Lunch box police - AIBU?

[Ladyonashortfuse]

At my 4 year old DS's new school the children all take packed lunches. Before he started I was given a note saying no sweets were allowed in school - fine, I support this. On the first day I sent him in with a snack of mixed nuts (unsalted). A note came home saying no nuts were allowed because they could be a choking hazard. So on the second day I sent him with no nuts, and a chocolate flavoured yoghurt for his dessert which looked frankly disgusting but I'd bought it by mistake and nobody else was going to eat it. A note came home saying chocolate is not allowed in school so it would be 'preferable' if he did not have chocolate yoghurt again. Yesterday I sent him with no nuts, no chocolate yoghurt, but a handful of plain mini-crackers as a snack. A not came home saying no biscuit snacks. I can't keep up. Thinking of putting a note in his bag asking to be provided with a complete list of foods which aren't allowed in school, or for a new parent might that be construed as a bit passive-aggressive and rude?

I would send a note back and remind her that she is the teacher and you are the parent; Her job is to teach the child the subjects from the curriculum whereas it's the parents job to provide nutritionally etc.

Don't be soft with her, tell her to provide a list of acceptable foods or alternatively mind her own business.

I'm a bitch though, so you'll probably be a lot nicer than me!

Well that's it isn't it Biking. What exactly are we teaching our children if we categorically deny certain foods. It's massively unhealthy, creates an unhealthy attitude to food.

If I honestly felt these policies were teaching my children about proper healthy eating, I would just do it happily. But I don't.

Plus it pisses me off.

I hate it when people apply science so badly. don't get me started on being told today that if I drank coffee whipped with organic butter and coconut milk I would lose weight because it neutral uses the acid. But when it affects my children you better have a good argument based on an actual understanding of food.

*neutralises

At a primary school I was teaching at recently the children were encouraged to buy morning break snacks as it boosted sch funds enormously and paid for children's parties, prizes etc. the only things available to buy were (and I believe still are) crisps, Quavers, biscuits, chocolate biscuits and cartons of squash. They also display a small sad basket of fruit that no child ever buys from - the rotten fruit just gets discarded and replaced.

I really do not need anyone to monitor my child's lunch - I do that myself. My dd is very healthy and active, but, no food is banned in our house. I'm a recovered bulimic. No way are my girls going to have the issues with food that I did. Everything in moderation and lots of fresh air and exercise. Today dd1 had weetabix and raspberries for breakfast. School provide fruit for snack time. For lunch she had a ham wholemeal sandwich, cucumber, more raspberries, a frube and a packet of crisps. Her dinner was roast chicken wrap with new potatos, salad and some grated cheese. Before bed she will probably have a glass of milk and a chocolate biscuit. Dd2 has had breast milk. Dd1s diet is healthy and varied but she has some form of 'treat' food every day. She has a small amount, enjoys it and forgets about it. That way she understands that there is no need to binge on treats because she can have them whenever she wants them albeit in a small amount moderated by me.

What actually screwed up my eating was the insistence that I had to eat faster.

TarragonChicken makes a good point here too - a lot of English schools have very short mealtimes or impossible meal schedules and so they need kids in and out of the dining room as fast as possible.

When I was at school we had an hour for lunch ... but during that time they hd to get almsot every student from Seniors and Sixth Form through the canteen (Infants & Juniors had their lunchtime the hour before) as the only people who ever brought a packed lunch were children with allergies. My school tried to stagger lunches so one week Yr 7 would go in at 12;10, Yr8 at 12:20, Yr9 at 12:30; Yr10 at 12:40; Yr11 at 12:50, then the following week Yr8 would go in first etcetc You'd line up outside then when it was your yeargroup's turn you went to queue up inside and get your food ... but it never worked properly because anyone with extra-curriculars at lunchtime would get a pass to go into lunch first (they were usually 12:30 till 13:00, so if your slot was later you wouldn't get lunch otherwise) then both years of Sixth Form could come in at any time and just join the inside queue rather than waiting outside, people would try to get in early anyway or turn up late for their yearslot and of course because it was such a short time, by the time the next year group was coming in, there was still usually half of the previous yeargroup still waiting to even get a tray, never mind any food!

I then went to work abroad in Spain and I much prefer their system! Schools usually have two hour lunchbreaks (around 13:00-15:00) as lunch is the big meal of the day. Most children go home for lunch anyway or older ones go offsite to cafes/restaurants, but those that stay at school have a general staggered system, mostly just make sure all the little ones actually come to eat before they go to the playground or nap room. Because there is usually so few children eating at school (In a year group of about 60, in my school you'd have probably had an average of 20 staying for lunch every day) there were less bodies to get through the dining room and more time to do it in, so it could be a bit more relaxed. Most kids were still done with lunch in about 20 minutes, but they could take it at an enjoyable pace rather than just shovelling it in to get back to class ... if one of the Infants needs an hour to eat lunch, they can take an hour, if they finish in 10 minutes then that's fine too but not "necessary".

melj the european system is only good if you have parents at home. I grew up in France where you also have two hours lunch. Both my parents were wording so I either spent lunch time walking around town eating a sandwich or at the cantine being utterly bored. Thus said I love the bread and chocolate at 4pm :) as i didn't finish school before 5.

