Another replaced lunch

[jujsky]

I don't think that the fact that this program is for at risk, low income kids means that the parent's rights should be usurped. And I don't think that pointing out that the lunches were not unhealthy even if they lacked carrot sticks is hysteria. Or that wondering what they would do with food allergies or other health problems which can show up just as much, if not more, in at risk kids in such a one-size fits all system, is hysteria either.

 

:iagree:

[GoVanGogh]

I felt the same about the memo!

 

Parents should start a double-edged campaign for better education and more lunch freedom. Let's think of slogans.

 

"Fewer Nuggets. More Grammar!"

 

"Punctuation Trumps Potatoes"

 

"Cheese Slices are Better than Comma Splices"

"if one comma is good, then three must be great!"

I'm a huge fan of the "Although; we, however, with you...fill in the details and follow orders...will lead to greatness someday." style. Semi-colons are a nice touch; and add variety, to a hard-to-read letter that is for parents to read.

:lol:

 

But all laughing aside, I think the bigger news story is the memo that was sent out from school officials. Is it any wonder that the American public school system is in shambles when we have supposedly educated school officials sending out memos with so many grammatical errors? :001_huh:

 

Last year I printed off copies of our local school's "gifted and talented" teacher's website and mailed in to the mayor, superintendent and principal. The teacher's website is now password locked and no longer viewable to the public, so I have no idea if she cleaned up her writing.

That was not the first time I have edited something from our (high rated) school and returned it to them. I am sure it won't be the last. :tongue_smilie:

 

School officials need to be held to a high standard, in my very humble opinion. Allowing sloppy writing to be printed and distributed should not be tolerated. Period.

The irony being... The memo states at the bottom, "High Expectations From..." and yet they don't know how to properly use a comma.

[Night Elf]

AGAIN, the school is absolutely implementing the intent incorrectly. The idea is to feed kids who are not being fed, NOT to be the food police. This program is for AT RISK kids. It is NOT compulsory schooling.

 

Doesn't the school make money from children buying lunches? If so, it sounds fishy to me.

 

They would not care that your kid has extra fats in his lunch. That is not the intent of the inspections. The intent is to supplement, never replace. This school was doing it wrong.

 

And yet they obviously have no desire to change. If they ignored publicity the first go around, I wouldn't be surprised to see this school pop up in the news more times.

 

I guess a parent can go to the school at lunch time and stand over their child while he/she eats. I'm not confrontational but it is something I would do. I would also ask to see the nutritional label on those chicken nuggets. I'm wondering if they are pressed chicken parts that come in a great big frozen box or bag. I would also find a copy of that policy and highlight the 'supplement' part in a very bright yellow marker and hand it to them on a daily basis. I guess they would end up hating me.

 

I wonder what they do for a child who refuses to eat any part of the lunch.

[Caroline]

Doesn't the school make money from children buying lunches? If so, it sounds fishy

 

Schools lose money on lunches.

[Night Elf]

That was not the first time I have edited something from our (high rated) school and returned it to them. I am sure it won't be the last. :tongue_smilie:

 

You should do that for this school with a note on top that says something like 'If you're going to try to sound authoritative and knowledgeable, please try to write like an adult and not like a student from elementary school. You might have a bit more credibility.' :tongue_smilie:

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't think that the fact that this program is for at risk, low income kids means that the parent's rights should be usurped. And I don't think that pointing out that the lunches were not unhealthy even if they lacked carrot sticks is hysteria. Or that wondering what they would do with food allergies or other health problems which can show up just as much, if not more, in at risk kids in such a one-size fits all system, is hysteria either.

 

If that was what was supposed to happen in this program, then I might agree. But it's not. They aren't supposed to declare a lunch unhealthy and replace it. They are supposed to say, "you don't have any fruit in your lunch, would you like an apple?" That is not usurping anyone's rights.

 

Doesn't the school make money from children buying lunches? If so, it sounds fishy to me.

 

No.

 

And yet they obviously have no desire to change. If they ignored publicity the first go around, I wouldn't be surprised to see this school pop up in the news more times.

 

The two incidents happened in the same time frame. I am certain that the state program is answering way more questions than they ever imagined when the lawmakers decided to help feed hungry preschoolers. I do not doubt the issue will be remedied.

