Free school meals - WHY

[MrsSpringfield]

Could anyone help me articulate an argument as to why children from lower income families should receive a free school meal 5 days a week.
Why it is beneficial?

There is a mum on my class watsapp group, from another country originally, who is basically saying they shouldn't provide kids with FSM and that it's not a high priority. (The school have temporarily stopped serving food. It's a primary school. ) She says where she's from they don't do it and they shouldn't do it here either.

I am so inarticulate I don't dare respond in my own words... but noone else has said anything and I feel I ought to stand up for FSM!!

Bump bump help please

Because children learn better when they are not hungry

Hungry children can't learn.

So they perform worse and the social gaps in society will widen.

Id ask why she thinks kids should be starving?

Because sometimes it’s the only meal the poor wee bugger will get in a day!

She's a charmer isn't she? I doubt any argument will work with her. The reason why we have free school meals is to make sure children have at least one balanced meal a day to try to make sure they get the nutrition they need to grow up healthily. Apart from being morally right, it's in the interest if society to have a healthy population. Obviously nowadays we think of the NHS but way back in WW1 it was realised that poverty was producing undernourished adults who didn't make very strong soldiers. (I'm a graduate of economic and social history and one of my favourite topics was the influence of wars on social policy.)

@Summerstorms

Because children learn better when they are not hungry

^Also this.

She has posted an image with easy packed lunch ideas. And saying it's not hard to to a packed lunch.

I feel the point is being missed. How do I politely/ articulately say not all kids get fed at home

where she's from they don't do it

So they rely on families to send in food if they can't pay for school dinners? What happens when parents send their kids in with two mars bars and a can of Monster at the age of 5, or even worse, nothing at all?

As a society we have decided that our priority is that we want our kids to learn, and be healthy. This should produce a population that is healthier and better educated, resulting in a more productive and happier society in future. In order to do both of those, they need to be fed, preferably a nutritious hot meal in the middle of the day. If a family can't afford it, we have decided to meet that need out of taxpayer money, raised in a graduated fashion from all our citizens who are earning.

Where she is from do the costs of living substantially outstrip the average person's earnings?

Because in some areas of England like where I am the cost of accommodation, council tax are generally very high. I'm incredibly lucky to live in a HA place as they are gold dust around here, but many families have huge rents and bills which will eat up most of their income.

I spend a lot on my childrens packed lunch. She is entitled to a free lunch because she is in reception but she doesn't like it so I send her in with a lunch box. It costs plenty of extra money and for some parents that will really be a stretch too far.

There are also children with parents who have, as we call them, chaotic lifestyles. For them providing a balanced or even remotely adequate lunch every day for potentially multiple children is again a stretch too far for them.

Why would we let children go hungry in a civilised society when we can easily afford to provide a meal.

I also sometimes imagine all the catering companies who would go out of business if schools didn't provide lunches. A separate issue but it's really not a black and white economic positive to take the lunches away even.

Because the cost of living in this country is crippling and it's the food budget that is usually the one to get slashed as rent and bills need to be paid or you'll be homeless.

Also, some parents from low income households have troubled personal lives, never learned how to budget or have addictions that need paying for, and their children go hungry.

This mum is an A* twat.

I often wasn't fed at home. Fsm kept me going.

@CloudyVanilla cross post and snap!

It improves their behaviour if they are not hungry. This has a positive impact on all the children in the class.

(Not that it should matter, it’s mostly about the child who needs the meals, but for some people the wider benefit to society, ie their own kids, needs to be pointed out)

Ask her why Child Allowance is paid to the mother?

She literally keeps posting more and more stuff. I haven't replied yet.
Something quite cutting would be ideal?

Because but there for the grace of god go I.

And seriously if you can so very easily provide a packed lunch for your child, why would you begrudge a child who doesn't have that one hot meal?
What does it take away form your life for a child to provided with a hot meal?

Are we really so base that well the third world country where I come from kids starve and die of easily avoided childhood diseases because they are poor and there is no social welfare (or minimum wage, or maternity pay or anything come to that).

Would this woman happily watch her child go hungry if she suddenly faced financial hardship, because well back home they let the kids starve so that ok then.

When did it become like this.

Some families have a very limited income, often due to disability but also due to insecure employment (zero hours contracts, few employment rights) and low wages. The benefits system is there to support these families but it is imperfect and many fall through the gaps. Also some households can be chaotic, due to illness, domestic violence, even shift work, so many factors that can make what we find to be easy, far from it.

We want every child to be able to achieve their full potential. Sometimes home circumstances can be due to the actions or choices of a parent, sometimes it is beyond their control. Irrespective of the reason, it is never the child's fault, so we do what we can to help the child.

Is she from a country with even worse inequality than the UK?

I'm in favour of free school meals, but as someone who doesn't come from the UK I think it's worth pointing out that MANY other countries have no such provision, and living costs may be equally high, and welfare provision less.

I'm Irish, and primary schools there have no school lunches free or otherwise. You bring a sandwich. I am very appreciative of the free school dinners for my 5 year old, free GP appointments etc.

OP I'm not sure it's a good use of energy to look for cutting things to say, as tempting as it may be. If you want to persuade her then making her angry is not the right way to go about it.

Hungry children need food. If their parents can't provide it then someone else should, because children need to eat.

Even if you stripped the human element out of it, FSM probably cost £1 or so a day - if it was some learning device that could improve both educational attainment and future health for that kind of money, then it would be a no brainer to invest in it. Just because it's food instead of a gadget, it's the same.

Again, in cold economic terms then children who do not get the right nutrition are more likely to be a drain on the state through higher rates of disease and lower educational attainment.

Some people are just determined to be contrary though.

Don’t argue over a class whatsapp

Could you not tell her that instead of putting that £2.70 per day into benefits paid to adults, the govt hold it back and fund the FSM program so it is spent on good food for that child in the middle of the day.

Sounds like that's the sort of argument that'd appeal to her way of thinking ;-)

Because it's not the child's fault if their parent can't afford to, or for any other reason doesn't feed their child a healthy diet. As a society we have a responsibility to make sure children aren't going hungry in one of the wealthiest countries on earth.