To think it's absolutely ridiculous that parents can't choose their own children's lunch?

[annabanana84]

I've read a few threads on here now where parents have been told they can't put chocolate/fizzy pop/whatever the fuck they want into their childrens lunchboxes. Am I alone in thinking this is absolutely absurd? Why on earth is the school taking away the parents choice? I remember once a week, as a treat, I would be sent with jam butties, a packet of crisps, a kit kat and a panda pop cherryade, and the school didn't bat an eyelid. Why do schools feel they have to do this, I wonder?

[IneedAyoniNickname]

A couple of years ago I'd have agreed with the op. Then I started helping on school trips....

The first one I went on a child had a cheeseburger and chips, still in a polystyrene box. Apparently his mum bought an extra one when she got the dinner the night before specially :(

[Pobblewhohasnotoes]

As a children's nurse I'm fully aware that some parents don't have a clue about their children's diet.

I had a four year old once who weighed seven stone! Purely from diet!

We have obese children whose parents tell us they don't understand why their children are so big, and then proceed to open their bags to find them stuffed with junk food. Their bedside lockers are filled with crisps, they buy them snacks constantly.

We have physio's who run exercise classes for obese children, and are trying to educate parents regarding diet and also target pregnant women so they are aware of a healthy diet for their future children.

Surely this is why teachers need to keep an eye on children's lunch boxes? Some parents don't have a clue.

[ShoeWhore]

I agree with the lunchbox rules.

Apart from anything else, too much junk at lunchtime will give the children a short-lived fix of sugar followed by a slump. This does not set them up well for an afternoon of learning.

I too was concerned at all the puddings featured in school dinners but I was reassured that they are homemade and usually made with either fruit and/or yoghurt and less sugar than normal. So healthier versions I suppose.

By the way I am ancient but my primary school had similar rules 30 years ago. This is nothing new.

[5Foot5]

YANBU

I accept that some parents will send their kids in with unhealthy shit for lunch but I don't accept that this means the school can impose rigid guidelines on the rest of the parents who make more of an effort.

All that seems to lead to is lunch box police showing no common sense and confiscating the odd chocolate biscuit in an otherwise perfectly healthy packed lunch.

[Wheresmycaffeinedrip]

With regards to the lower sugar lower salt/fat foods served etc, does anyone not remember that programme that followed a journalist living off that kind of diet food. She actually gained three pounds as a result of the food being less satisfying and eating more just trying to get the same level of enjoyment from it.

Lower sugar stuff may seem like a good idea but in some circumstances a smaller portion of the full flavoured version would be more satisfying and enjoyable than a massive slab of the reduced fat and sugar version. And if they use sweetners it's worse for them.

[gordyslovesheep]

'treat' Fridays? that sounds like an early start to an unhealthy relationship with food.

I WISH our school would enforce it - mine nag me constantly for crisps and fizz and chocolate in their lunches and tell me it's 'not fair' I wont give them tat to eat

They have these at home but in school, without me checking, I know they don't JUST eat the rubbish

[Wheresmycaffeinedrip]

And if something's deemed unhealthy enough to have half the ingredients removed in order to make it "acceptable" then it has no place on a school menu. They should police their own food before they go over board on ours. I agree with no sweets and fizzy drinks as they are void if any nutritional benefit. BUT cakes and biscuits are a science, quantities have to be right on order for them to work, so if they are removing sugar then it would have to be replaced with something which may not even be better for the children.

[MrsTerryPratchett]

I work a lot with First Nations people of Canada. Our indigenous people. We have lunch box police here too. One of them told me that her child had fallen foul of the lunch box police and she was told to bring in healthier food. Her mother said, "I shopped the outside of the store for the first time" with a big grin. It can work.

[littlestgirlguide]

Our school says no nuts, no sweets, no chocolate bars (things like Penguin biscuits are ok, but no a Mars bar for example), and no fizzy drinks.
I do agree with basic rules, as not everyone knows what constitutes a scent lunch, but I've never heard of anything as daft as confiscating a slice of birthday cake from a child on her birthday! Ridiculous.
I've just prepared 4year old DD's packed lunch for tomorrow. She has got a pasta salad with cheese, cold sausage and cherry tomatoes, a petit filous, an apple, some dried apricots and a small chocolate fairy cake, home made by herself. I know it's low on veg, but her evening meal will be a vegetable casserole and rice so over the day I know it's balanced.
I don't see the point in treat days, to me that sounds like using unhealthy food as a reward which can't be a good thing. Children learn to see sugary, high fat food as desirable and as soon as the restrictions are lifted - when they are old enough to make their own food choices - they instinctively choose the food they have learnt to want but not been allowed.

[propertyNIGHTmareBEFOREXMAS]

Yanbu. There's nothing at all wrong with the odd great given now and again. Schools are catering to the lowest common denominator which is a shame for the sensible but needs must, I guess.

[primarymonkeyhanger]

My personal fave was the child that brought a cheese burger or kebab everyday from the takeaway her dad worked at and was leftover from dinner. Kids regularly have cold fishfinger sandwiches or potato smileys (fried bg mum each morning).
There is a clear need for limitations.
For the record school dinners are strictly monitored in terms of calorie/sugar/fat content.

Do people actually expect teachers yo police this though? Are we not entitled yo a break? Dont tell Gove he'll tske our lhnch break next!

[Esker]

I would agree- if schools knew the first thing about nutrition. My school (am a secondary teacher) has all the usual bans on coke, sprite etc, but sell these bullshit 'acquajuice' things which can hardly be of greater nutritional value- full of sugar. No chocolate bars, but muffins the size of your head - apparently acceptable because bake on site. - No sense of portion control though. A cupcake size one would be fine, but seriously these things are enormous!
They serve salad, but its just a bunch of lettuce and tomatoes - no dressing- so how are kids supposed to learn that 'salad' can be an enjoyable meal in itself (eg with couscous and roast veg etc) rather than just a pile of watery leaves?