Depends though, at the schools I and my friends worked at, and my DC went to, there were always lots of clubs, groups and activities on during the 2 hour lunch time for kids who didn't go home and there was always an open classroom with a teacher on duty so kids could go and do homework/study, and the primary kids had a room set out with little cotmats and blankets so they could have a nap.

I suppose if schools didn't do anything then it could get boring but I've never had that happen fortunately.

When I was at school (1970s) we had kermit the frog flasks and took in tea to drink - primary age..

If the school doesn't ban grapes or popcorn as choking hazards, then they have no business banning nuts for the same reason. (Nut allergies in the school, of course they should be banned. That would be completely different.) Grapes and popcorn are terrible to get out of little throats, if you can even do it!

Snacktime in the morning is fruit or veg in most schools. Anything else is generally banned, so that's normal.

I'd tell them to stick it re the yogurt, though. Ask for a list of puddings served with school dinners.

There have been a few reported deaths from young children choking on whole grapes. They are perfectly shaped to lodge in the throats if not bitten or cut and can get stuck. I always cut grapes up because of this. Not worth the risk.

A few children have died in the UK over the last 18 months choking on grapes. They are a huge choking risk because of their shape and the consistency means they slip down the throat easily then get lodged and are v difficult to get out. It's not hard to cut them lengthways. I can't believe anyone would question doing this to be honest!

As for lunchbox police, we don't have them at our school, I'd have great fun with them if they were.

It's no wonder that british schools are getting poorer educational results when resources go on things like policing lunch boxes. IMO schools are tyrannical, dictating what must be worn, acceptable hair styles and what may or may not be eaten. I understand that they have a captive audience of most of our children and are therefore a usefu land efficient means for delivering beneficial info or services to children, but that was never intended to be their purpose. Schools have become more demanding, parents are more demanding; battles ensue!

Schools! Please focus on educating instead of policing our children.

My guess is OP is not in the England as all infants are provided lunch under English system ( not sure about the rest of uk)

Again it is the lets target everyone.. Why don't they discuss the lunchboxes with those parents who just send there kids just a couple of packets of crisps and chocolate, or the kids who are very overweight. Refer these on,. I gave up on packed lunches as my DS didn't eat them but does eat his hot dinner.

I would ask for a full list as they are playing silly buggers by drip feeding

but the same school will be okay with the sweetener/sugar rammed, salt loaded, highly processed, fatty foods they knock out for those not on packed lunches.

Jamie Oliver (School dinners) was an eye opener.

Is it policy or is it an over zealous smsa? The cheddar biscuits makes me think they are misreading their policies. They're not sugary. Children need carbs. There's probably more sugar in bread. That'll be banned next!

I would ask the class teacher for a list and explain you've had notes everyday and clarify if mini cheddars are banned too.

How ridiculous! And to the sarcy poster saying snacks aren't lunch a packed lunch usually has a sandwich and then things like nuts and a yogurt so I think the lunches you have sent are perfectly acceptable!

I used to buy dinner in school and get a hot dog and only eat the bun and two cakes with custard!

I would say something to them as thats beyond policing. I would be furious.

howcanwedo Just read that menu. The only things I would eat off there are sweetcorn, baked beans, peas and rice pudding. And I'm a 42-year old. Clearly, if I was at school these days, I would starve.

Amazing how things have changed in such a short time. My DC were at primary in the early 2000s and there was no lunch box or snack policy. Mid morning break was milk and a biscuit. Lunch for DS was jam sandwiches and an apple every day . The apple, of course, came home each day untouched but I did my duty. He was a very picky eater but has grown up into quite a foodie so there is hope for all.

violetroar I send my kid in with a thermos of pasta . Only on a Friday though because he has school dinners the rest of the time.

I'll certainly be filling it with soup when he stops getting the free meals.

I was kinda hoping to get into an argument about him having a kit kat in his lunch because he has pudding every day as part of school dinners but they didn't seem to mind. Not much lunch box police going on at his school apart from the no nuts thing.

Dd had the opposite problem last year & the ta kept saying ooo aren't you healthy (chicken & lettuce sandwich ) or lets see what rabbit food poppy's got today then. It made her feel bad & requested cheese sarnie &crisps!

Woah, that's a lot of faffing effort on notes being sent home, one can only hope they put in as much effort when it comes to...you know....educating your child.

The no nuts thing I definitely agree with (as well as other goods like Shellfish which are allergy related) but the rest is complete bonkers. They need to get a list of 'acceptable foods' up online. I'm guessing the reason they haven't is that there isn't much food left to list!
And I would also hazard a guess that previous parent complaints have got them into the situation of no this, no this and no that?

They expect parents to tow the line but their communication is piss-poor.