An Intergenerational Approach to Nutrition: Introducing the FRIDGE Program

1
An Intergenerational Approach to Nutrition
Introducing the FRIDGE Program

• Generations United 2007
• Matt Kaplan, Ph.D., Associate Professor
• Intergenerational Programs and Aging
• Penn State University
• July 27, 2007

2
Alternative title for this sessionOpening the
Black Box of Family Communication about Food
3
- or - Making communication about food easier,
more fun, and more effective for family members
of all ages.
4
Overview

• Definitions
• Mono-, Multi-, and intergenerational approaches
  to nutrition education
  
• What we found out - Focus Group Study
• An educational program called FRIDGE
• Food-Related Intergenerational Discussion Group
  Experiences

5
Mono-, multi-, and intergenerational frameworks
for nutrition education

• A mono-generational framework
• Reaches only part of family
• Outside of family context

Nutrition Information
6

• A multi-generational framework
• Delivers information to entire family
• No guarantee that family will discuss/ use/
• or otherwise act upon this information

Nutrition Information
7
An intergenerational framework

• Facilitates family interaction
• (involves children, parents and grandparents)
• Joint opportunities to learn, discuss, and act
  upon same health and nutrition information
  

8
Clues from a studyAn Intergenerational Focus
Group Study of Family Conversations and
Decision-Making about Food and Eating Healthfully
What would an intergenerational framework for
nutrition education look like?

• Funded by the Pennsylvania Nutrition Education
  Tracks, a part of USDAs Food Stamp Program.

9
Purpose of Focus Group Study

• Learn how family members from different
  generations discuss food and healthy eating
  issues.
  
• Establish if family members perceive a need to
  improve the way they discuss food and healthy
  eating issues.
  
• Assess members receptivity to participating in a
  multi-generational and multi-family type of a
  program.
  

10
Overview of the Study

• Focus group format
• 3 focus groups
• 4-8 families per focus group
• Preteens 10-13 years of age
• Parents
• Grandparents
• Diverse- geographically and culturally diverse
  community nutrition education sites
  

11
Study Results

• Participants understand basic nutrition
• but do not apply the knowledge.
• Poor family communication was noted as a barrier
  for achieving healthy eating goals.
  
• Participants indicated a desire for a program
  that would encourage better family communication
  about food.
  

12
Family Disharmony Conflictual communication
patterns

• Sometimes Im to the point of crying because I
  think Im doing all the right stuff and its
  still not the right stuff. (Parent)

13
Food Related Decisions

• Parenting Styles
• Authoritarian- high control/ low nurture (most
  common) Im in charge. Its pretty much what I
  say. During the week, it is whatever I cook.
  (Parent)
• Authoritative- high control and nurture Ive
  always stressed letting her decide within
  reason. (Parent)
  
• My mom says if I cook breakfast that I can
  pick out
  
• the stuff I want to cook. If they want eggs,
  Ill choose the kind of eggs I want. (Child)

(Baumrind, 1968, 1971)
14
Putting parenting aside for a moment

• Does the parenting literature fully capture what
  is happening/ should be happening in terms of how
  families communicate and make decisions about
  food?

15
Situation 1

• Grandmother This morning, I had made cream of
  wheat. And I had packaged meat and orange juice.
  She didnt stop in the kitchen. She kept going.
  And Im calling her to come have breakfast and
  shes going to school.
• Who is responsible for this situation?
• Where does the responsibility lie?

16
An eleven year old boy and his grandmother
(primary caregiver) talk openly about how their
family makes decisions about food
Situation 2

• Child Usually, my grandma and me just sit down
  and make a list of the things were going to
  make, like apple pie or mashed potatoes or
  something. And then we just go to the store and
  get the stuff that were going to make and then
  we just make it.
• Grandmother I started when they were little.
  You know, its something that we prepare the
  meals together. And there are sometimes that they
  like to do that. I was laid up last year, I had
  surgery and my back was out, and I could not do
  anything. And they just took over everything.
  They did the cooking. I was really surprised. I
  knew they could cook, but I didnt think they
  could do it on their own without me being there.
  But they could.

17
Food Related Decisions
Child involvement and empowerment
Child takes control
Child is full partner
Child is limited partner
Child is Consulted
Child is informed
Child is not informed
18
Food Related Decisions
Child is consulted

• Child has a chance to voice an opinion
• All decision-making power is in the hands of the
  adults.
  
• I ask, but then I cook whatever I want.
  (Parent)
  

19
Food Related Decisions
Child is informed

• Child is told about parents food-related
  decisions and expectations
  
• Child has no chance to give input.
• At least I let them know first. (Parent)

20
Implications of study results for working with
parents

• Support for
• being less rigid/authoritarian with children
• Increased child involvement (re food selection
  and preparation) for better buy-in
  
• More emphasis on teamwork (from an early age)

21
FRIDGE Food-Related Intergenerational Discussion
Group Experiences

• A curriculum to help families
• communicate better
• learn more about food and nutrition and
• work as partners
• to achieve their healthy eating goals.

22
Characteristics of FRIDGE

• The curriculum has three sections
• (Section 1) Enhancing family communication about
  food
  
• (Section 2) Learning together about food and
  nutrition
  
• (Section 3) Working as a team to improve family
  eating practices
  

23
Ice Breakers and Takes Outs

• Ice Breakers
• Help participants ease into program.
• Encourage openness and sharing between family
  members and other families.
  
