Lunchroom lessons: I quit! - A Rant

[BabyBre]

I've worked in the lunchroom at dc's public school for a few years. It's a great way to earn a little money and get to know the staff and kids they're around all day. Soon after I started, I realized how much perfectly consumable food was being tossed in the trash when the kids dumped their trays. It was an astounding amount of food! I find it unethical to throw it in the trash when there are poor and hungry kids within our own school and district that would love to have it. So I made a suggestion that turned into the "sharing table". Rather than thow out their unwanted yogurt, milk, Goldfish, etc, kids put it on the sharing table and other kids can ask to have it if they're still hungry after they finish their lunch.

 

Soon I realized that kids would eat pizza and nothing else (because they're only required to take a grain and a protein and our district considers pizza to be both) and then get some fruit snacks from the sharing table, never having consumed anything healthy. I asked if we could require them to at least eat a fruit or vegetable from our bountiful produce bar before going to the sharing table, and this was approved. This has been the rule for several months and was working out beautifully. Kids were a little miffed at first, but now they just get a fruit or vegetable when they go through the line which, of course, was the desired outcome.

 

This week, our secretary must have just learned of the rule and announced to the entire lunchroom full of kids that it is NOT required that they have a fruit or vegetable before having seconds! She's afraid of getting calls from angry parents. She hasn't received any, she's just afraid she will, and our principal backed her up!

 

So today I've decided that I quit. I find the lessons they're teaching in our lunchroom reprehensible, especially if you consider we're in the middle of an "obesity crisis". That pizza is mandatory and fruits and vegetables are optional is, of course, just one of those lessons. We also make Ranch dressing available in unlimited quantities (it's very popular ON the pizza!), and the "brown lunch" is served several times a week, usually something like chicken nuggets, french fries, and chocolate milk - nothing natural, nothing unprocessed. I think it's morally irresponsible for an educational institution to be teaching these things to young children, and they do it because it's easier and cheaper than teaching the right things.

 

I have to pick my battles and, with dc in full-time public school, there are plenty to choose from. I don't think lunch is going to be one I take to the mat. So I quit! I can't be part of it.

 

Thanks for listening!

[Starr]

:confused: Sorry. It sounds like you had a good plan and that parents would be happy with it.

[gardening momma]

stupid secretary (and principal)

[JenniferB]

This issue and many others make it hard for me not to worry about the future of our country. I don't want to be a worry wart, but it's pretty frightening. *sigh* I'm sorry for you, for all of us. [goes to promptly put head in sand - again.]

[cubfan]

I think you must have a very big heart for kids and your idea was a creative one. But if the kids take fruit, aren't they just free then to put it on the share table?

 

My bigger issue is that I just don't understand why the school should be able to impose food standards onto others. There are probably some that would say pizza isn't healthy. I don't see why a kid should be required to take a fruit, a vegetable, or dessert. I'm all for helping them learn what is healthy and that choices have consequences, but I don't like the whole requirement aspect. Just my two cents.

[Lawana]

So today I've decided that I quit. I find the lessons they're teaching in our lunchroom reprehensible, especially if you consider we're in the middle of an "obesity crisis". That pizza is mandatory and fruits and vegetables are optional is, of course, just one of those lessons.

 

Thank you for what you have done. I wish there were more caring people like you to help our kids.:001_smile:

 

I'm all for helping them learn what is healthy and that choices have consequences, but I don't like the whole requirement aspect.

Are you saying you would prefer that kids have unlimited choice to whatever strikes their fancy for lunch? Is that what you would want for your kids? What do you think most kids would choose if given the option?

[MindyD]

I don't care for the requirement part either. Ideally, all the choices should be good choices, then they pick from that. Besides, the op already said a lot of the food was being thrown out. Even if there is a sharing table, I would assume a lot of food is still being thrown out. So why require it if they're not going to eat it? BUT...all this goes under the broad heading of things that ps try to mandate and that the parents SHOULD take care of.

Sorry, sounds like a rough day!

[Night Elf]

Ooooohh.. you went up against a big opponent. I saw a documentary once about school lunches. I think the bottom line is money. Food companies make bids to provide food to school systems. Obviously the lesser quality foods are cheaper.

 

Although I must confess I wouldn't like for a school to make my child eat anything she/he didn't want to eat. But I certainly see both sides of the argument!

