snacks and little ones

[athomeontheprairie]

There's a group I'm in that is dealing with the issue of snacks. There is a very wide opinion of what is "normal". So i thought I'd turn it over to the hive for some insight.

 

If you have a child that is 2-4. Can they go three hours without eating a large snack? A small snack of fresh fruit would be served, but not a large snack/mini meal. Would that be sufficient for your young ones*?
 

*Assume all these kids are NT with no disclosed health issues or weight problems.

 

Also assume they will have things to do. Sometimes kids eat because they're bored. Assume they have fun things to do for those 3 hours.

Edited August 27, 2017 by athomeontheprairie

[three4me]

My three year old can go three hours, but not four or five hours. I mean, he can, but not happily. But definitely three hours. We normally have six hours between meals and at some point he needs a snack.

[MommyLiberty5013]

A snack, IMO, is just a bridge between meals. Something to tie a person over until a meal. That would be:

 

A string cheese.

A handful of cereal or goldfish or popcorn or pretzels.

A full piece of fruit (not just a few bits).

A pack of healthy fruit snack things.

 

With or without a drink. If with a drink, just water.

[Daria]

I think that a young child easily falls into a routine.  If a kid's system is used to dividing their calories into 5 or 6 equal portions, then they're going to get hungry after a few hours.  It's unfair to blame the kid for becoming accustomed to what they're used to.  It's not like a 2 year old is going to think "better eat a big breakfast, because I don't know what they'll serve at that party."

 

On the other hand, if a kid that age is used to only light snacks, or no snacks, they can absolutely handle 3 meals a day.  

[athomeontheprairie]

My three year old can go three hours, but not four or five hours. I mean, he can, but not happily. But definitely three hours. We normally have six hours between meals and at some point he needs a snack.

No, three hours. Not longer.

 

A snack, IMO, is just a bridge between meals. Something to tie a person over until a meal. That would be:

 

A string cheese.

A handful of cereal or goldfish or popcorn or pretzels.

A full piece of fruit (not just a few bits).

A pack of healthy fruit snack things.

 

With or without a drink. If with a drink, just water.

I'm okay with this definition. But regardless, it's a snack. Not a small meal.

 

Can your little one go for the three hours with this snack?

[bensonduck]

My oldest and youngest could easily go for 3 hours with no snack between those ages. My 3 year old today didn't eat from noon until 6pm just randomly (we were home and he didn't ask for a snack after naptime and was happily playing so no one thought to interrupt him and give him a snack).

 

My middle guy has always been a hungrier kid and would probably be NEEDING another snack in the car on the way home from the activity at that age. He could make it, but it would be close.

[MommyLiberty5013]

No, three hours. Not longer.

 

I'm okay with this definition. But regardless, it's a snack. Not a small meal.

 

Can your little one go for the three hours with this snack?

My 7 and 5 year olds can. DS4 is asking for a snack within two hours of every meal. If we eat breakfast at 8 and lunch at 1130, he wants a snack around 10. Like clock work. If we eat lunch at 1130 and dinner at 530, he wants a snack around 200.

 

Kids just burn more calories being so active. I find they get along better, pay better attention, and are good at obeying better when their tummies aren't grumbling. But I don't fix a whole meal...no way!

[SKL]

Yes, my kids could.  However, I would say a small fruit or sugary snack might not satisfy all kids.  Something with protein might be a better choice.  A small yogurt drink with cereal o's maybe?

[Murphy101]

2 hours - absolutely.

3 would be wanting something like half an apple sliced with peanut butter.

 

Water is the only drink we ever offer the kids.

 

BUT if I knew I was going somewhere that took three hours, I would feed them substantially before going and immediately afterwards.

 

So lunch at noon, activity starts at 1 and ends at 4, at about 3/3:30ish they'd be tapped out and ready for a snack break. If nothing else, because it allows them to decompress after all that excitement.

 

For a child that young, I'd recommend just ending the activity after 2 hours. 3 hours sustained attention and activity is a lot to ask of a kid that little.

[desertstrawberry5]

2-3hours, I'd estimate. My kids would love a full meal every hour or so, but that's certainly not necessary/ 

[TechWife]

My son regularly ate every three hours up until about halfway through his fourth year.

