While I find much to love in the Intuitive Eating model--it accurately calls out diet culture and weight stigma as every bit as damaging as "obesity" supposedly is--I still find some elements incomplete. One critique I hear about Intuitive Eating is that it still isn't evidence-based enough and hasn't fully hashed out its psychology of eating and how that coheres with "gentle nutrition." I think there's truth to that.
Critics often ask for evidence that, if you let someone freely eat what they want (without any restrictions) that they'll naturally find mental and physical balance on that later. I agree; you can't prove that will be the most likely result. For example, don't most of us still under- or overeat to extreme discomfort at times as adults? Who really "learns" that lesson? Maybe that's just life and human psychology. This book, and Intuitive Eating in general, relies too much on the belief that there should be no food restrictions, so eating balance will occur naturally over time. Perhaps "gentle nutrition" and moderation can co-exist more than Intuitive Eating spends time exploring (when we separate out diet culture)? Yes, having significant choice and variety matters, and it can lead to de-stigmatization and greater joy in food. But, it also feels entirely possible that gentle nutrition is treated too much as an afterthought in Intuitive Eating, when it could support energy levels and mental/physical health significantly.
Nonetheless, yes, mental health matters as much as physical health, and our culture fails to reckon with that amid our "obesity" rhetoric and it's cruelties. Overall, the authors thoroughly address food insecurity, racial and socioeconomic oppression, diet culture, capitalism, and weight stigma. Plus, they emphasize that the how-to, as a parent, is mainly in healing your own relationship with food, diet culture, and weight stigma, as much as you can in the environment we swim in (while we continue to try to change it).