[MindyD]

Have you watched Jamie Oliver's Food Nation? You can watch it on hulu. It's unbelievable! He's trying to get into the LA county school district and they have stonewalled him at every turn. They don't even cook at the schools, everything is delivered pre-packaged. A parent brought the breakfast for him to see. The cold breakfast was a brownie and the "hot" breakfast was a danish that was supposed to be heated up in the microwave in the plastic package.

[LibraryLover]

I so appreciate people like you. I really do.

 

My issue is that I do not want anyone to tell my children what they can and cannot eat. It's for our family to decide. I had one who wanted certain particular things and was freaked out by other things. I packed his lunch accordingly.

 

If my child doesn't want fruit or whatever at lunch, that is up to us! We are very thoughtful about our food, and I do not want any outsiders telling us what we should eat or when we should eat it. I would be a parent against this, even as I know people mean well.

Edited April 22, 2011 by LibraryLover

[nukeswife]

I have to say, I'm probably one of those parents the secretary was worried about. I don't think my child should be required to take anything they don't want, I don't care who in the school said so. I'm the parent and wouldn't want someone else to tell my kids what they can and can't eat, isn't that my responsibility? For instance I would find the yogurt you said ended up on the sharing table, a healthy choice, so why should my son be required to have a fruit or veggie before he could have extra yogurt? You may not think it's a good choice, but maybe I do.

 

One other question, what about kids with a sensitivity or allergy to certain foods/food groups, are they required to have an excuse?

 

Sorry if I got a bit heated in my response, but someone telling me how to feed my kid is one of my pet peeves (it's an in-law thing)

[cubfan]

"Are you saying you would prefer that kids have unlimited choice to whatever strikes their fancy for lunch? Is that what you would want for your kids? What do you think most kids would choose if given the option?"

 

 

No, a variety of CHOICES(implies one gets to make a decision), but I ask you, who then decides what is healthy?

Edited April 22, 2011 by cubfan

[EJCMom]

:grouphug: OP. You're in an impossible situation. Unfortunately, most parents are more concerned about their authority being usurped than whether or not their kids are eating garbage.

[Matryoshka]

I so appreciate people like you. I really do.

 

My issue is that I do not want anyone to tell my children what they can and cannot eat. It's for our family to decide. I had one who wanted certain particular things and was freaked out by other things. I packed his lunch accordingly.

 

If my child doesn't want fruit or whatever at lunch, that is up to us! We are very thoughtful about our food, and I really do not want any outsiders telling us what we should. I would be a parent against this, even as I know people mean well.

 

Here's the thing, though - if the parent wants it to be up to them what their kids eat, they can pack a lunch.

 

If they go with the school lunches, they give up all control - not because of the lunch ladies or government micromanagement, but because even if the parent says "You can only eat vegan food" or "Eat chicken but not beef" or "You must only eat nuggets and tater tots and chocolate milk" or "you must eat at least one vegetable/fruit" - well, if you're not there, the kid can do whatever they darn well please.

 

Including using their lunch money to buy Hostess cupcakes or M&Ms instead of the hot lunch. Ask me how I know. :blush:

 

If the kids are at school, parents have no control over what they do or don't eat. I would love it if the school only had an array of healthy choices and all were good, but barring that, I would very much like it if they required the children to choose at least one fruit or veggie before eating junk. Are kids really so picky that they can't eat an orange, apple, banana, or carrot stick? Do we want them to have 1/3 of their meals without eating anything healthy?

 

If the parent eats healthy foods at home, then I can't see how they'd object to their kids eating a piece of fruit for lunch. If the parent feeds their kids junk all the time, maybe it's the only healthy thing the kid gets in their diet ever. Either way, I'm having a hard time seeing the downside...

[cubfan]

nt

[cubfan]

Actually, I thought my reply reflected a value of healthy eating- it's a question of who decides? What if I don't think all the sugar in yogurt is healthy for my child? And yes, I do think my autonomy for my children trumps the "value" of a school or any other govt. entity.

[Night Elf]

...the op already said a lot of the food was being thrown out...

 

Oooh, this reminds me. I don't know if this is across the board, but I've been to restaurants who cannot save unused items that have been touched by other people, so I'm kind of surprised that the sharing table was even approved. Things like a stack of napkins, unused ketchup or sugar packages, and unused sets of wrapped plastic tableware have to be thrown out.