Breakfast meal around 7:30 am - hot or cold cereal, fruit, milk

Morning snack around 10:00 am - cereal bar or peanut butter toast or string cheese with a couple of whole wheat crackers

Lunch meal around 12:00 - 1:00 yogurt pb&j on whole wheat, carrots, grapes, occasionally one cookie, milk

Afternoon snack - something light such as pb crackers or a banana and water or maybe milk

Dinner - 6:00 pm - whatever was brung served to family

 

Around the age of 4 he dropped his am snack and added a bedtime snack. There was no effort on our part todo this, but two other boys on the neighborhood did it et the same time. We always wondered if they plotted it at the urging of an older sibling to see if the parents would go for it!

Edited August 27, 2017 by TechWife

[Rebel Yell]

Three hours? Maybe, probably.

 

But if we had to drive 45minutes to get to the activity, and plan to be there 15 mins early we'd have to finish a substantial meal 90mins before the start of the activity to allow for cleanup and travel time. So assuming it's a reasonable time for the child to eat a full meal, that's now 4.5 hours (3hr activity, 1hr travel, 30mins clean up and get shoes/coats/etc and in car) since the last bite. It could be even longer if, for example, we had to leave two hours after breakfast- that's too soon for another meal, but way too long to not eat during the three hour activity. Not because three hours is too long to go without snack/meal, but because of the timing of it.

 

My most hated outside class time (class of any length) or time for kids to start after-school jobs, is 4:00pm. Again, with 30-60 minute travel time, its way too early for dinner, but way too long past lunch.

[Arcadia]

If you have a child that is 2-4. Can they go three hours without eating a large snack? A small snack of fresh fruit would be served, but not a large snack/mini meal. Would that be sufficient for your young ones*?

My kids are older. Their german Saturday school has a mommy & me class of that age group. Class starts at 9:30am and snack time is at 10:20am usually for 20mins. Class ends at 12noon and parents usually have snacks for the ride home. They find that kids can't last until 10:40am which is when the older kids have their snack time. Many stay at most 30 mins drive away so it's about 1hr 20mins before the 2-4 year old kids get hungry and fidgety.

 

They are usually provided with snacks like cheese crackers, tortilla chips, fruits, hummus, potato salad.

[heartlikealion]

I don't know... that's kind of hard for me to answer because dd is constantly asking for food. She's 2.5. There have been mornings where she is insisting she eat within a short time of eating. Maybe there was a growth spurt here and there, but it's not that rare, either. On a typical school day, I can feed her a bowl of greek yogurt with chunks of fruit and she may ask for more food right after eating that. Then I might give her a banana or toast with applesauce or some apple slices. Then definitely within 3 hours she's asking for food again. She'll start reaching for something in the house or yelling, "eat!" Sometimes I can distract her and get food off her mind, but other times she just goes back to asking. She looks healthy. So in your scenario, say my dd was insisting on eating and you offered her one stick of string cheese. I don't know if she would continue to pester you for more. If you gave her 4 slices of apple she might pester you for more. I really don't know.

[heartlikealion]

Three hours? Maybe, probably.

 

But if we had to drive 45minutes to get to the activity, and plan to be there 15 mins early we'd have to finish a substantial meal 90mins before the start of the activity to allow for cleanup and travel time. So assuming it's a reasonable time for the child to eat a full meal, that's now 4.5 hours (3hr activity, 1hr travel, 30mins clean up and get shoes/coats/etc and in car) since the last bite. It could be even longer if, for example, we had to leave two hours after breakfast- that's too soon for another meal, but way too long to not eat during the three hour activity. Not because three hours is too long to go without snack/meal, but because of the timing of it.

 

My most hated outside class time (class of any length) or time for kids to start after-school jobs, is 4:00pm. Again, with 30-60 minute travel time, its way too early for dinner, but way too long past lunch.

 

For this reason sometimes I now bring snacks/drinks in the car. I just don't want to hear them whining about being hungry while I'm driving and/or show up acting starved. Tonight when we left the house I brought the toddler's drink bottle with water. I have also packed bendy straws in the car before just because the fast food places always have straight straws and it's harder to offer to her.

 

[Guinevere]

3 hours with a snack in the middle would work for my youngest, and most of my older ones would have been fine with no snack at that age. A little snack is sometimes worse than no snack. Mine get ravenous and can only think about more once they've started eating.

