AIBU to think free school dinners is a waste of money

[Iwannalaylikethisforever]

Our primary school newsletter announces from September 2014 all reception children and years 1&2 will be getting free school meals. Everyone else pays usual £2 per day.
Although the government is calling for a ban on packed lunches, our school is not enforcing it.
I think free school lunches for those who need it is brilliant. I loved my free school lunches as a child.
But, so many parents are angry about it and insisting their child is too fussy to eat whats on offer at school, surely it's just a waste of tax payers money. Further more I think it's unreasonable to assume after year 2 parents and children won't benefit from trying to introduce children to a broader array of foods than they get elsewhere.

If anyone tries to tell me that I cannot provide my child with my own choice of packed lunch I will take them to court. I have the right to feed my child organic food only. Call me what you want but that's my choice and I WILL NOT have any government tell me otherwise. Fucking cheek.

What gets me is we've lost CB,won't get free school dinners but others on a lot more will keep their child benefit and get school dinners.

Why Retro Why don't you get CB or free dinners?

What I do wonder is whether the pupil premium that schools get when children receive fsm will still apply. Where will that money come from if it does not? Won't schools that have a high percentage of children receiving fsm be underfunded?

My kids are KS 2 and we're in the 40-60k single income bracket unlike parents on joint £80k with KS 1 children.

Not fair.

Maureen. It is also a matter of principle isn't, why should parents be "told" what our dc will eat at school? I will get fsm for 1 child and be making packed lunch for 3 anyway.

I don't know why they did not just stick to the same criteria for free school meals, but increase they amount you can have coming in & still be entitled to get fsm's. It would be fairly cheap to implement and would mean that the low income families would get the extra help.

I'm concerned also re those of us with KS2 children paying for lunches sitting after KS1. KS1 already get the pick of everything and decent portions.KS2 often have smaller portions and food not advertised because they've run out.

My kids have been known to end up with bread instead of veg and stale crackers and rubbery cheese because they'd run out of the "healthy" pudding I'd actually paid for which the KS1 kids were happily still chomping into on the same table.Sometimes they substitute the menu meal with a sausage roll and often on a a Friday they've ended up with as few as 6 chips.

I can see the above getting worse as take up picks up.

I think its ace

It's a bit lowest-common-denominator. Some packed lunches are dreadful, therefore everyone has to have one provided by the state?

Total waste of money. And it doesn't mean that any of us are suddenly getting our lunches for free. Because the state's money is only what we pay in. It isn't some benevolent bank on high!

I haven't 'seen' school dinners with my own eyes (although the fact DS p1 teacher told me to stop persevering with them as 'she wouldn't eat that slop and so she doesn't expect a child to') but I have seen a school packed lunch and it is a fat and carb fest. Last Friday DS friend came home with a white egg mayo roll, a sugary milkshake drink, a chocolate cookie and an apple.

FFS I would like to see someone forcing me to feed that to my child. Not that there's anything wrong with any individual item on that list, it's just all put together it's terrible.

I think free school meals are vital for some families and the threshold should be increased so that everyone in need of them gets them. But it's ridiculous that families who could easily afford them get them free as well, surely that money could be better spent elsewhere in education.

What really worries me about this is if they did try to ban packed lunches. My DS had school dinners for a year and I was happily thinking he was getting a healthy balanced meal every day, and I just did sandwiches/soup or whatever in the evenings. He ended up very poorly with worryingly low iron levels. It turns out that although all the food offered was fairly healthy, there was nobody checking that each child chose a balanced meal, so DS had basically been eating potato in various forms each day.

He's now on packed lunches and I know exactly what he's eaten and I make sure it's a healthy lunch. Unless the school have the resources to check that each child is choosing (and eating) a good balance of foods there is no way I'm letting my DCs have school dinners again.

Yanbu. I won't be taking up the free meals if and when they become available for all. I can afford to feed a healthy packed lunch and would not want free food of questionable quality and nutritional content (horse meat or choc sponge anyone?).

I don't think it's going to be optional property

It will be optional. They can take me to court over it. I am quite sure I won't be the only one opting out.

Iwould they don't enforce fruit and veg,it's white carb and sugar city so I can easily see how that can happen.One of my dc are fussy but he eats plenty of fruit/ veg at home because I serve the ones he likes and he gets nothing else.

If he brings his packed lunch carrots home from school he eats them before anything else

At school if they turn down the veg they give them bread so my DS merrily gets away with eating fuck all veg.If he ever does it's starchy sweet corn or baked beans.

I think the standard for school lunches is pretty low to be honest.

Here they rave about how good they are and they're shite! The main is ok about 3 times a week, the other 2 they have rubbish. Nuggets, burger etc.
and they have a stodgy carby sugary pudding with custard EVERY DAY.

I emailed the people "in charge" and they said without the pudding they wouldn't meet energy requirements so basically, the meals don't contain enough good calories so they bulk it out with sugar and saturated fat. Great.

I emailed my local councillor, he ignored my email.

I'm at a loss. How can that be considered healthy? How can the alternative packed lunch POSSIBLY be worse?! This is a fairly affluent area, most kids lunches are fine. Surely we need more targeted intervention than this?

I raise you pink custard property.

DD has school meals so we will benefit as she is only in reception.

The problem I have is that the reasoning behind it seems to be some kind of healthy eating drive (or so we are told), when today DD had chocolate rice krispie cake for pudding, and tomorrow is cornflake tart and custard. I don't mind her eating these things, but dont make out that you can do so much better than I could with regards to lunch choices.

Instead of a sweeping policy, they should have rejigged the FSM criteria as other posters have suggested.

I absolutely agree it should be means tested, and it would be of far more value if they raised the qualifying threshold (so some of those families who are struggling, but not currently struggling quite enough, could have FSM), rather than give it to families (like mine) who are lucky enough to not need the benefit at all.

If its going to be compulsory I am glad my DS will have moved into KS2. He is a ridiculously fussy eater so would go hungry and get upset.

There are many people who say the tories are harking back to Victorian times. Why cant they bring some of the Victorian non-interference back too?

Retro if they turn down veg they get bread??! Well that just proves how ridiculous the whole thing is. If they can't ensure children are eating healthy school meals there's no way on earth parents are going to agree to having them rather than packed lunches where you know what they're eating.

Yanbu. I would not feed that shite to a dog. I'm perfectly capable of making a decent packed lunch and funnily enough I enjoy cooking for my children and I know what a carrot and a chicken is.

By all means expand criteria to ensure those who would benefit get it. But ffs stop treating parents like idiots.

YANBU

I live in an area where this already happens, more than 70% of kids take a pack lunch anyway, because the quality and more importantly the way the food is cooked ( in a central area and distributed, ie kept warm in a steamer for hours) has made it unpalatable, this is a direct result of cost cutting to accommodate the free meals.

I think that in theory it is a great idea. Hopefully the increase in numbers will mean higher quality ingredients. If they look at the menu's and create healthy balanced meals then it will be great.

My dd has school meals once or twice per week. We have a sheet and she has it tick her choices before we go into the classroom. I encourage her to choose the healthy options. I don't mind her having pudding once a week but I prefer her to choose fruit salad or a yoghurt if she is having more than one a week. This system works really well.

I went on a school trip recently and was intrigued to see what the packed lunches were like. I have to say I was quite shocked. Even the seemingly "healthy" ones (for example innocent smoothie drink, white bread sandwich, dried apricots and yoghurt tube) were high carb, high sugar and low protein. Schools are trying to get kids to learn which must be pretty tricky with a post lunch blood sugar slump. If they get the balance right for school meals then it could be really positive.