 

For instance I would find the yogurt you said ended up on the sharing table, a healthy choice, so why should my son be required to have a fruit or veggie before he could have extra yogurt?

 

I've known parents who wouldn't let their children eat yogurt because it has too much sugar in it. They see it as a sugar snack, not a healthy choice.

 

why is pizza a bad choice? It would seem to me that it is a perfect choice.

 

I guess because it's the way it's prepared? School pizza is likely all processed? I loved our school pizza! :D

[Garga]

Wait a sec....where was that other thread from a few weeks ago about how some schools mandate what kids are allowed to bring in their lunches? And how if the kids bring in a piece of candy it can be confiscated until the end of the school day?

 

Weren't we all in an uproar about all that (the schools imposing on the kids) and saying that the schools were overstepping their bounds? Is it because the school was imposing on the bagged lunch instead of the school-provided lunch?

[cara]

Here's the thing, though - if the parent wants it to be up to them what their kids eat, they can pack a lunch.

 

If they go with the school lunches, they give up all control - not because of the lunch ladies or government micromanagement, but because even if the parent says "You can only eat vegan food" or "Eat chicken but not beef" or "You must only eat nuggets and tater tots and chocolate milk" or "you must eat at least one vegetable/fruit" - well, if you're not there, the kid can do whatever they darn well please.

 

Including using their lunch money to buy Hostess cupcakes or M&Ms instead of the hot lunch. Ask me how I know. :blush:

 

If the kids are at school, parents have no control over what they do or don't eat. I would love it if the school only had an array of healthy choices and all were good, but barring that, I would very much like it if they required the children to choose at least one fruit or veggie before eating junk. Are kids really so picky that they can't eat an orange, apple, banana, or carrot stick? Do we want them to have 1/3 of their meals without eating anything healthy?

 

If the parent eats healthy foods at home, then I can't see how they'd object to their kids eating a piece of fruit for lunch. If the parent feeds their kids junk all the time, maybe it's the only healthy thing the kid gets in their diet ever. Either way, I'm having a hard time seeing the downside...

 

:iagree:

[gardening momma]

Weren't we all in an uproar about all that (the schools imposing on the kids) and saying that the schools were overstepping their bounds? Is it because the school was imposing on the bagged lunch instead of the school-provided lunch?

I would much rather that the school impose some standards on the school-provided lunch. The idea would be that, if you choose to buy the school lunch, this is what you get (healthy stuff, hopefully). If you don't want that, then bring your lunch (whatever the parent chooses to pack).

[shinyhappypeople]

Here's the thing, though - if the parent wants it to be up to them what their kids eat, they can pack a lunch.

 

If they go with the school lunches, they give up all control - not because of the lunch ladies or government micromanagement, but because even if the parent says "You can only eat vegan food" or "Eat chicken but not beef" or "You must only eat nuggets and tater tots and chocolate milk" or "you must eat at least one vegetable/fruit" - well, if you're not there, the kid can do whatever they darn well please.

 

Including using their lunch money to buy Hostess cupcakes or M&Ms instead of the hot lunch. Ask me how I know. :blush:

 

If the kids are at school, parents have no control over what they do or don't eat. I would love it if the school only had an array of healthy choices and all were good, but barring that, I would very much like it if they required the children to choose at least one fruit or veggie before eating junk. Are kids really so picky that they can't eat an orange, apple, banana, or carrot stick? Do we want them to have 1/3 of their meals without eating anything healthy?

 

If the parent eats healthy foods at home, then I can't see how they'd object to their kids eating a piece of fruit for lunch. If the parent feeds their kids junk all the time, maybe it's the only healthy thing the kid gets in their diet ever. Either way, I'm having a hard time seeing the downside...

 

:iagree:

 

Being required to surrender part of my parental authority was of the things that *really* bugged me when DD was in kindergarten PS. Signing those registration papers meant, in effect, limiting my parental rights during school hours - not literally and certainly not permanently, but it sure felt awful.

 

Personally, I think what the OP was doing sounds wonderful. I'm sorry it didn't work out :(

[shinyhappypeople]

I would much rather that the school impose some standards on the school-provided lunch. The idea would be that, if you choose to buy the school lunch, this is what you get (healthy stuff, hopefully). If you don't want that, then bring your lunch (whatever the parent chooses to pack).

:iagree:

[Lawana]

 

but I ask you, who then decides what is healthy?