 

We also have to drive a lot to events, and I would have to feed him on the way there and immediately once we got in the car. Maybe parents are wanting more so that they don't have to bring food for before/after which can really mess up regular mealtimes.

[Elizabeth86]

It depends I guess. My first 2 were big snackers at two, but dd does not have a big appetite like the boys did. She rarely snacks.

[regentrude]

No, my 2 y/olds could not have done that. They did/could not eat enough food at main meals to sustain them for this long. 

Edited August 27, 2017 by regentrude

[ondreeuh]

3 hours might be ok, but it's not like kids are eating a sandwich in the hallway before they enter the room. So you have the 3 hours plus whatever amount of time between their last meal and the start of class. A little fresh fruit would not satisfy my kids.

[Frances]

Mine could have easily as he ate huge quantities (as a toddler several pices of whole wheat toast, two bananas, and 2-3 scrambled eggs or equivalent amount of tofu for breakfast) very slowly at meals and rarely requested snacks, but I know many children are not like that. He still rarely snacks, except when actively trying to gain weight.

[Tanaqui]

I'm thinking back, and I think three hours sounds reasonable for that age range... unless they're having a growth spurt.

[Daria]

I'd also ask what kind of activity this is, because while I agree that most 2 - 4 year olds could manage, i don't really think that shaming or second guessing parents who tell you that their kids can't manage is conducive to community building.  If this is something like a class that's often oversubscribed, and you're saying "well, we're catering to those families who can manage", I guess that's OK.  But if it's something like a church activity where you're hoping to welcome people and encourage participation, then I'd take parents at their word that a few pieces of fruit won't get their kid through, and make another decision. 

 

I also think that setting up an activity on the assumption that all kids will be NT and not have health issues isn't reasonable.  For one thing, at 2 large numbers of kids aren't yet diagnosed.  For another thing, it's better to be accommodating up front, then to set things up that people need to ask.  If providing fruit + milk, or allowing parents to supplement is an option, it's definitely the more inclusive choice. 

[Elizabeth86]

3 hours might be ok, but it's not like kids are eating a sandwich in the hallway before they enter the room. So you have the 3 hours plus whatever amount of time between their last meal and the start of class. A little fresh fruit would not satisfy my kids.

Good point.

[Megbo]

I think it depends on the kid and what type of snacks and scheduled they're accustomed to. If a parent says that their child needs more than fruit to make it through the 3 hours, I would absolutely believe them. 

 

My 2.5yo is used to only eating fruit between meals. But, if the kids were given a shared fruit tray he might just take two or three pieces, and then need to eat again before the 3 hour mark. If he was given an individual plate with half a banana, some sliced apple, and a peeled clementine, he would eat all of it and be fine. 

 

[Mommyof1]

My DD4 when going through a growing spurt ask for food every hour even when she was younger. Otherwise she doesn't always get a snacks.

[blondeviolin]

My son has participated in a speech-based preK. They serve snack at the 2.5/3 hour mark. And it's like a handful of goldfish and some apple slices. Church here is three hours and he does fine going that time without food.

[Ausmumof3]

For me we are 30 minutes drive from anywhere. So a three hour activity would mean four hours between meals. My littlest could survive on fruit but would be best with something slightly more substantial but healthy depending on timing.

[athomeontheprairie]

I think my original question was wrong. It should be more like:
Can your child go 4 hours between meals with one snack being served two hours after the first meal?

OR:

pretend you have a group of 25 2-4 year olds. You can't serve dairy, wheat, any type of nut, processed foods are a no because of dyes and sugar. Kids are going 4 hours between breakfast and lunch. You need to serve a snack to ALL of the kids at once. What do you serve them? Parents aren't able to come in. 

 

2-3hours, I'd estimate. My kids would love a full meal every hour or so, but that's certainly not necessary/ 

My mom likes to tell me that I never feed my youngest (3, almost 4), because he eats constantly at her house when he visits.

 

For this reason sometimes I now bring snacks/drinks in the car. I just don't want to hear them whining about being hungry while I'm driving and/or show up acting starved. Tonight when we left the house I brought the toddler's drink bottle with water. I have also packed bendy straws in the car before just because the fast food places always have straight straws and it's harder to offer to her.
 

I do this because too. I buy car snacks, they live in the car. I don't run out. Ever. I'm stingy with them perhaps. They aren't for every time we get in the car. They are for those times when chores took a little too long, or something happened. They aren't for "we just ate lunch" and had to run into town but will be back before snack time.