[KidsHappen]

This is really nothing new. Does anyone remember the candy bar blow up the first day I sent my youngest to PS? Or the time I had to call the cafeteria lady and have it out with her regarding what my middle child could get for lunch? She was required to get one of each food group but she is a vegetarian and wanted to get extra salad and bread instead of meat. Now they both girls are in middle school and high school they can get their food a la carte but neither one of them ever eat at lunch anyhow. They eat breakfast, have a snack and drink at school lunchtime and then eat lunch when they get home.

[GoVanGogh]

You should do that for this school with a note on top that says something like 'If you're going to try to sound authoritative and knowledgeable, please try to write like an adult and not like a student from elementary school. You might have a bit more credibility.' :tongue_smilie:

I already have it printed off and waiting on my red pen. ;)

 

Oh my gosh. There is no need for all of the hysteria. They are supposed to *offer* free items to the kids to supplement what they already brought. They aren't forcing anything on anybody. Again, this particular school was implementing the program in a manner *not intended*. Both stories were from the same school. I am sure there will be some retraining happening.

I don't see it as hysteria.

 

I pulled my DS from a private preschool for something very similar.

He is highly allergic to eggs, dairy and nuts. We had a daily battle over snacks.

My rule was simple: Do not feed my child anything that I did not send.

Daily they would give DS goldfish, cupcakes, candy bars, etc. Thankfully, DS was very obedient about not eating food from anyone other than his mom or dad, so he never had a reaction at school.

 

On a larger scale - publicly funded preschool, in this case - I cannot see every staff member and every student being so cautious.

 

Personally, I have not had to deal with food allergies in the public school setting, but my nephew has similar food allergies and has always been in public school. He has had some very diligent teachers over the years, but he has also had some nightmare situations.

[celticmom]

I don't think that the fact that this program is for at risk, low income kids means that the parent's rights should be usurped. And I don't think that pointing out that the lunches were not unhealthy even if they lacked carrot sticks is hysteria. Or that wondering what they would do with food allergies or other health problems which can show up just as much, if not more, in at risk kids in such a one-size fits all system, is hysteria either.

 

:iagree:

[Mrs Mungo]

This is not a normal compulsory school scenario. Part of the intended purpose of this preschool for at-risk kids is providing adequate nutrition. It is one of their mandates. That makes lunch their business. You are not required to send your kid to preschool on the state's dime, but you shouldn't be surprised when strings are involved.

[KungFuPanda]

Oh my gosh. There is no need for all of the hysteria. They are supposed to *offer* free items to the kids to supplement what they already brought. They aren't forcing anything on anybody. Again, this particular school was implementing the program in a manner *not intended*. Both stories were from the same school. I am sure there will be some retraining happening.

 

LA LA LA I can't hear you LA LA LA

 

::Insert hysterical personal scenario that misses the point::

:lol::lol::lol:

[melissad2]

It seems to me that they can't see the forest for the trees. They get so caught up in the "daily requirements" and the little nutrition facts on the package that they can't see that the quality of the food is horrendous. Just because the nutrition facts on the food is the same speaks nothing for the quality of the ingredients.

[Stacy in NJ]

The big problem is that this is a regulation. Regulations do not generally allow for exceptions or thought. The school has an inspector because they want to be in compliance. I'm quite sure this was a well intended idea. However, once someone had to write a rule to make it happen, it became binary. (The lunch meets guidelines or it does not.) After all the uproar, I assume a new regulation will be written to allow for exceptions. Then another regulation will be written to detail precisely how and why one may qualify for an exception and the process for getting the exception.

 

staff for this new regulation, thus lowering unemployment, but please don't complain about any increase in your taxes. It's for the children.

[GoVanGogh]

It seems to me that they can't see the forest for the trees. They get so caught up in the "daily requirements" and the little nutrition facts on the package that they can't see that the quality of the food is horrendous. Just because the nutrition facts on the food is the same speaks nothing for the quality of the ingredients.

Exactly.

One does not need each and every meal to include 1 serving milk, 2 servings fruits/vegetables, 1 serving grains/bread and 1 serving of meat/meat alternative.