That is actually a very good question. There is definitely not a consensus as to what constitutes healthy food.

 

The facts are: a "protein" choice and a "grain" choice are required; everything else is optional. This means that standards are being imposed. Given the protein and grain standards, I can't imagine any standard that suggests that protein and grain are good, but fruit/vegetable are not.

 

Either the standards are clearly stated: USDA pyramid or something else, or everyone gets free reign at whatever is provided.

 

I greatly applaud the OP's actions toward healthier food choices. If parents give up the option of choosing their children's lunches for them, then it falls to the school to do its best job imposing the standard it sees fit to make healthy food available to the students.

[LibraryLover]

I would love to see all schools offer healthy lunches! However, I do not want anyone policing my child as he/she eats, teling what to eat etc. That can go south pretty quickly. When I think of all the evil lunch aides of my past, I simply would never allow anyone to 'require' anything, foodwise. I can only imagine the abuses and the tears. The kids with sensory issues. I see a nightmare.

 

Children should also not be eating at long tables with adults standing over them, barking orders or telling them what they can eat, when they can eat it.

 

Adults should share school meals with children, they should be sitting with them, eating with them, and chatting kindly.

 

That's my fantasy.

Edited April 22, 2011 by LibraryLover

[Lawana]

That's my fantasy.

Yes. Unfortunately it is fantastical that a consensus on what is healthy be achieved, and that there are caring adults to implement the results.

[gardening momma]

I would love to see all schools offer healthy lunches! However, I do not want anyone policing my child as he/she eats, teling what to eat etc. That can go south pretty quickly. When I think of all the evil lunch aides of my past, I simply would never allow anyone to 'require' anything, foodwise. I can only imagine the abuses and the tears. The kids with sensory issues. I see a nightmare.

 

Children should also not be eating at long tables with adults standing over them, barking orders or telling them what they can eat, when they can eat it.

No, I wouldn't want that, either. But they can certainly make each available food option better, and then what the child picks is what he picks.

[Penelope]

That does sound frustrating.

 

I'm a little confused at why a sharing table would be seen as a positive when the concern is overeating, eating junk food, and obesity issues.

 

Maybe it doesn't waste as much food, but why do the children need seconds of milk, fruit leather, or whatever other sides and entrees are offered? :confused: That seems just as unhealthy.

 

Why can't they just go to the vegetable bar, period, if they are still hungry?

 

I don't think that requiring a vegetable before being allowed to eat some more junk is necessarily a healthy, positive policy.

[nd293]

This sounds like the sort of twisted logic I saw on the Jamie Oliver show where he went into a US school. He wasn't allowed to make stirfry noodles because it wasn't a high enough serving of veggies - instead french fries were served because that did meet the vegetable serving requirement. Very disturbing... Great that you tried, though...

[nukeswife]

 

I've known parents who wouldn't let their children eat yogurt because it has too much sugar in it. They see it as a sugar snack, not a healthy choice.

 

 

This was part of my point, I see it as fine, other parents see it as junk, so if it's ok to say my kid has to have a fruit or veggie first (or something else, someone other than mean deems Good for you) then would it also be ok for someone that feels like me to say to another persons child "You have to eat that yogurt because it's healthy" even if the child would prefer not to take it? I'm sure there are parents that would want to have my hide for trying to feed their kid sugary junk. All that to say, if it's not ok for me to impose my food preferences on someone else's kids, it should also work the other way around for mine.

 

Now this is not related to the quote above, but I don't think when I sent my kid to PS I gave up my rights to decide what was ok and not ok for him to eat. If he chose to have the school provided lunch he also knew that it was fine with me for him to eat only the parts he would enjoy and either not take, or if forced to take something he didn't want to eat, to throw it out when done. If I didn't feel he would eat the enough of the appropriate things in what they provided I would send a sack lunch for him. Sure he may not always make the choices I would like him too, but that's really an issue for me to deal with not the schools.

[Paige]

When my kids were in school they were not allowed to share at all because of food allergies and sensitivities. I am amazed the sharing table was allowed. I would sometimes mix up the lunches for my kids who were in the same class and put the wrong sandwiches in their lunch boxes. The girls were not even allowed to trade when their food came from the same mother and both kids came home hungry because they didn't like their sister's sandwich.

