Lunch box police

[BackToBeingMe]

Just had a phone call from school and asked if I could go in for a chat regarding dd lunch. She is 6 and in year 2, being in key stage 1 she gets universal free school meals which she has everyday apart from Wednesday. Wednesday is always a roast and the gravy the meat is cooked in gives her an upset stomach. I am irritated as the teacher has looked in dd lunch bag this morning which I feel is out of order if I'm total honest. So the offending item which she has had the last few Wednesday's as there is 10 in a pack is a mini Pick Up Bar. Photo attached for size she has just the 1 biscuit not the 3 that is the actual serving size. Along with the pick up she has a cheese and ham mini wrap with lettuce, cucumber and red onion in, 6 cherry tomatoes, carrot sticks, a pot of hummus and grapes which are cut into 1/4s. I was a bit taken aback just now on the phone so didn't say much at all, now I need to know what to say at by meeting this afternoon. I would seriously think the school had more to worry about than a flamming fun size biscuit. For back ground we moved into this area recently and dd has only been at the school since the September and such rule was mentioned during induction day in July.

Quick update, currently on hold with LA. So the head was more professional today than I expected after yesterday's performance which was a pleasant surprise. She allowed me to check both dc school records for the appropriate medical information which for me was my biggest concern. It is now all present and correct and ds has been issued with an allergy card and lanyard that he needs to wear for school trips etc. The office lady has apologised for her error and said she understood that the situation could of ended alot differently and she was extremely sorry, apology was excepted by myself and dh. There is going to be some sort of disciplinary hearing and internal investigation into how such an error was made. The head didn't apologise for her attitude/accusations yesterday and was insistent that it was inline with the LA safe gaurding policies. I am on hold now to discuss this with the LA. We will be making a formal written complaint to the school and board of governers as the error in the case of my dc has been discovered an investigation is needed to make sure the other children's information in all correct.

The head didn't apologise for her attitude/accusations yesterday and was insistent that it was inline with the LA safe gaurding policies. I am on hold now to discuss this with the LA. We will be making a formal written complaint to the school and board of governers

Good! The apologies etc sound fine as far as they go, but haven't gone far enough by the sounds of it.

Seems a pity if they've decided to put all the blame on the office assistant. Sure, it was a bad error to make, but massive questions arise about why, for instance, they were happily letting your child have school lunches if they thought she had a lactose intolerance, why they instantly assumed that the cheese would contain lactose, and why they didn't double check their facts before slinging around extremely serious allegations. There's also an issue about why they don't apparently have any checks and balances in place to guard against this sort of error happening in the first place.

I am glad that the receptionist had the grace to apologise for her error.

I really don't see why the headteacher could not have apologised for her accusations once it had become obvious that they were unfounded and due to the original error. Stating that she was behaving in line with LA guidelines is just a cop out. Or so it seems to me anyway.

Get your complaint in as soon as you have everything together for it. I'd also be telling the head that I certainly didn't appreciate her accusations and her refusal to apologise when they were proven incorrect RIGHT UNDER HER NOSE. I might even consider pointing out that her receptionist has behaved far better than she has by apologising to you and DH for her error, and that you did both appreciate that when it was given.

The Head does need to make an apology.

Because if the information had been recorded correctly, there would have been no need for any accusations. I don't think they can use the safeguarding excuse for this one.

This comes up time and time again on mumsnet. Schools have to have rules because even the sharpest of parents can have brain freeze when it comes to nutrition. Lunch boxes these days can be bizarre. On dinner lady duties, I have seen lunch boxes consisting of bread sticks, packets of fruit based crap, biscuits, crisps and sugar laden pudding pots and drinks. Not a piece of real food in sight. And it is picked at rather than eaten because it’s just a series of snacks rather than a decent meal.

It’s very annoying for you as your lunch is bloody healthy overall but they have to have set rules so little Johnny doesn’t go home and tell his mum that little Jennie can have a chocolate biscuit but he can’t. He obviously won’t tell his mum that Jennie had all that veg and fruit too whereas he had white bread and butter and nothing else (for some parents if yo take out the packets of crap the genuinely don’t know what to put in there). It’s draconian but necessary as modern lunchboxes are on the whole a disgrace.

School meals aren’t like other meals. They are very carefully controlled nutritionally. The puddings are barely sweet - try them. You can tell the kids with high sugar diets because they hate the school dinner puddings. They get used to them though so it can be done.

Personally I don’t see a place for a chocolate biscuit in a lunch box. I’d be glad of that rule as it would enforce healthy eating without me being blamed for it. I think your school sounds ace. But agree it’s a shame the school has to play big brother. Sadly as a nation we are fat and unhealthy and an awful lot of us would feed our kids utter crap in the absnce of a ban.

Not read the thread by th way, looks like things have moved on!

Also, the headteacher should have double checked the paper records herself before flinging serious accusations around, if she had used any common sense.

She could have avoided the whole debacle, which has now landed her in such an embarrassing position (which she seems to be trying to brazen out).

She might have forgotten that, as headmistress, the buck stops with her.

The receptionist has had the grace to be contrite. I'm not excusing the error. Things should have been double checked, if possible by more than one person. If the head is as stubborn as she sounds will she eventually accept her part in all of this rather than making her receptionist the only fall guy (shafting her, so to speak)?

That is why the head should apologise. Plus, it would also be good manners.