 

3 hours might be ok, but it's not like kids are eating a sandwich in the hallway before they enter the room. So you have the 3 hours plus whatever amount of time between their last meal and the start of class. A little fresh fruit would not satisfy my kids.

This made me laugh so hard. :)

 

I'd also ask what kind of activity this is, because while I agree that most 2 - 4 year olds could manage, i don't really think that shaming or second guessing parents who tell you that their kids can't manage is conducive to community building.  If this is something like a class that's often oversubscribed, and you're saying "well, we're catering to those families who can manage", I guess that's OK.  But if it's something like a church activity where you're hoping to welcome people and encourage participation, then I'd take parents at their word that a few pieces of fruit won't get their kid through, and make another decision. 

 

I also think that setting up an activity on the assumption that all kids will be NT and not have health issues isn't reasonable.  For one thing, at 2 large numbers of kids aren't yet diagnosed.  For another thing, it's better to be accommodating up front, then to set things up that people need to ask.  If providing fruit + milk, or allowing parents to supplement is an option, it's definitely the more inclusive choice. 

No shaming. No arguing or putting them down. It's just a question. My ds5 had SERIOUS growth problems at 2-3. We were CONSTANTLY feeding to keep him from losing weight-forget trying to grow. Yes, it was medically necessary to push food into him every 20 minutes for 18 months. There is zero chance I'm shaming anyone. Also, this is not a church event and parents are self reporting kids as NT with no health issues BEYOND the allergies listed.

For me we are 30 minutes drive from anywhere. So a three hour activity would mean four hours between meals. My littlest could survive on fruit but would be best with something slightly more substantial but healthy depending on timing.

So are we. So I either plan ahead and bring the food with us. Or try and have food made and ready at home. Otherwise, I'm pushing 4.5 hours at a minimum usually 5 since we like to arrive a little early to things and don't leave the moment an event is over....and that's too long.

My son has participated in a speech-based preK. They serve snack at the 2.5/3 hour mark. And it's like a handful of goldfish and some apple slices. Church here is three hours and he does fine going that time without food.

Church is specifically what I was thinking about. Those that are heavily complaining are those we go to church with. And our church is at a minimum of 3.5 hours with a snack served only to the 2-3 age group. They aren't leaving the church to go have a snack half way through and no one is eating in the sanctuary. And all of these families are at least 30 minutes from the church. Their argument then doesn't seem constant to me. Because their kids clearly go for that long once a week.

[Daria]

I'd serve bananas, or sliced apples (kids eat more when they're cut up for them), or unsweetened apple sauce, plus something crunchy.  Rice Chex is a great gluten free, nut free, dairy, egg, soy, dye free snack, and in my experience serving snack to preschoolers, they'll gobble it down dry.  Rice cakes are another choice, although not as popular as the Chex, in my experience.

If a parent objects to the "processed" aspect of cereal, they can opt their kid out. 

[Ausmumof3]

I think my original question was wrong. It should be more like:

Can your child go 4 hours between meals with one snack being served two hours after the first meal?

OR:

pretend you have a group of 25 2-4 year olds. You can't serve dairy, wheat, any type of nut, processed foods are a no because of dyes and sugar. Kids are going 4 hours between breakfast and lunch. You need to serve a snack to ALL of the kids at once. What do you serve them? Parents aren't able to come in.

 

My mom likes to tell me that I never feed my youngest (3, almost 4), because he eats constantly at her house when he visits.

 

I do this because too. I buy car snacks, they live in the car. I don't run out. Ever. I'm stingy with them perhaps. They aren't for every time we get in the car. They are for those times when chores took a little too long, or something happened. They aren't for "we just ate lunch" and had to run into town but will be back before snack time.

 

This made me laugh so hard. :)

 

No shaming. No arguing or putting them down. It's just a question. My ds5 had SERIOUS growth problems at 2-3. We were CONSTANTLY feeding to keep him from losing weight-forget trying to grow. Yes, it was medically necessary to push food into him every 20 minutes for 18 months. There is zero chance I'm shaming anyone. Also, this is not a church event and parents are self reporting kids as NT with no health issues BEYOND the allergies listed.

So are we. So I either plan ahead and bring the food with us. Or try and have food made and ready at home. Otherwise, I'm pushing 4.5 hours at a minimum usually 5 since we like to arrive a little early to things and don't leave the moment an event is over....and that's too long.