[Snickerdoodle]

This sounds like the sort of twisted logic I saw on the Jamie Oliver show where he went into a US school. He wasn't allowed to make stirfry noodles because it wasn't a high enough serving of veggies - instead french fries were served because that did meet the vegetable serving requirement. Very disturbing... Great that you tried, though...

 

 

He who defines, wins.

[Down_the_Rabbit_Hole]

Adults should share school meals with children, they should be sitting with them, eating with them, and chatting kindly.

 

That's my fantasy.

At my elementary school (many moons ago), the teacher would sit with her students a the lunch table. Each day a different student got to sit across from the teacher who then carried on a conversation with the child. one tended to eat more of the school lunch this way because the teacher would make sure the child at least tried each offering...not in a forced way, but a fun way.

[2cents]

IMO most of the food the op described sounds unhealthy. We limit grains and dairy and to some extent fruit too because of the sugar. Fruit snacks are out and pizza is for special occasions. I think trying to make something better of school lunches may be a losing battle because there is so little to work with and many people in admin are still stuck on the old food pyramid. Personally, I think that the lunch as described would probably be better off uneaten. :)

 

All that said, I would also have a problem with someone imposing their ideas of what is a proper lunch on my child. If there is a problem with the lunch system then the school needs to address that with the parents as a whole and come to decisions and agreements after everyone has been offered an opportunity to suggest remedies.

[lollie010]

To the OP, I appreciate that you made an effort.

 

Recently, in a moment of weekness I looked at the website for our local elementary school. I was feeling a little overwhelmed as a homeschool mom. I realized that not only was I the teacher, counselor, recreational director, etc., but I was also the breakfast, lunch, and dinner lady.

 

For a brief moment I considered putting the kids in public school. I called the school to ask what math curriculum they used and about the school schedule. The sweet lady said they would need to be in the cafeteria for breakfast by 7:00 am. They required that the students eat breakfast at the school. So I went to the website where the menu was posted. Breakfast was a poptart and milk. My kiddos would wilt with a poptart and milk for breakfast. Their menu plan consisted of a rotation of poptart and milk, sweet roll and milk, grits and milk, biscuit and milk. And luches were similarly carb laden. I felt sorry for the poor sixth grade boys.

 

Now when we sit down for breakfast we all say "at least its not a poptart and milk." lol.

[Mrs Mungo]

I called the school to ask what math curriculum they used and about the school schedule. The sweet lady said they would need to be in the cafeteria for breakfast by 7:00 am. They required that the students eat breakfast at the school. So I went to the website where the menu was posted. Breakfast was a poptart and milk. My kiddos would wilt with a poptart and milk for breakfast. Their menu plan consisted of a rotation of poptart and milk, sweet roll and milk, grits and milk, biscuit and milk. And luches were similarly carb laden. I felt sorry for the poor sixth grade boys.

 

The kids are *required* to eat breakfast at the school? Is that just so they can make sure every kid gets breakfast? Are you allowed to bring your own breakfast to eat there?

 

You would NOT want to see how my 2 younger kids would fare on a carb-only breakfast. That would be a bad scene for the teachers. No wonder so many kids are medicated.

[lollie010]

The kids are *required* to eat breakfast at the school? Is that just so they can make sure every kid gets breakfast? Are you allowed to bring your own breakfast to eat there?

 

You would NOT want to see how my 2 younger kids would fare on a carb-only breakfast. That would be a bad scene for the teachers. No wonder so many kids are medicated.

 

Yep. She basically said that they couldn't trust that the children would have a good breakfast so they required them to eat there. When I said that we would have breakfast at home she said she guessed that they could work something out, but they would still need to be seated in the cafeteria at 7:00 with all the other kiddos. Apparently, no one had ever asked if they could skip breakfast before. :confused: My thought was that my little ones would probably eat breakfast at home and then go eat again at school because they wouldn't want to sit there doing nothing while the other kids ate. LIke I said it was just a momentary thought--fortunately I quickly came to my senses and decided to continue hs'ing with boring old scrambled eggs for breakfast!

 

What makes me sad about the whole situation is thinking about the kids in our community. They eat at school two meals (nearly reaching their daily max of recommended fat and calories) but they come home starving.

[BabyBre]

Wait a sec....where was that other thread from a few weeks ago about how some schools mandate what kids are allowed to bring in their lunches? And how if the kids bring in a piece of candy it can be confiscated until the end of the school day?