Personally I don’t see a place for a chocolate biscuit in a lunch box. I’d be glad of that rule as it would enforce healthy eating without me being blamed for it

How does banning a chocolate biscuit do that. Approved alternatives are often no better. Kellogs cereal bars or those yoyo bears or the same biscuit but the non chocolate version.

You can have a good healthy lunch that includes a chocolate biscuit and a shit lunch as you describe made
up of approved items.

Giles, yes I can see the logic in your argument but I wouldn’t put a packet anything in a lunchbox, cereal bars are often just as bad. I admit I am extreme but I had a dreadful diet as a kid and so I enforce a very healthy diet on my own kids. It doesn’t mean no treats - I’m not that bad - but I wouldn’t put it in a lunchbox. I still consider a packed lunch to be sndwich crisps chocolate bar and a sugary drink because I was brought up that way. It’s crap. I don’t want my kids to see food that way. And they don’t.

I agree with the premise that the Ops lunch is on the whole very healthy and you can have a box of approved items that isn’t. Completely agree. But it’s diffickt for a big school to police on the basis of logic - a banned list is the next best thing surely?

shit

See that's where the whole thing falls apart. There's no common sense. And it's so inconsistent.

There's probably more sugar in a kids yogurt than than a chocolate spread sandwich but guess what one gets banned.

Raisins are worse than Haribo but again what one gets taken out the lunch box?

Hot pizza served at school. But cold pizza in a lunch box is frowned upon.

Doesbt matter if it's sugar free, a massive slab of stodgy chocolate cake served with school dinners teaching children you have cakes/puddings all the time is ok but 2 squares of dark chocolate not in a healthy lunch not allowed.

Personally I hate over processed fat free sugar free crap that's served at school. I think its worse for you and less filling than a small sensible portion of the proper version.

And banned items usually consist of

Sweets
Chocolate
Nuts
Fizzy drinks

Still alot of scope there to give utter shite.

Giles, I get the feeling you haven’t seen school dinners post Jamie. Or your school is very different to many I’ve seen. Not a processed piece of food in sight. Unless you count butchers sausages, in which case just the sausage then. It’s all freshly cooked decent food these days.The puddings aren’t sugar free fat free crap, they are low sugar bakes which are usually served with a milk based low sugar side like cUstard, giving both calories and nutrition. Trust me, I complained about this very thing (daily puddings) and was sent to the kitchen to eat a school dinner and educated about what goes into the food. I agree that in an ideal world there would be just fruit or low sugar yogurt (not low fat, just yogurt with fruit in it, which you can buy in supermarkets ) available for pudding but I’m pretty happy with low sugar freshly baked real food puddings. Kids need carbs (flour) and fat (butter/Marge) in moderation.

Haribo v raisins - they both have sugar but one is dried fruit and the other is processed crap. They are different, albeit raisins should be eaten in moderation like everything else.

I hate kids yogurts and don’t buy any apart from the no added sugar ones. I agree they are not a healthy choice sugar wise (though you get calcium and minerals which you don’t from chocolate spread).

You could debate the issue for hours. I agree that the effect can be crackers - like in the OPs case - but having seen what goes into lunchboxes I totally see why they have to have some rules.

But the lunch box didn't actually break any rules....

And many won't and still be full of shit

Next instalment. I have made a formal complaint against the head to the LA, the way she has conducted herself throughout this whole mess as been dreadful. I total agree the admin lady as acted very maturely and in a respectful manner. The information she recorded was correct but was recorded for the wrong child, she admitted her mistake and apologised and I believe she was genuine. I don't think she should lose her job as no serious harm was caused but I do think a policy should be put into so that such recordings are double checked to stop this ever happening again and I also strongly believe she shouldn't be left to burden all of the blame. The LA seem to be taking this seriously I have a home visit with a welfare office tomorrow so will shall see what that brings.

Back to being me - was all this about the lunchbox?!

Giles, we are speaking generally, albeit that the OP started off th debate with hers. I agree that her lunchbox was very healthy and packed full of good things apart from the biscuit.

I have also forwarded a copy of my complaint to the board of governers so all box ticking done my end. I believe the governers have 10 working days to respond in writing to my complaint.

Yes @shitholiday2018 it all started with the lunch box. There was some wrong info recorded one dc school records about allergies that were her brothers. Her once a week packed lunch has contain items that it appeard to staff she was allergic to or intolerant to and it escalate quickly into an accusation of neglect/abuse.

The head absolutely should apologise. If she had checked the paper forms you filled in there would have been no need to make any accusations. Why wasn’t this done before you were hauled in?

For goodness sake - will people stop going on about the lunchbox!

This thread is no longer about a chocolate biscuit and what should/should not be in a school lunchbox.

It's about keeping DC safe in a school environment and the Head Teacher taking responsibility for her actions, and those of her team!

BacktoBeingMe - You rock! You've handled this perfectly

somebody gave their child a leftover hamburger, a packet of biscuits and a shandy for their lunch makes you wonder dosent it what some people have for brains.

The receptionist has had the grace to be contrite.

She probably got a blocking from the head.

The fact they took her lunch away and gave her a school dinner, without telling you they were doing it needs bringing up as well I think. She takes packed lunches on Wednesdays specifically because the school dinner provided that day makes her ill. So by not telling you in the phone call before dinner they have actually done exactly what they accused you of - given her food that makes her ill.