Controversy in Feeding Kids: The Division Of Responsibility is Considered the Gold Standard… But is it Really?

Even within the dietetics field, there are differing opinions on feeding, and a topic that is gaining some attention is the division of responsibility (DOR).

The Basics of the DOR

The DOR is a framework, coined by Ellyn Satter, focused on promoting a structured yet flexible mealtime environment. The point is to allow children to develop a healthy relationship with food and learn how to regulate their own hunger and fullness cues. The concept emphasizes a clear division of roles between parents or caregivers and children when it comes to food. Parents are responsible for the what, when, and where of eating, while children are responsible for determining how much they eat and whether they eat at all. The DOR aims to reduce mealtime conflicts and support children in making balanced food choices, allowing them to become eating competent.

Criticisms of the DOR

The main criticisms are that it’s ableist, anti-intuitive eating, non-trauma-informed, and fatphobic. Let me break this down for you:

1) Fatphobic

Many view the DOR as being fatphobic, as it may inadvertently stigmatize or pathologize larger bodies. Satter’s discussion of a child’s weight as “helping without harming” leads many to believe that the “harming” viewpoint is likely focused on the larger end of the spectrum… and her one dessert portion does not help clear up the confusion.

2) Ableist

Some argue that the DOR assumes that all children can self-regulate their eating without considering potential cognitive or physical differences. Individuals with autism or ARFID may not have this ability. A good example to consider is a child with very specific food selectivity; if a child will only eat one or two foods, they cannot follow the “one family meal” rule the way the DOR expects and enforces.

3) Non-Intuitive Eating

Intuitive eating encourages individuals to listen to their hunger and fullness cues. The DOR promotes an open and closed kitchen policy which many believe contradicts an individual’s ability to listen to their body. Therefore, it prevents a child from eating when they feel hungry.

4) Non-Trauma-Informed

The DOR does not address how past traumatic experiences can impact an individual’s relationship with food. This means that a parent or caregiver’s own emotional turmoil or trauma can be brought to the table. This can indirectly or directly impact the child as they are learning to develop their own relationship with food.

Social Media and the DOR

Taking this all together, it is also important to discuss how social media has changed the way the DOR has been viewed over the years; Virginia Sole-Smith clearly emphasizes this, with her discussion of influencers, including some dietitians, who convey the idea that “if it is not working, you’re not doing it right” (1). This essentially makes it out to be a strict diet that needs to be followed “to the T,” when its creation was to be anti-diet. What seems to be going on?

Solving the DOR Problem

Breaking down the DOR, we know we have the what, when, where, if, and how much to focus on. It’s now clear that these elements may have some problems attributed to them, based on criticisms we’ve discussed. However, as with every debate, there is always a comeback that people seem to find. So… Why don’t we find a compromise? Join the Picky Eating Network to get access to this training and all the other ones about picky eating.

1. Virginia Sole-Smith. Oct 19, 2021. “What Instagram gets wrong about Feeding Your Kids” https://virginiasolesmith.substack.com/i/42608458/did-instagram-ruin-the-division-of-responsibility