So what if you eat two fruits at one meal and two vegetables with another. A nutritionist would view the overall diet for a week and not one or two 'snapshots' of a meal.

[Zebra]

 

I don't see it as hysteria.

 

My rule was simple: Do not feed my child anything that I did not send.

 

 

 

It seems like a simple enough rule to follow!

 

It also doesn't take a genius to discern the difference from a reasonable lunch (and by that I mean FOOD) from a kid who has nothing for lunch. That would be the only time you should be allowed to step in, is if a child has NO LUNCH.

 

I've seen too many trends over the years (you can't eat eggs, you can't drink coffee/no wait coffee and eggs are GOOD for you!) to believe that the government has any idea what is healthy, and what is not.

 

But, it's also true that when you accept free preschool from the gov't, you should accept the strings that will inevitably be attached. I assume that they get funding based on every child eating a "healthy lunch" and they are in danger of losing their funding if everyone doesn't get a "healthy lunch".

[RoundAbout]

It also doesn't take a genius to discern the difference from a reasonable lunch (and by that I mean FOOD) from a kid who has nothing for lunch. That would be the only time you should be allowed to step in, is if a child has NO LUNCH.

 

 

:iagree: Yes, and maybe we could just give teachers some credit - back in the day a teacher might take notice of a child who consistently came in dirty or with just pop tarts and soda for lunch and address it themselves - by bringing it up discreetly with the parents. You didn't need an army of bureaucratic nonsense and rules.

 

We eat lower-carb and I usually don't have things like bread and crackers in the house. I also don't consider fruits and vegetables equivalent to each other. But other people have other ideas of good nutrition and that's their business, not the schools.

[Impish]

Here's another issue:

 

There are families that are vegetarian/vegan.

 

In today's day and age, sending pb or eggs to school is usually a huge no...but for a lot of families, it's a major source of protien, esp when on a budget.

 

So, what would they do in that situation?

 

Kinda crazy.

[Zebra]

:iagree: Yes, and maybe we could just give teachers some credit - back in the day a teacher might take notice of a child who consistently came in dirty or with just pop tarts and soda for lunch and address it themselves - by bringing it up discreetly with the parents. You didn't need an army of bureaucratic nonsense and rules.

 

We eat lower-carb and I usually don't have things like bread and crackers in the house. I also don't consider fruits and vegetables equivalent to each other. But other people have other ideas of good nutrition and that's their business, not the schools.

 

Can you imagine how frustrating this must be for the teachers? No one is happy, and it's all their fault! I used to think teaching was a nice vocation to get into, but not any more.

 

We love PB in this vegetarian household, and I've often wondered how my daughter would eat at all in PS!

[MSNative]

Schools lose money on lunches.

 

How is that possible with the USDA reimbursements? (honest question. I have no doubt there is some bizarre way it is possible.) Surely with bulk buying you can serve a kid a free meal of chicken nuggets, carrots, milk and an apple for under $2.82.

Current Cash Reimbursement Rates Free meals:$2.8225 Reduced-price meals:$2.4225 Paid meals:$0.3125

[Serenade]

 

But, it's also true that when you accept free preschool from the gov't, you should accept the strings that will inevitably be attached.

 

While I agree with this, I am wondering if these rules only apply to the gov. funded preschools. I live in NC, and my husband said he heard on the radio that the law actually applies to all NC public school students. I don't quite believe this -- I'm not sure what station he was listening to, or if he heard quite right driving home in rush hour traffic. :)

 

Does anybody on this board know for sure that it just applies to programs like Head Start?

[Caroline]

How is that possible with the USDA reimbursements? (honest question. I have no doubt there is some bizarre way it is possible.) Surely with bulk buying you can serve a kid a free meal of chicken nuggets, carrots, milk and an apple for under $2.82.

Current Cash Reimbursement Rates Free meals:$2.8225 Reduced-price meals:$2.4225 Paid meals:$0.3125

 

Plus the cost of the people to make and serve the lunches and breakfasts. It is not bizarre. It just is true.

[DarlaS]

What is it with this school and the chicken nuggets? They get a truckload deal or something? :confused:

[*Lulu*]

If this is a Head Start program I don't understand why the parents would be charged for the lunch? Generally speaking, people utilizing Head Start are in lower income brackets and are qualified for several programs aimed at helping at-risk students.......including the free lunch program. :confused:

[GoVanGogh]

What is it with this school and the chicken nuggets? They get a truckload deal or something?