[Theodorakiss]

Its amazing we are alive at all after the 70s/80s diets most of us had.

I don't really give a fig about healthy eating, we just eat food. And we all love sugar, outside of the mini mummy Surrey bubble, in the real world, it's what people tend to do.

[BeyondTheLimitsOfAcceptability]

I know a shit feeder. They send their child to school with the appropriate lunch, which the child eats none of. Then when the child gets home, they eat all the shite they would have had for lunch if they were allowed. Just now they are hungry and eat loads more. So imo, I don't think policing lunches necessarily helps the people in need that it claims it is for.

I also have issues with schools passing on the wrong info, things like saying little children should have wholemeal bread and low fat. I'm half tempted to get a recognised nutrition qualification before mine get there!

[Sunnysummer]

YABU. It can really help kids who might otherwise be sent with total junk, plus it saves naturally healthy-minded parents from forever being pestered for sweets and fizzy drinks.

I spent my childhood being deeply embarrassed by the healthy lunches that my Euro-hippy parents put together (tuna and pumpernickel bread, anyone?) and jealous of other kids with their mini chocolates and crisp packets, and am grateful that my DCs will not be repeating my own continual pestering for junk food!

[Wheresmycaffeinedrip]

But I don't think it does stop kids bringing in junk. When polices say no sweets or chocolate and nuts. They are still free to fill sandwiches full of marshmallow fluff, jam etc. And still free to send in most other crap their kid ears. They can't say no to a sausage roll when they are serving burger and chips. There's plenty of room for "crap" inside the guide lines stated.

[BuntyPenfold]

They still bring in junk, very pricey junk too.
A jam sandwich and then packets of those fruit juice sweets, jelly sweets and fruit winders etc, and all much worse for their teeth than chocolate.

Last year one little boy would have 3 packets a day in his lunchbox of these sweets made with fruit juice, (and his mother is a teacher.)

[cory]

I think it's reasonable that teachers don't want to teach the child whose lunch has consisted of a bag of Haribos. Always remember the time dh ran holiday activities for local children. One little dear grabbed a pick-axe and swung it round his head (strictly against instructions) and when he got bollocked cheerfully explained that "I always get hyper after eating x". Dh had to swallow very hard before tactfully inquiring if this might not be a good reason not to take x in his lunchbox. Teachers deal with this every day, and they have to provide an education not just ensure that they don't brain each other with pickaxes.

[Wheresmycaffeinedrip]

It's reasonable yes but it needs to also be consistent and make sense. I mean if nothing was said about a smartie cookie then theoretically you can't say anything about a tube of smarties. You can't say no chocolate spread, but allow choc sponge and chocolate sauce. You may write home to parents about that cold burger and chips in their kids lunch, but if said parent sliced up burger shoved it in a sandwich with a lettuce leaf and gave a bag of crisps and a customary carrot stick portion that the kid won't eat anyway, and that gets through. It's pretty much the same meal.

[Smartiepants79]

Oh great it's another one of those damned if you do and damned if you don't situations.

Schools get bashed for not eductating children about food choices, using sweets as rewards, allowing kids to hand out sweets on their birthdays..... I could go on!!

And now they are in the wrong for educating parents and children about food choices, encouraging healthy eating, not allowing sweets at lunch time.....
They can't really win can they?

These rules are sadly necessary because some parents need that guidance.
It may be due to lack of education. Sometimes it due to sheer bloody mindedness. 'Its my kid I can feed it what I like'
I've seen a lunch box that has just had a McDonald's happy meal stuffed into it! Don't tell me that parent doesn't need some rules about acceptables lunches for year olds.

[Theodorakiss]

I am astounded how much time people spend analysing and competing at diets. It is quite boring really and life is too short

[PeppiNephrine]

Really? You think its terrible that you're not allowed to send your child in with a lunch full of shit?
Do you also complain that they've taken the clothes choice away from you, and that they make them sit down at certain times?

Get over yourself or homeschool.

[Wheresmycaffeinedrip]

No I don't think its acceptable to send kids in with a shit lunch. But neither is it acceptable to have kids fed a shit lunch in school. Rules are fine but the school should abide by them too or no one will.

The point in trying to make is that with or without stipulations, parents will still serve crap if that's how they want to feed their kids. Banning sweets and chocolate will barely make a dent.

[GangstersLoveToDance]

I would have an issue with common sense not being used.

For instance...every day, ds1s lunch is a wholemeal sandwich or Pitta (ham/cheese/tuna) and sometimes a boiled egg. He has a duo-compartment lunch box which has cucumber, pepper and carrot stick on one side and chopped fruit on the other, like grapes/oranges/melon. He then has a natural fruit yoghurt and bottle of no sugar squash.

He has this EVERY day. In addition to this, he will have one treat. Sometimes a cake or Jaffa cake bar. He also loves cereal bars and sometimes takes a tub of chocolate raisins. Occasionally he'll have a small packet of crisps.

If someone told me he had to cut this out I would be Furious.

Having an issue with a lunch box FULL of crap though...that's to be expected surely?

[Wheresmycaffeinedrip]

But a lunch box can contain everything that's allowed and still be crap. You can list acceptable foods but of someone chooses to send their kid in with sausage roll, cold pizza, cheese portion , carton of fruit juice and a yogurt, then what can u do? It's a shit lunch but nothing in it that isn't served at school or on banned list. (And no I wouldn't send that in in a million years) some people really need it spelling out but that can't be done without penalising everyone else who takes a sensible approach.