<jumps up and down screaming at you to read the frelling thread title>
And I repeat, *what would YOU do if the state substituted your kid’s lunch?"
Nothing about the freaking article, someone asked WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF THE STATE SUBSTITUTED YOUR KID"S LUNCH.
Jesus freaking jumping Christ. This is not the other thread.
sort of like a mass market cheese curd?
again, who is serving who here? It’s not the school’s job to inspect a parent-provided meal. It’s not the function of government to create our-way-or-the-highway institutions. They represent us. We don’t serve them. We pay taxes and have every right to question intrusions into parental responsibilities.
I used the TSA as an example of what happens when inches are given. There appears to be no end in sight to the goofy shit that spills out of this agency. This is why people should step up and challenge policies in the early stages. guidelines become inspections which turn into mandates which grow bureaucracies. The TSA is the poster child of an agency that has regularly failed it’s function yet continues to intrude on personal freedoms.
In the case in question, the government is serving the parents by providing the service that the parents signed up for and, in some cases, are paying tuition for. If I, as a parent, signed up for a program that promised to provide extra support, both socially and academically, for my child and that told me they’d be checking lunches to make sure they were nutritionally balanced, and the program in question did NOT do that, I’d be pissed. The people in the program were doing exactly what they’d been asked, by the PARENTS, to do.
The OP directly refers to that case, then asks:
The parents in question did not sign up for the lunch police. Please stop saying this.
There ain’t no such thing as the “lunch police”. Please stop saying this.
They did! The program in NC (in which the child in question is enrolled) is a VOLUNTARY, non-mandatory, fill out an application if you want in type of program. This is not a normal public school classroom that we’re talking about. The parents asked for their children to be enrolled in this, knowing what the rules were, and knowing that the idea behind the program is to provide extra care in order to get these at-risk children up to the same level as their peers so that when they enter kindergarten, they’re not behind. That’s the ENTIRE PURPOSE of the program.
You are correct.
As a child I would have been thrilled if someone made sure I had a decent lunch…
Your cute tautology fails to be relevant to anything in this thread. I have prepared a pot of decaf, please do me a favor and partake of it from now on.
Given the educational and nutritional crisis in this country, I think it’s a great idea for schools to monitor students’ nutrition and offer them “top-ups” to complete their meals.
However, the system should ensure that the food that the school provides is indeed nutritionally sound, and it should be sure to take into account allergies, intolerances, and other legitimate reasons why a child’s diet might require disinclusion of some items.
Schools should also be providing fresh, healthful, and attractive foods. I think Jamie Oliver really has the right idea here. Schools should also be offering hands-on nutrition lessons. That and financial education really should be an indispensable part of our educational system.
What I would do were I a parent would depend on the structure of this nutritional program. I should hope that there would have been some prior consultation and education with and of parents as well, as well as ways to communicate allergies and the such. If, in the context of that program, a school changed my child’s lunch, I would check to see whether I thought it was a sensible change, and, if so, I would endeavour to incorporate that into my child’s nutritional program. If I thought there was a problem with the change, I would consult with the nutritional program to discuss the matter.
Oh, what a surprise…Republicans introduce legislation to completely privatize pre-k classrooms in NC, leaving many at-risk families out in the cold.
What did I do is a better question for me. This has happened to me three times.
The first time, a smoothie company came into the school and gave each kid a free smoothie and a coupon to get more. These things were 300 calories each, no fibre, one gram of protein and a whole shitton of sugar. They were supposedly ‘healthy.’ I ignored the fact that the teachers were too stupid to know healthy and gave the principal a piece of my mind about marketing to my children in school.
The second and third times were a problem with the ‘snack box’ in the classroom. There is a program in our region that provides money for having a box in each elementary classroom with ‘healthy’ snacks in case a child forgot their lunch. The problem is that their idea of ‘healthy’ and mine differ quite severly. Chocolate chip granola bars. Crackers and cheese. Drink boxes (not juice).
Anyway, my daugher’s problem is that since she was neglected as a young child, she would just eat until she barfed when she was first placed with us. So, she would eat her huge home-packed lunch as fast as she could and then clear our the ‘snack box.’ It took three weeks for the teacher to mention this to me. Since the boxes are supposed to be easily accessible for kids who might be embarrassed, it took another two to convince the principal to put the thing out of reach and that the lunch supervisor could give it to kids if they need it.
The problem with my son was much more inventive on his part. You see, they don’t get those kinds of snacks at home (exept as treats). So, he would eat his whole lunch (big sandwich, two fruits/veggies, milk, juice, fibre bar and yogurt) during first lunch (they have two lunch breaks) and then claim to be hungry during second so that he could eat treats out of the box. My little boy was so convincing that the teacher said that I should really pack him more food for lunch. (She rescinded when I showed her what had been packed for that day.) After that, we packed two lunches for him (one for each break) and gave him a stern talking-to.
…what’s wrong with crackers and cheese?
From the package:
Kraft Handi-Snacks: Ritz - Cheese ‘n’ Crackers
Servings:
Calories 100 Sodium 330 mg
Total Fat 6 g Potassium 50 mg
Saturated 2 g Total Carbs 11 g
Polyunsaturated 2 g Dietary Fiber 0 g
Monounsaturated 2 g Sugars 2 g
Trans 0 g Protein 2 g
Cholesterol 5 mg
Vitamin A 2% Calcium 6%
Vitamin C 0% Iron 2%
100 calories, 6 grams of fat. That’s actually not the worst snack in the world for a kid – depending of course on what else he or she eating during the day.
I don’t look at fat so much I look at the lack of anything nutritional at all in it. All refined flour and sugar.
Our kids just don’t get that at home.
(Now, whole grain crackers with real unprocessed cheese they would get. You get fibre and calcium.)
ETA: if you look at anything that is prepackaged as a ‘kid snack’ you will see that about 95% of them lack any nutritional benefit at all. I end up ‘packaging’ my own or giving them ‘adult’ snacks.
Oh. When I think of cheese and crackers, I think of cheese cubes and saltines. Not whatever a “Handi-Snack” is.
They were handi snacks. Prepackaged crap for kids.