:lol:

 

What upsets me is that it sends a bad message to the children.

Homemade lunch = bad.

Chicken nuggets = healthy.

 

It reminds me of the McDonald's ad that claims their chicken nuggets are healthier than a homemade grilled cheese sandwich. :001_huh:

[MSNative]

Plus the cost of the people to make and serve the lunches and breakfasts. It is not bizarre. It just is true.

 

By that logic, though, having teachers causes schools to lose money. There is a budget to pay for personnel. The main cost of providing lunches ought to be the actual food. The schools get reimbursed quite generously. I understand your point. Thanks for responding. Moving on since this is clearly a side issue to the main discussion.. :)

Edited February 19, 2012 by MSNative

[ereks mom]

No, but it proves you're qualified to inspect lunches though. :D

 

:iagree: :lol:

[Jean in Newcastle]

If that was what was supposed to happen in this program, then I might agree. But it's not. They aren't supposed to declare a lunch unhealthy and replace it. They are supposed to say, "you don't have any fruit in your lunch, would you like an apple?" That is not usurping anyone's rights.

 

 

But we're not responding specifically to the mandate. We're responding to what actually happened.

[justamouse]

What is it with this school and the chicken nuggets? They get a truckload deal or something? :confused:

:lol: I know, right?!

[LauraGB]

I love you people.

 

I have shared this with my family and friends and no one gets it like you do.

 

It was hard enough to believe this was a real story. Then, trying to get through the grammatically painful "memo" (which looked a lot like a formal letter to me), and then trying to understand how chicken nuggets are a substitute for a vegetable, and then trying to figure out how it was an error on one teacher's part because she should have given the child milk instead (because as we all know, milk is now a vegetable :svengo:), I'm about to blow an eyeball.

 

Really, I need to visit more often than I have these days. I miss you people.

[Mrs Mungo]

But we're not responding specifically to the mandate. We're responding to what actually happened.

 

People are responding to what happened as if it was what was supposed to happen. Hence, all the jackboot talk.

[MSNative]

I love you people.

 

I have shared this with my family and friends and no one gets it like you do.

 

It was hard enough to believe this was a real story. Then, trying to get through the grammatically painful "memo" (which looked a lot like a formal letter to me), and then trying to understand how chicken nuggets are a substitute for a vegetable, and then trying to figure out how it was an error on one teacher's part because she should have given the child milk instead (because as we all know, milk is now a vegetable :svengo:), I'm about to blow an eyeball.

 

Really, I need to visit more often than I have these days. I miss you people.

:iagree: I know. I just tried to talk to my sister about it. She gave me the "Oh...ok. So, let me tell you about this cool book I read..." :)

 

(FYI - The book is a P.D. James book - Death Comes to Pemberley. Be still my heart. Murder and Mr. Darcy! What more could a girl want in a book.)

[Jean in Newcastle]

I love you people.

 

I have shared this with my family and friends and no one gets it like you do.

 

It was hard enough to believe this was a real story. Then, trying to get through the grammatically painful "memo" (which looked a lot like a formal letter to me), and then trying to understand how chicken nuggets are a substitute for a vegetable, and then trying to figure out how it was an error on one teacher's part because she should have given the child milk instead (because as we all know, milk is now a vegetable :svengo:), I'm about to blow an eyeball.

 

Really, I need to visit more often than I have these days. I miss you people.

 

:lol: Good to see you!

[LibraryLover]

I

substitute for a vegetable, and then trying to figure out how it was an error on one teacher's part

 

.

 

 

That's very interesting...and believable.

[Zebra]

Well, cows eat grass....so I guess that makes milk a vegetable :001_huh:......

 

I eat chocolate....which is made out of milk....so I eat a lot of vegetables.

 

Chickens eat grains and bugs so....I don't know, now I am lost. :lol:

[MSNative]

Well, cows eat grass....so I guess that makes milk a vegetable :001_huh:......

 

I eat chocolate....which is made out of milk....so I eat a lot of vegetables.

