AIBU to think there is a stigma attached to taking up Free School Meals?

[cingolimama]

Would really value MNers experience here. DH and I have had a pretty disastrous year financially (redundancy for DH, drying up of contracts for me). However we are both working hell for leather to turn this around. In the meantime we're eligible for FSM, which frankly would be a big help. I also know that it helps the school gain a Pupil Premium.

But I'm a bit nervous about this. I don't want my daughter to be "targeted for help" as I believe anyone benefiting from FSM is (but perhaps I'm being idiotic - DD could surely use a booster in maths dept.) I also don't want any social stigma attached to this. It's a mixed school socially, but the majority is very middle class. Has anyone had any negative experience of taking this up? Or AIBU and it will all be fine?

Me neither, curlew.

Spikeytree explained it very well, particularly in her last sentence.

Neither do I curlew, if it wasnt the case then there would be no stats to back up the facts and pupil premium wouldnt be needed. There will be exceptions like with any other situations but they can only go with the majority.

they are not acting parents in any shape or form

Except they are.

As I said...'in loco parentis'

If your school is wise they won't be "targeting for help" or singling out your daughter, and ought to have a system where other children don't know she has FSM. There used to be luminous passes like LifeofPo describes but I think most schools have clicked that this isn't a good idea and have a more sensible system so you can keep your status private. We are in an area with a quite high area for FSMs and all the schools whose open-days we went to said the same: apply for the FSM so the school gets the extra money, even if you don't intend to use it. No-one knows whose meals are free, and mostly the pupil premium is used to give a boost to whichever pupils most need extra help, without reference to whether they are the FSM recipients themselves, because by so doing it raises the standards of the whole school in general, and the children with FSM individually too, far more than if the help was just targeted at those on FSM. The exception to this is that most schools do retain some of the pupil premium money to allow children on FSM to participate in trips and extracurricular activities without having to pay the extra.

Happy Mummy - FSM don't step in in a crisis actually, you or may not be eligible. We don't get cb at the moment, can't use that. What I am building on is other posters suggesting that the factors for eligibility for fsm omit lots of people and I personally think that free school meals for all would be a positive move for various reasons. That's all.

Nerfmother

I totally agree and have seen a number of children who were neglected where packed lunches were concerned, the parents either ill educated as what constituted a healthy meal, with not enough food, or those not able to afford the lunch and not entitled to fsm.
Making it free for all would eradicate this, and that poor boy who starved to death springs to mind.

"Stevie Wonder's doing alright. Why are we wasting money on providing help for blind people? It's offensive to those that go on to become major recording stars"

Totally out of context friday16, as is quoting the first line of my post without the second, where I qualified my point that I got FSM but did well a school with the fact that I realised not everyone did.

I still stand by my point that children should be treated as individuals rather than stereotypes. With help there for those who need it, as and when that need arises.

That's generally what happens, Jemima. However, the only money available for this is PP money, which has to be accounted for. Hence we have to do an extra analysis on narrowing the gap children (this includes CLA etc as well as FSM).

I feel like it's wrong to pick a group of people (the unemployed and the poor, for example) and allocate money to support academic performance in schools based on that. I'd understand if it was about a subsidy to buy uniform, ditto fsm, help with costs to go on trips etc., because lack of money is a direct consequence of being poor/unemployed. Being poor doesn't, however, necessarily mean that you need extra tutoring. There might be a correlation with poverty and poor performance, but it is not a direct consequence. Poor academic performance in itself, on the other hand, is an excellent indicator of need for extra tutoring. Why not use that data?

Ask Nick Clegg, ToysRLuv. PP is a Lib Dem policy.

We get FSMs...no negative stigma. But there are alot of people in our school. One supply teacher stupidly asked my dd, why she hadnt paid for her dinners all term

dd was very proud to say that the government paid for her dinners

all the other kids were awestruck....'will the government pay for my dinners miss?'

I spect the supply teacher was a bit

Spikey: it's nuts. I thought the lib dems were sane.

