “Mummy Blogs and Representations of Motherhood: “Bad Mummies” and Their Readers.” Social Media + Society, Vol. 3 No. 2, https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117707186.

12. Veit, Helen Zoe. “Race, Diet, and the Eugenics of Nutrition.” Modern Food, Moral Food : Self-control, Science, and the Rise of Modern American Eating in the Early Twentieth Century. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2013.

13. Eliot, M. Martha. “Child Health.” https://congressional.proquest.com/histvault?q=104604-019-0407&accountid=9676

14. Steckel, Richard H. “Nutritional Status in the Colonial American Economy.” The William and Mary Quarterly 56, no. 1 (1999): 31–52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2674594.

15. Eliot, Martha M. “Planning the Diet for Children When the Food Budget Is Small,” n.d.

https://congressional.proquest.com/histvault?q=201751-207-0125&accountid=9676.

16. Annunziata, Azzurra, Vecchio, Riccardo, Kraus, Artur. “Factors affecting parents’ choices of functional foods targeted for children.” International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 40, No. 5, https://doi-org.ezproxy.bu.edu/10.1111/ijcs.12297.

About The Author

Megan grew up in Burke, Virginia, about a half hour from Washington, DC. She likes to go downtown with friends and family. She also considers Pittsburgh a home away from home since it's where her mom is from and she still has family there, plus she likes their sports teams. In fact, many people were surprised she chose to go to Boston for college over Pittsburgh. At Boston University, she plays club soccer and is studying dietetics. She grew up playing sports and wants to become a sports nutritionist.

Page updated

Report abuse