 

Chickens eat grains and bugs so....I don't know, now I am lost. :lol:

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

This made me laugh out loud not just type LOL!

[pqr]

People are responding to what happened as if it was what was supposed to happen. Hence, all the jackboot talk.

 

Perhaps it was not meant to happen, but it did. I further suspect that this will happen again.

 

The "jackboot talk" stems from the arrogance that officials seem to have in a belief that they can dictate to parents what meal children bring to school. Who in the blazes do they think they are? Someone has to remind these individuals that they are NOT the parents. They are the teachers and seem to be doing a remarkably poor job at that. The idea that they are now the food police is simply outrageous.

 

We still have a nation, or at least I hope we do, where the parents decide what children eat not some faceless bureaucrat or some teacher who seems incapable of applying common sense. If these teachers honestly thought they were doing the right thing then they should be fired for incredible, irredeemable stupidity. We are being asked to trust that lot to teach children.... really?

[Jean in Newcastle]

If these parents are the example of parents who need to be helped, then perhaps the parents aren't as dumb as the school thinks. These parents were not sending Twinkies to school. Perhaps if the school could give some examples of other parents who were sending junk who were helped by this program, then we might be more willing to see the good in it. But all we see is that they felt the need to add dairy to two meals that already had dairy products in it. (Not to mention the fact that dairy is a problem for many children and certain ethnicities in particular.)

[nikkid]

Seems to me this kind of thing indicates schools are leaning more towards the 'rights of the child' in lieu of the 'rights of the parent'.

[texascamps]

The problem is that there is an "inspector" in the first place.

 

They need to stay out of my kid's lunch bag. I couldn't afford the $2.55 for my five children's lunches, so, unless they would pick up the tab for my children's lunches, its none of their concern. I would pull my child from the school in a second.

 

I am so lucky that we live rural and our schools aren't overly concerned with trends written about in "Today's Principal" and "The Micromanaging School Administrator" magazines.

[stripe]

Seems to me this kind of thing indicates schools are leaning more towards the 'rights of the child' in lieu of the 'rights of the parent'.

It seems the rights of a child to eat a nutritious lunch might be more relevant to an administrator than the supposed right of a parent to feed their child garbage and leave said child in said administrator's care while a) hungry from insufficient food, b) hyped up on sugar, c) sluggish from unbalanced meal, or d) some combination of both.

 

I don't really understand how no one grasps that teachers and administrators actually have to DEAL with these kids all day long. It's a bit obnoxious, frankly, to say a parent has one million rights but make everyone else BUT that parent deal with the consequences of an ill-fed child, such as bad behavior, inability to concentrate, and so forth, that affect the child, other students, and the teacher, but not the parent, because (guess what?) that parent dropped the kid off at school.

 

I also think it's mind-blowing how all parents are supposedly endowed by their creator with a perfect understanding of nutrition (despite the fact that the majority of Americans are obese and children continue to become less healthy) yet teachers, especially public school teachers, are supposedly dumber than a post. I can't imagine that a single public school teacher could ever (gasp) be a parent, or even more shocking, a human being! Why are all schoolteachers and administrators assumed to be complete morons?

 

And yes, I do have relatives who are and were very dedicated public school teachers, and, yes, I am a graduate of a public school.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Seems to me this kind of thing indicates schools are leaning more towards the 'rights of the child' in lieu of the 'rights of the parent'.

 

I'm not sure that anyone is concerned about the rights of the child here. This is a debate over who ultimately controls the life of a child-parents or institutions/government.

[nikkid]

It seems the rights of a child to eat a nutritious lunch might be more relevant to an administrator than the supposed right of a parent to feed their child garbage and leave said child in said administrator's care while a) hungry from insufficient food, b) hyped up on sugar, c) sluggish from unbalanced meal, or d) some combination of both.

 

I don't really understand how no one grasps that teachers and administrators actually have to DEAL with these kids all day long. It's a bit obnoxious, frankly, to say a parent has one million rights but make everyone else BUT that parent deal with the consequences of an ill-fed child, such as bad behavior, inability to concentrate, and so forth, that affect the child, other students, and the teacher, but not the parent, because (guess what?) that parent dropped the kid off at school.