This pp is not good - have heard of nurseries trying to scramble for more disadvantaged kids while trying to reduce hours of those on mat leave.

I couldn't work it out but the person going on about it said it was due to PP.

I also don't think pupils should know who has FSM.

I'm a primary teacher. When I do the dinner register, children just answer school dinners or sandwiches. When the register gets to the office, the administrator sorts out who is FSM and who pays. That info is only shared with me when we have to do data analysis, and is never shared with the children. In fact, if parents don't tell their own children that they are on FSM, even they wouldn't know.

Best laugh I've had all day, Toys. No friend of Nick here

Look, I've been the child on FSM. I understand that to individuals it feels insulting to be told your child is at a disadvantage because you are poor. Statistically, though, children who qualify for FSM do perform poorly in comparison to those who don't. Statistics do not tell the whole story though and that is clear. I bucked that trend, as do many others on this thread and elsewhere. It doesn't mean that the trend doesn't exist.

The reality is that any school worth its salt will be providing assistance for any child underachieving. The PP money is the funding that provides this assistance. In general I'm in favour of lots more money for schools that they can use where the need arises. In practice, PP money is generally used like that but school needs to show that they have used the money in a way that has had an impact on the performance of the students in the cohort it was intended for. Hence the extra column on exam analysis.

Nerfmother, wil agree to disagree then. I think the state already pay enough to parents who dont provide or fully provide for the children they chose to have and shouldnt have to pay anymore to feed every child. FSM steps in where no adults in the house work so no income hence a "crisis" and CB is only not paid to earners over around £50k so FSM wouldnt even be a consideration for those people.

Do people really have children believing its their right and the state should pay for it all?

Yawn.

I know the allocation of pp is probably a very discreet and logical process in many schools, but I know how it feels to be tarred with a very wide brush (e.g. have pnd and could use a couple of hours a week of respite child care - ergo you're thick, useless and need to be patronised), so would hate for that to happen to anyone. And it can happen - as long as we are all still human and prone to prejudices.

happymummyofone i understand what you are saying about taking responsibility for the children you have. But not everyone does take responsibility. Some kids are neglected and underfed. Wouldn't you rather a system that protected those children from malnutrition, regardless of the fecklessness of their parents?

I would hope the allocation of pp is discreet but I am not so sure it is.

"Do people really have children believing its their right and the state should pay for it all?"

Happymotherofone Do people really never consider that events change - people can go from rich to poor, parents alive to dead, why on earth don't people think that most parents want the absolute best for their children!!

If the school is doing that, Toys, then you have bigger problems than PP and I'd say it is time to find a new school.

As both a recipient of FSM and a teacher of 10 years experience I've never encountered any presumption that a child receiving FSM would be thick, nor have I seen them patronised. If I had a child at a school that acted like this I would remove them whether they were eligible for FSM or not.

Yep, they do! We walk three miles to school and back. And they're both skinny minnies! If they don't have a good lunch they don't make it back home ok.

And obviously, i'm talking about reasonable child sized portions, not adult sized ones!

And, i'd like to point out that aside from the time off raising the kids, i've worked from the age of 13 to 36, without ever claiming anything. I don't think that, now i've fallen on hard times, although still working, it's too much to ask for some hopefully temporary aid, is it?

We went from a dual income of 80K, to a lone income of 45K, while I raised the kids for f ew years, to a dual income of about 14K. No fault of ours, jobs lay off.

Let's hope it doesn't happen to those people who moralise about not having kids unless you can afford them.

Sheridand good luck and I hope your income rises again soon.

I really think the people who go on about their taxes and benefits are so often people that are well off and I just don't get it.

I would never begrudge help to those who need it.

I think there are some really bitter people out there who have no idea.

Thanks! tbh, it's been a mare as the system goes on your last years earnings, so we are twiddling our thumbs waiting...........

At least we have something coming in though, and luckily our mortgage is small, as we downsized so I could be a SAHM. Dread to think what would have happened if it was big.

I feel lucky to have anything in my local area, it is very high in unemployment.