 

Weren't we all in an uproar about all that (the schools imposing on the kids) and saying that the schools were overstepping their bounds? Is it because the school was imposing on the bagged lunch instead of the school-provided lunch?

 

 

Surely you're not implying this situation is anything like that one.

 

This is an elementary school with a responsibility to teach, and even if they're not trying to teach, they are infusing lessons daily through their actions. These kids spend more time around the adults at school than they do around their parents every day. Serving the children high fat, low nutrient, highly processed foods 5 days a week, and leaving the only fresh, nutritious, unprocessed foods on the menu optional is teaching lessons for an unhealthy future. It's no wonder the federal government is poised to take over.

 

If parents aren't strongly proactive, presenting the conflicting message in a more convincing way, kids will see nothing wrong with eating pizza every day. And, while I appreciate all the input, the suggestion that that is ok is just plain silly.

[BabyBre]

I would love to see all schools offer healthy lunches! However, I do not want anyone policing my child as he/she eats, teling what to eat etc. That can go south pretty quickly. When I think of all the evil lunch aides of my past, I simply would never allow anyone to 'require' anything, foodwise. I can only imagine the abuses and the tears. The kids with sensory issues. I see a nightmare.

 

Children should also not be eating at long tables with adults standing over them, barking orders or telling them what they can eat, when they can eat it.

 

Adults should share school meals with children, they should be sitting with them, eating with them, and chatting kindly.

 

That's my fantasy.

 

Oh my heavens! It's certainly not like that! No one is being force fed here! When a kids wants something from the sharing table, they raise their hand and ask. A requirement of visiting the sharing table is that they've eaten everything on their tray (I haven't heard anyone address that requirement yet) as the whole idea is to cut down on waste. The fruit and veggie rule meant that one of those things had to have been a fruit or veggie, just like it had to have been the (I think) state-required protein and grain. If it wasn't, they're told they can go up to the produce bar and help themselves to whatever they like first and then go to the sharing table.

 

The adults in our school don't eat the hot lunches! I know only two who do so regularly.

Edited April 22, 2011 by BabyBre

[Carol in Cal.]

Frankly, this sounds like primarily a control issue.

I'm amazed that this is the hill to die on.

 

Not education, not safety, not behavior, but whether or not some poor kid eats some wilted old fruit or veggie at school. Never mind whether or not they have sensory issues, never mind whether or not they normally even CAN eat that much, never mind whether they have a really good garden at home and know what fruits really should taste like, never mind whether they are almost too thin to be healthy and need to push calories at lunch or they will never make it through the rest of the day, never mind if they are always thirsty and really need the extra milk to choke down their food, never mind whether they are miserable in school and their food is the only high point of their day, no, none of that matters because gosh darn it this must be controlled too!

[pqr]

This week, our secretary must have just learned of the rule and announced to the entire lunchroom full of kids that it is NOT required that they have a fruit or vegetable before having seconds! She's afraid of getting calls from angry parents. She hasn't received any, she's just afraid she will, and our principal backed her up!

 

Sorry but that is NOT your call and yes I would have been one of the irate parents even though I actually agree with your opinion on the need for fruit and veg.

 

 

 

If parents aren't strongly proactive, presenting the conflicting message in a more convincing way, kids will see nothing wrong with eating pizza every day. And, while I appreciate all the input, the suggestion that that is ok is just plain silly.

 

 

While I do not doubt the best intentions on the part of the OP, she crossed the line.

 

It is NOT up to her to make these choices and this is one of those rare times when I actually agree with the school admin.

 

The children are NOT the teacher's they are the parent's and the decision (even if it is a bad one) must be left to the parents.

 

When will we get the point that it is NOT up to the generic "lunchroom lady" to decide what "my" children eat.

[LibraryLover]

I am fine with, "There is fruit available at the table, children". Sitting with the children, chatting about food, having a school garden, etc would be wonderful. I don't have any probelm with that. I just do not feel comfrotable with school rules about what to eat and when. That's a slippery slope and can easily be abused. If my child wants to eat two cookies at lunch and save his apple for the ride home, I am fine with that.

 

I am also fine with our country deciding that french fries are not a vegetable. I am fine with schools deciding that ketchup isn't a fruit. :)

 

And gently, the great majority of elementary age children in the US do not spend more time at school than they do at home. :)

Edited April 22, 2011 by LibraryLover

[BabyBre]

Frankly, this sounds like primarily a control issue.