 

It's a fine balance, isn't it. I'm mostly dumbfounded that somehow it was determined that the processed chicken nugget lunch (where I heard that the vegetables were thrown away by the child anyway) was more healthy than a turkey and cheese sandwich on a whole wheat bun with 100% apple juice. I am all for improving school lunch...just before we pulled out I was getting involved in trying to change this. Clearly there are problems with children getting healthy food--just seems a shame that kids with healthy lunches are affected too.

[joannqn]

It seems the rights of a child to eat a nutritious lunch might be more relevant to an administrator than the supposed right of a parent to feed their child garbage and leave said child in said administrator's care while a) hungry from insufficient food, b) hyped up on sugar, c) sluggish from unbalanced meal, or d) some combination of both.

 

I don't really understand how no one grasps that teachers and administrators actually have to DEAL with these kids all day long. It's a bit obnoxious, frankly, to say a parent has one million rights but make everyone else BUT that parent deal with the consequences of an ill-fed child, such as bad behavior, inability to concentrate, and so forth, that affect the child, other students, and the teacher, but not the parent, because (guess what?) that parent dropped the kid off at school.

 

I also think it's mind-blowing how all parents are supposedly endowed by their creator with a perfect understanding of nutrition (despite the fact that the majority of Americans are obese and children continue to become less healthy) yet teachers, especially public school teachers, are supposedly dumber than a post. I can't imagine that a single public school teacher could ever (gasp) be a parent, or even more shocking, a human being! Why are all schoolteachers and administrators assumed to be complete morons?

 

And yes, I do have relatives who are and were very dedicated public school teachers, and, yes, I am a graduate of a public school.

 

Except that in both of these cases, the homemade lunch was healthier than the school provided lunch.

 

And what do many of these overweight kids eat? School provided breakfast and school provided lunch.

 

When DS was in public school (1/2 day preschool), I saw what the school provided for lunch. It was nothing but crap. What was even more sickening was the smell. It was the same nasty-smell day in and day out. There was no difference in how the pizza smelled compared to the chicken nuggets compared the hot dogs. Even calling what they served pizza, chicken nuggets, or hot dogs was a disservice to those foods.

Edited February 20, 2012 by joannqn

[LizzyBee]

Except that in both of these cases, the homemade lunch was healthier than the school provided lunch.

 

Exactly! I could understand it if the parents had sent junk, but that wasn't the case.

[MSNative]

It seems the rights of a child to eat a nutritious lunch might be more relevant to an administrator than the supposed right of a parent to feed their child garbage and leave said child in said administrator's care while a) hungry from insufficient food, b) hyped up on sugar, c) sluggish from unbalanced meal, or d) some combination of both.

 

I don't really understand how no one grasps that teachers and administrators actually have to DEAL with these kids all day long. It's a bit obnoxious, frankly, to say a parent has one million rights but make everyone else BUT that parent deal with the consequences of an ill-fed child, such as bad behavior, inability to concentrate, and so forth, that affect the child, other students, and the teacher, but not the parent, because (guess what?) that parent dropped the kid off at school.

 

I also think it's mind-blowing how all parents are supposedly endowed by their creator with a perfect understanding of nutrition (despite the fact that the majority of Americans are obese and children continue to become less healthy) yet teachers, especially public school teachers, are supposedly dumber than a post. I can't imagine that a single public school teacher could ever (gasp) be a parent, or even more shocking, a human being! Why are all schoolteachers and administrators assumed to be complete morons?

 

And yes, I do have relatives who are and were very dedicated public school teachers, and, yes, I am a graduate of a public school.

 

Back when I was in public elementary school, I ate jelly sandwiches on white bread washed down with chocolate milk. Some of my very lucky friends got Hostess cupcakes. The healthiest thing I saw any off my friends eat was a cheese sandwich on white. Despite eating absolute junk, we didn't have these behavior problems. If you misbehaved, you were sent to the principal's office. If you got sent there, your parents would know and would punish you much worse than that school did. So, while I agree that it is good for people to eat healthier, I think it is a stretch to say that every child who eats junk will be climbing the walls. The problem is not the food, it's the lack of discipline. That is a much harder problem to fix. Changing the food is easier.

[Lizzie in Ma]

It does seem to be a slightly bigger problem than the school originally claimed.