• Promote full participation.
• Take Outs
• Reinforce lessons at home
• Apply skills learned in class

24
Section 1 Enhancing Family Communication about
Food

• Activities
• Icebreaker Food Becomes You
• The Think You Know Me? game (similar to the
  Newlywed Game)
  
• RECIPE for Good Communication (3 parts).
• Coolish or Foolish talking about peer pressure
  and food choices
  
• Take out Activity Using Your Communication
  Skills at Home
  

25
The Think You Know Me? activity

• Similar to the Newlywed Game
• Small group Team child and grandparent
• Parent goes to different room, or a corner, to
  answer questions about their parent and their
  child printed on a sheet, as well as questions
  about herself.
• Grandparent and child team up to answer questions
  about their child/ mother, as well as questions
  about themselves.

26
Questions

• Child/Grandparent
• What is Mom/ Daughters favorite food?
• When M/D goes food shopping does she use a list?
• Does your M/D prefer to use the oven or the
  microwave?
  

• Parent
• What is you favorite food?
• When you go food shopping do you use a list?
• Do you prefer to us the oven or the microwave?

27
The R.E.C.I.P.E. for Good Communication

• R Reflective Listening
• E Encouragement
• C Compromise Cooperation
• I I messages
• P Practice
• E Engagement

28
Section 2 Learning Together about Food and
Nutrition

• Activities
• Icebreaker Two Truths and a Could Be
• Dietary Knowledge Timeline
• Back to the Future Food Time Capsule.
• Baking Now and Then
• Internet Recipe Scavenger Hunt optional
• Take out Activity The Family Meeting

29
(No Transcript)
30
Section 3 Working as a team to improve family
eating practices

• Activities
• Icebreaker The Human Pretzel
• Family Food Puzzle
• Making Decisions About Food From Me to We
• Dinnertime poem What Does it Mean to Eat
  Together?
  
• Out with the Unhealthy and In with the Healthy
• Take Out activity A Family Food Contract

31
Out with the Unhealthy and In with the Healthy

• Each family creates an Out with the Unhealthy
  and In with the Healthy wardrobe of food
  items and behaviors.
  
• The 1st hanger is food items and behaviors that
  the family does not want anymore or which no
  longer fit well.
  
• The 2nd hanger is new foods items and behaviors
  which fit the family better.

32

33
Pilot Study Related Methods

• Piloted at 5 sites throughout Pennsylvania
• Program facilitated by nutrition educators and
  program coordinators.
  
• 23 families participated.
• Total of 46 individuals
• 23 Children
• 23 Adults

34
Results of Pilot Study - Adults
Frequency of healthy eating behaviors. (A)
Ability to explain changes in food guidance syst
em. (B) Family members who help prepare grocery
list. Family members who help with meal planni
ng.
Level of significance for all reported pre-post
test differences .05
35
Results of Pilot Study - Youth
Frequency of trying new fruits and vegetables (A
). Ability to explain changes in food guidance
system (B) Family members who helped prepare th
e grocery list. Food purchases decisions (C).
Deciding how the family eats (C).
Level of significance for all reported pre-post
test differences .05
36
Keys to facilitating FRIDGE programs

• Provide adequate time during the activities so
  families can adequately explore communication and
  relationship issues.
  
• Instead of recommending 12 hours to complete the
  curriculum we now recommend 16- 20 hours.
  
• FRIDGE can be facilitated by a nutrition
  educator or a family relations specialist/
  educator, yet it is preferable to conduct the
  program with 2 facilitators with skills and
  knowledge spanning both areas.

37
Quotes from Participants

• I realized that my daughter and I dont share
  the same views on food and we are working on
  that Mother
  
• (What I liked most was) coming together as a
  family and discussing our recipe plans
  
• 12 year old girl
• This helped families realize how little they
  knew about each other.They (parents) are
  assuming that they know what the kids want, and
  kids are assuming that parents know what they
  want.
• Program Facilitator

38
Conclusion

• Adults and children enjoyed discussing food.
• Both generations reported improved eating
  practices.
  
• Increased communication led to greater family
  participation in food purchases and meal
  planning.
  

39
Summary Points

• In their efforts to eat more healthfully, many
  families need help in communicating effectively
  and in a positive manner.
  
• Nutrition educators are needed to reach out to
  the entire family
  
• As a master facilitator Promote reflection,
  discussion, and debate.
  
• As a deliverer of information. Families need
  help processing information and distinguishing
  between various strands of information and
  misinformation.
• There are so many diet fads out there right now
  that the kids are getting all of this information
  misinformation, what have you You know, you
  hear the Atkins and the South Beach and your
  protein diets. And especially having teenagers
  now, theyre sitting there going, you know, No
  carbs. No protein. Whats the best we to go?
  Are we supposed to cut out (Parent)
• FRIDGE is one tool that nutrition educators can
  use to enhance family communication
  

40
Questions and Comments?

• Thank you!

41
The Penn State Intergenerational Program

• Contact Information
• Matt Kaplan, Ph.D., Associate Professor
• Intergenerational Programs and Aging
• Department of Agricultural and Extension
  Education
  
• The Pennsylvania State University
• 323 Ag Administration Building, Room 315
• University Park, PA 16802
• Phone [phone], Fax [phone]
• E-Mail msk15_at_psu.edu
• Web http//intergenerational.cas.psu.edu
• Frances Alloway, M.A., R.D., Foods
  Nutrition/Nutrition Links Educator
  
• Penn State Cooperative Extension - Delaware
  County 20 Paper Mill Rd. Springfield, PA 
  19064 Ph 610-690-7662 fax [phone] Office
  number 610-690-2655 E-mail ffa2_at_psu.edu