Church is specifically what I was thinking about. Those that are heavily complaining are those we go to church with. And our church is at a minimum of 3.5 hours with a snack served only to the 2-3 age group. They aren't leaving the church to go have a snack half way through and no one is eating in the sanctuary. And all of these families are at least 30 minutes from the church. Their argument then doesn't seem constant to me. Because their kids clearly go for that long once a week.

But isn't that the age group you are talking about? The ones that get a snack?

 

I wouldn't mind packing snacks for kids, I wouldn't necessarily mind my older kids going that long but one of mine will definitely whinge. Actually he has a snack during church even though it's fairly short. It's less about the length and more the timing. Church runs right through his normal lunchtime so if he has a snack earlier he doesn't eat well.

[heartlikealion]

Wow that's a long church service for a toddler regardless of food being served. Today I sent dh to a parent meeting for Sunday school parents. I couldn't attend the meeting as I was teaching in one of the classrooms. He said they left early, probably lasted like 15 min. or so. He gave her food before the meeting, but that's just how bored/squirmy/loud she got. It's very challenging taking her to church for things. If I take her to Mass I sit in the cry room. She was repeatedly asking to go home when I took her last time and she napped most of the service. I could not easily keep her occupied that length. Are the kids in their own room doing crafts or something?

[happypamama]

2 hours - absolutely.

3 would be wanting something like half an apple sliced with peanut butter.

 

Water is the only drink we ever offer the kids.

 

BUT if I knew I was going somewhere that took three hours, I would feed them substantially before going and immediately afterwards.

 

So lunch at noon, activity starts at 1 and ends at 4, at about 3/3:30ish they'd be tapped out and ready for a snack break. If nothing else, because it allows them to decompress after all that excitement.

 

For a child that young, I'd recommend just ending the activity after 2 hours. 3 hours sustained attention and activity is a lot to ask of a kid that little.

That.  By 3 hours, they'd need something, including a little break.  They'd like fruit, but they'd need more than just that.  Cheese or a whole grain product that has some protein, ideally.  Three hours would be the absolute max I'd be pushing them, and I should probably plan that they'd be a bit whiny by the end -- fine for running around the house but probably not able to be on their best behavior for church or the like.  It would also depend on how much breakfast (and what they ate) they'd eaten.  

 

ETA: We're 45 minutes from the big kids' martial arts studio.  So ideally, the little people eat an hour or more before the class, which runs an hour, although often someone stays for a few extra minutes to get help with something, starts.  If we come home right away and eat lunch immediately, that means it's been just about exactly three hours before lunch.  They're usually okay at that point.  But if I feed them earlier (if it's oatmeal, I like to feed them before I dress them) or if we run even a quick errand or if we have stuff to unload so that we aren't eating lunch immediately, then it can be closer to four hours, and they're getting pretty hungry.  If I know we need to go to the store or library, I bring a snack.

Edited August 28, 2017 by happypamama

[athomeontheprairie]

But isn't that the age group you are talking about? The ones that get a snack?

 

I wouldn't mind packing snacks for kids, I wouldn't necessarily mind my older kids going that long but one of mine will definitely whinge. Actually he has a snack during church even though it's fairly short. It's less about the length and more the timing. Church runs right through his normal lunchtime so if he has a snack earlier he doesn't eat well.

I’m confused. Yes that IS the age group I’m talking about. But yes, they are being served a snack…

I guess I don’t understand your question here. My question has nothing to do with church. Only that some of the kids in my social group overlap with people in another social group. The parents questioning the snack ARE the parents that attend our church…. See the following comment.

 

Wow that's a long church service for a toddler regardless of food being served. Today I sent dh to a parent meeting for Sunday school parents. I couldn't attend the meeting as I was teaching in one of the classrooms. He said they left early, probably lasted like 15 min. or so. He gave her food before the meeting, but that's just how bored/squirmy/loud she got. It's very challenging taking her to church for things. If I take her to Mass I sit in the cry room. She was repeatedly asking to go home when I took her last time and she napped most of the service. I could not easily keep her occupied that length. Are the kids in their own room doing crafts or something?