I'm amazed that this is the hill to die on.

 

 

 

 

You must have misunderstood my op. This is the hill I choose NOT to die on. I could try to fight this battle for better nutrition in our school district, but that's not where my greatest passion nor interest lies. In the last few years, I've been more deeply involved in fighting the math wars with some success and I'll continue with that, among other things.

 

What I decided yesterday was that lunch will not be the hill I die on, and on principle I can't be part of teaching what I believe to be morally reprehensible lessons to these innocent and trusting children. So I won't continue. Call that a control issue if you want to, but I'm giving up a doorway to any influence I may have and have already had.

 

The unfortunate thing is that not enough parents or taxpayers have thrown down the gauntlet for better nutrition. That's why we don't have it. But my battle will be elsewhere.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

 

The unfortunate thing is that not enough parents or taxpayers have thrown down the gauntlet for better nutrition. That's why we don't have it. But my battle will be elsewhere.

 

I think because of our standard American diet, most people are not really familiar with a healthy diet, so they assume the school is providing nutritious meals. As a lunch volunteer during the two years my kids were in PS, I saw the mostly processed white bread related lunches with the wilted celery and dried out carrots that passed for the vegetable option. I also saw the lunches that many parents packed their kids. A typical packed lunch would be bologna on Wonder bread, a pack of "fruit" snacks, and a pack of oreos. Drinks would be a Capri Sun or chocolate milk. That's not my idea of a healthy lunch any more than my all time most disgusting school lunch that I saw- Cheesy Breadsticks, with corn that looked grayish, and sugar laden marinara sauce. I would hope we would be teaching our kids about better nutrition and eating natural foods, but I don't think we are. Either we don't know any better, or we don't care.

[Impish]

I'm surprised with all the allergies and sensitivites a sharing table was ever allowed. Wouldn't be here.

[Carol in Cal.]

You must have misunderstood my op.

 

Nope, you're quitting your job because you can't extend it into having your own way about what other people's children should eat. That's dying, in this context.

 

What I decided yesterday was that lunch will not be the hill I die on, and on principle I can't be part of teaching what I believe to be morally reprehensible lessons to these innocent and trusting children. So I won't continue. Call that a control issue if you want to, but I'm giving up a doorway to any influence I may have and have already had.

 

You're positioning your opinions as absolute fact that should, morally and scientifically, be binding on everyone. You have no right to impose them on other people's children.

 

The unfortunate thing is that not enough parents or taxpayers have thrown down the gauntlet for better nutrition. That's why we don't have it. But my battle will be elsewhere.

 

There are a lot of unfortunate things in schools today.

However, nutritional preferences vary greatly from family to family. And nutritional needs vary greatly from child to child. It is not right to choose one set of views and needs and impose them on everyone. That is not the business of the state. It is presumptuous.

 

The secretary was right.

[gingersmom]

My issue is that I do not want anyone to tell my children what they can and cannot eat. It's for our family to decide. I had one who wanted certain particular things and was freaked out by other things. I packed his lunch accordingly.

 

If my child doesn't want fruit or whatever at lunch, that is up to us! We are very thoughtful about our food, and I do not want any outsiders telling us what we should eat or when we should eat it. I would be a parent against this, even as I know people mean well.

 

 

:iagree:

[kalphs]

I've worked in the lunchroom at dc's public school for a few years. It's a great way to earn a little money and get to know the staff and kids they're around all day. Soon after I started, I realized how much perfectly consumable food was being tossed in the trash when the kids dumped their trays. It was an astounding amount of food! I find it unethical to throw it in the trash when there are poor and hungry kids within our own school and district that would love to have it. So I made a suggestion that turned into the "sharing table". Rather than thow out their unwanted yogurt, milk, Goldfish, etc, kids put it on the sharing table and other kids can ask to have it if they're still hungry after they finish their lunch.

 

Soon I realized that kids would eat pizza and nothing else (because they're only required to take a grain and a protein and our district considers pizza to be both) and then get some fruit snacks from the sharing table, never having consumed anything healthy. I asked if we could require them to at least eat a fruit or vegetable from our bountiful produce bar before going to the sharing table, and this was approved. This has been the rule for several months and was working out beautifully. Kids were a little miffed at first, but now they just get a fruit or vegetable when they go through the line which, of course, was the desired outcome.