 

I felt the same about the memo!

 

Parents should start a double-edged campaign for better education and more lunch freedom. Let's think of slogans.

 

"Fewer Nuggets. More Grammar!"

 

"Punctuation Trumps Potatoes"

 

"Cheese Slices are Better than Comma Splices"

 

:lol::lol:

[GoVanGogh]

Back when I was in public elementary school, I ate jelly sandwiches on white bread washed down with chocolate milk. Some of my very lucky friends got Hostess cupcakes. The healthiest thing I saw any off my friends eat was a cheese sandwich on white. Despite eating absolute junk, we didn't have these behavior problems. If you misbehaved, you were sent to the principal's office. If you got sent there, your parents would know and would punish you much worse than that school did. So, while I agree that it is good for people to eat healthier, I think it is a stretch to say that every child who eats junk will be climbing the walls. The problem is not the food, it's the lack of discipline.

:iagree:

I always packed my lunch. Bologna on white bread, processed cheese and mayo. Chips. Twinkies or something similar for dessert. My mom shopped at the Wonder bread outlet and we had a deep freeze with one whole shelf full of their junk treats. I would put a frozen one in my lunch and it would be thawed by lunch.

All my friends had similar lunches.

Most of us brought in soda to drink.

I remember a few friends bringing in an apple or orange, but never any vegetables.

No obesity to speak of. No discipline problems.

(This led to me thinking of how we even packed our lunch in 1970. :001_huh: No cute little Rubbermaid containers. Just a twist-tie or fold-over baggie for sandwich and chips. Everything else came in its own wrapper.)

 

I didn't taste wheat bread until I was married and shopping for myself.

In contrast, my son didn't taste white bread until he was 9-years-old.

Funny how in 30 years our perception of bread has changed so much.

[KnitWit]

When I was in school, I took FLUFFER NUTTERS!!! (For you poor souls who don't know, it's peanut butter and MARSHMALLOW CREME!!!)

 

My mother would have been brought to trial, I'm sure.

 

I just cannot believe this stuff.

[5kidsforME]

Back when I was in public elementary school, I ate jelly sandwiches on white bread washed down with chocolate milk. Some of my very lucky friends got Hostess cupcakes. The healthiest thing I saw any off my friends eat was a cheese sandwich on white. Despite eating absolute junk, we didn't have these behavior problems. If you misbehaved, you were sent to the principal's office. If you got sent there, your parents would know and would punish you much worse than that school did. So, while I agree that it is good for people to eat healthier, I think it is a stretch to say that every child who eats junk will be climbing the walls. The problem is not the food, it's the lack of discipline. That is a much harder problem to fix. Changing the food is easier.

 

:iagree: Amen.

[Jenny in Florida]

Back when I was in public elementary school, I ate jelly sandwiches on white bread washed down with chocolate milk. Some of my very lucky friends got Hostess cupcakes. The healthiest thing I saw any off my friends eat was a cheese sandwich on white. Despite eating absolute junk, we didn't have these behavior problems.

 

I was the kid with the Hostess cupcakes in my lunch.

 

A typical packed-by-my-mom lunch (when she bothered) was peanut butter and honey on Wonder bread, a thermos of milk with a packet of hot chocolate mix for me to put into it (stop and think about that one for a minute), an apple I didn't eat and a package of Twinkies or Ding Dongs or something similar.

 

Keep in mind that I was already a fat kid. It wasn't like they were worried about putting weight on me or anything.

 

Nonetheless, I was a model student. I was the brightest and most academically capable in every class and wouldn't have DREAMED of getting into any kind of trouble. I was, literally, NEVER disciplined in school until I just quit going in 10th grade.

 

Barring sensitivities and allergies, I simply don't buy that eating junk food at lunch means a kid will become a behavior problem.

 

And, as others have already pointed out, the lunches provided by the school in these cases is not inherently healthier than what was sent from home. In fact, it could be argued that it was LESS healthy, because parents pack foods they know their children will eat.

 

If my picky, vegan kids were set down in front of a tray full of chicken nuggets, soggy green beans and egg-based dessert accompanied by a carton of cow's milk, they would fast that day. I'm willing to bet having them hungry would be worse than hopped up on sugar.