 

But it isn’t just church. Sunday School, singing time, services. And people tend to stick around and visit for a solid 30 minutes after church. Occasionally someone leaves before that, but most? No. People are at the church for a good 3 hours. I understand this is probably not typical, but it is for us. Kids are in for church (about 75 minutes) but the rest, they do on their age mates

[heartlikealion]

I’m confused. Yes that IS the age group I’m talking about. But yes, they are being served a snack…

I guess I don’t understand your question here. My question has nothing to do with church. Only that some of the kids in my social group overlap with people in another social group. The parents questioning the snack ARE the parents that attend our church…. See the following comment.

 

 

But it isn’t just church. Sunday School, singing time, services. And people tend to stick around and visit for a solid 30 minutes after church. Occasionally someone leaves before that, but most? No. People are at the church for a good 3 hours. I understand this is probably not typical, but it is for us. Kids are in for church (about 75 minutes) but the rest, they do on their age mates

 

When the children have Sunday school are parents there doing their own Bible study or something? What are parents doing during that time or do they leave and come back?

 

Here the kids have Sunday school for an hour and families can go to Mass before or after class. Mass is about an hour. Is your actual service longer than an hour?

 

[Daria]

I am still not entirely sure I understand.  Can you tell me if I'm correct?

 

You belong to a group which is planning an activity for 2 - 4 year olds.  The activity will last 3 hours, and will include kids with allergies to dairy, wheat, nuts, as well as kids who parents have very strong feelings about sugar and artificial ingredients.  The group has agreed to avoid all these ingredients, making it challenging to come up with snacks.

There are some families involved in the activity who feel that no snack is needed.  Ironically, these families attend your church, where their kids do get a snack in the middle of a 3 hour activity.  There are also families who propose a small serving of fruit, and families (including yours?) who think that the kids will need something more substantial.  So, the question is, what can you serve with that list of ingredient restrictions?

 

Am I right, or do I have something backwards?

[Bluegoat]

I think even my kid who sometimes became ravenous could go two or three hours, so long as i wasn't over a normal meal time.  For just two hours I would not at all expect a snack to be required.

[Chris in VA]

I teach preschool, which lasts from 9:30 til 12:30. We have a snack around 11. 

We are a no nut school, and sometimes there's gluten or other allergies. Allergic kids usually bring their own snack. Everyone else brings snack for the entire class for one week out of 10 (there are 10 kids), so about 3 times a school year.

 

We usually have a cracker of some sort with fruit. You could do--rice cakes, rice rollers (like a healthy rice krispie treat shaped in a cylinder), tortilla roll-ups, smoothies...

 

 

[athomeontheprairie]

I am still not entirely sure I understand.  Can you tell me if I'm correct?

 

You belong to a group which is planning an activity for 2 - 4 year olds.  The activity will last 3 hours, and will include kids with allergies to dairy, wheat, nuts, as well as kids who parents have very strong feelings about sugar and artificial ingredients.  The group has agreed to avoid all these ingredients, making it challenging to come up with snacks.

 

There are some families involved in the activity who feel that no snack is needed.  Ironically, these families attend your church, where their kids do get a snack in the middle of a 3 hour activity.  There are also families who propose a small serving of fruit, and families (including yours?) who think that the kids will need something more substantial.  So, the question is, what can you serve with that list of ingredient restrictions?

 

Am I right, or do I have something backwards?

 

The bolded is correct.

To the rest... a snack IS going to be served. That was a given. Some feel strongly that what has been proposed is NOT enough. It is ironic to me that those that are complaining are those that attend a church where the kids get less than what is being proposed, despite the time being the same.

I haven't listed my position :) Pretend my thoughts don't matter. I'm curious what the hive would do, but failed to explain myself clearly the first time around.

The italicized and underlined is the question. Along with frequency and quantity.

[Ausmumof3]

Ok I see your problem. Also to be fair to the snack parents it may be that they aren't happy with the church situation but can't change it. So they are voicing an opinion where they think they can be heard. Or maybe they are just being difficult. Snack time at our church has caused problems here and there as some mums want it just fruit time and others want more substance so bring biscuits popcorn and crackers but then they might not make a healthy moderate choice. Then dentists aren't a huge fan of kids snacking on fruit either. These kind of discussions always seem to cause problems. I am mostly a fan of - these life threatening allergies exist - please do not bring these foods but otherwise everyone packs for their own kids. It's sad and food should be about community but with allergies, and hugely varied approaches to food it seems to be the only option.