 

This week, our secretary must have just learned of the rule and announced to the entire lunchroom full of kids that it is NOT required that they have a fruit or vegetable before having seconds! She's afraid of getting calls from angry parents. She hasn't received any, she's just afraid she will, and our principal backed her up!

 

So today I've decided that I quit. I find the lessons they're teaching in our lunchroom reprehensible, especially if you consider we're in the middle of an "obesity crisis". That pizza is mandatory and fruits and vegetables are optional is, of course, just one of those lessons. We also make Ranch dressing available in unlimited quantities (it's very popular ON the pizza!), and the "brown lunch" is served several times a week, usually something like chicken nuggets, french fries, and chocolate milk - nothing natural, nothing unprocessed. I think it's morally irresponsible for an educational institution to be teaching these things to young children, and they do it because it's easier and cheaper than teaching the right things.

 

I have to pick my battles and, with dc in full-time public school, there are plenty to choose from. I don't think lunch is going to be one I take to the mat. So I quit! I can't be part of it.

 

Thanks for listening!

:grouphug:

[CAMom]

Interesting discussion...

 

I think I have a problem with making sure everything on a tray is eaten before going for something on the sharing table. I understand not wanting to have waste but I think the "clean plate club" mentality is very damaging and a big contributor to obesity.

 

What if the kids are looking at the sharing table and really wanting something that's on it? They force themselves to eat what's on the tray since they know they can't have what they want without eating everything else. So, they end up over eating in order to get what they prefer. Not healthy.

 

I grew up with a "clean plate club" grandma. I still have a hard time not cleaning my plate even when I'm past satisfied.

[Matryoshka]

However, nutritional preferences vary greatly from family to family. And nutritional needs vary greatly from child to child. It is not right to choose one set of views and needs and impose them on everyone. That is not the business of the state. It is presumptuous.

.

 

Nutritional need doesn't vary greatly from family to family, however. One family may prefer to eat deep-fried everything and chips and soda all day, but it doesn't make it nutritious. And the fact that the schools seem to offer all kids that menu rather than a healthy one is nuts, imho. What about the food preferences of those that like to eat healthy? What if I'd prefer my kids not be required to eat a protein (in school, that would be the chicken nuggets?) and grain (Wonder bread?)? Or what if I'm fine with that requirement but would like grilled chiken, or brioled fish, or whole grain everything?

 

I am rather gobsmacked that adding a fruit OR veggie that the child gets to choose themselves is so controversial. :confused: And that by default schools cater to the preferences of the junk-food eaters, and that seems fine because it's the status quo, and we wouldn't want to upset those that are fine with the status quo.

 

Kids eat what they're used to. And if the schools are feeding them crap 1-2 meals a day 5 days a week for most of the year, they are going to get used to eating crap, and that's one of the things that make it so hard for families who want to eat healthfully to get their kids on board. My kids refused mac 'n' cheese and hot dogs when they were young because they were unfamiliar foods. Familiar = good. Kids usually have to try something a few times before it's "accepted". Aiming at the lowest common denominator is not the way to go.

 

Some people have said that their kids have texture issues. So, an apple or orange is bad, but chicken nuggets and nachos are universally a fine texture for everyone? Wouldn't texture or preference issues come up for kids no matter what the food is that's served - the menu is by definition limited - it's what it's limited to that's the question.

 

The thing is, saying "I don't want the school telling my kids what to eat" is a meaningless demand if you're sending them to eat at the cafeteria. They will then eat what is offered at the cafeteria (or the vending machines). The choices they are offered are pretty much what they then can eat.

 

Did anyone else look at that thread about school lunches around the world? It's a disgrace what passes for lunch in American schools. And the rest of the kids on the planet don't seem to be scarred by being offered vegetables at every meal.

Edited April 22, 2011 by matroyshka

[Joker]

Nutritional need doesn't vary greatly from family to family, however.

I am rather gobsmacked that adding a fruit OR veggie that the child gets to choose themselves is so controversial. :confused: .

 

No schools I have been in offer a variety of fruits and vegetables though. They usually had A fruit and A vegetable of the day. My dds each have certain fruits and veggies they are allergic to and/or can't tolerate. So I would be upset if they ate a pizza one day and the fruit and veggie offered were ones they couldn't eat but they were also told they couldn't get a yogurt off the table. It's controversial because not every child is the same and you can't impose the same nutritional guidelines on everyone.