to be annoyed that my dds school has been giving out certificates to children who bring in healthy packed lunches?

[spudmasher]

Today she took in a ham roll, four cherry tomatoes, a few slices of cucumber, some fresh pineapple and a small apple pie.

She was not given a certificate because she had the apple pie in her lunch!

When I was making her lunch tonight she asked me not to put a little cake in because it was unhealthy and she would not get a certificate.

I thought it was unreasonable to reward a child, or deny a reward on the basis of decisions made by the parent.

I also feel that six is too young an age to bear the responsbility of deciding what they should eat. Surely the child should be carefree and just trust the parents to know what is healthy?

I also thought that a little fat and sugar occassionally, will not be harmful to a child.

I also felt that they are encouraging children to deny themselves small pleasures - could lead to eating disorders imo.

Thanks. Feel better now.

Am I over reacting?

Have sent snotty e mail to school........

The problem with the heavy-handed approach that all cakes = bad, all apple pies=bad is that this message is WRONG. So children are thinking that good home cooking is BAD for them in some way. It's a clunky message and it's WRONG.

DD has been in reception for 8 days. Yesterday she came home and her and her sister (who is 2) made themselves pizza for dinner from scratch - because we were having curry. She sat down to eat it and then said "This is bad food because it is high in salt!"

So I had to explain that actually, that was bollocks. She's been at school for 8 days!!!!!

It pisses me off that I try not to make food an ISSUE at home because I know that she is probably going to spend most of her adult life OBSESSING about everything she eats, like most women do, and after EIGHT days at school she is already reluctant to eat a fuckign home-made pizza!

Well it's not exactly healthy harpsi. Not much food value in there.

flame - I know that the schools are targetting the mothers who seem to know nothing, but why not reward kids for having a healthy overall balanced lunch box.

Yeah, the messages are coming through all wrong

it isn't working

there isn't much you can make in your own kitchen from proper ingredients that is going to do you much harm

it's processed foods that are the real bugger IMO

There is massive difference in saying "Everything in moderation" (meaning Fruit Shoots, Coke etc) and saying "Everything in moderation" (meaning white flour and home-made cakes)

WHITE FLOUR IS NOT BAD FOR YOU!

CHEMICALS ARE BAD FOR YOU!

I would FAR rather my children eat butter than magarine, or white flour than a Fruit Shoot!

Haven't read the whole thread but I agree with the OP. Everything in moderation and inspecting what's in the lunchbox is too controlling. And I speak as someone who is the 'proud' owner of one of those certificates.

Tbh it's not their concern what what I put in their lunchboxes. I like school to reinforce the concept of healthy eating - all well and good - but that is overstepping the mark.

my rule is to look at the ingredients, if it looks full of crap, don't buy it

(this rule is broken at parties, McDonald visits and when I say so )

Lol at 'when I say so' Olive. That rule applies here too

for instance, have you SEEN some of these lunchbox type 'fruit' sticks

OMFG

I get Humzingers, but they are £1.75 so being a cheapskate I looked for an alternative

Full. Of. Shite.

and they have raisins but instead of just being raisins they have 'yoghurt' coating which has never seen cow imo, frankenstein food

No rewarding or punishing ANY lunchboxes - it is just plain wrong. It is the PARENTS that need talking to about it, not the children.

I think it would be a zillion times more beneficial to children if they were to encourage EXERCISE and SPORTS rather than this obsession with food TBH.

Soon enough (particularly the girls) will be obsessed by food ANYWAY. But if they had a love of some sport they would be FAR healthier and more balanced individuals than if they could tell you all about fats and salts.

we had all sorts of crap growing up but seemed to do PE every day and ran around all the time

most school playing fields are sold off now

Packets of crisps have been banned at my son's school. The following has been copied verbatim from their newsletter:-

"they DO NOT DECOMPOSE for a very long time (1000's years?). Thus we are saying "NO" to any crisp or similar high salt and fat content snack for the health reasons and the packets for the sustainable planet reasons. Thank you"

Quite apart from the appalling grammer in this diktat is it any wonder that so many people are confused by all these mixed messages our children are getting?.

Attila

olive: This morning DD said "I do like P.E. but I was so hungry that when we curled up on the floor my chest really hurt."

oh fucking wonderful

(I think you need to sort out the eating thing MP, surely she can bring a snack in form home?)

(They won't let me! They said I can bring in an apple when she starts full-time. I'm not allowed to bring in fruit juice because it is banned.)

What is this all coming too. Our school has been awarded Healthy status over teh holiday. They have a little logo which they are putting on all their letters now.

Have all schools randomly been awarded this. Is it an excuse to start policing lunchboxes cos they can sod off for all I care

There doesn't seem to be any consistency between the schools, I have noticed one mum say that it HAS to be fruit juice, then MP just saying it's banned.
Do each of the schools have their own rules. DD1 starts next sept, should this be on my list of Q's when I visit a school???

fruit juice banned?????

I know it goes against the flow but i have to say I am totally behind the school on the concept here, even if the execution was a bit rough-handed... prior to Jamie Oliver's programmes my nephew was at a nursery where he was given chips and crisps and turkey dinasaurs and stuff - at the age of 2.... there are a lot of people who really don't realise that some stuff they dole out sets kids along a path of self-destruction. And there are also people who use sweets and chocolates as rewards all the time and I strongly feel this gives them completely inappropriate associations which again they may carry through to later life (I'm depresssed - I will eat chocolate as a treat to cheer myself up").

For better or for worse (for worse IMO, but that's something for another thread) people today are overwhelmingly opting to modify childrens' behaviours via rewards and punishments - there's naughty steps and time outs and so on everywhere. Whilst this may be a dubious methodology it is at least one that young children are familiar with and understand and respond to, and I see no problem in having schools extending this to nutritional teaching/certificates. The only thing that has gone wrong here is that (a) parents should have been invovled in the process here and should be made aware of what is good/ok/bad in advance and (b) the rule should be something like 50% really healthy, 35% OK and 15% from the bad list. People can then argue what fits into what but at least you can make a stab at getting things right. without guidelines there are many many people who have no idea - it was only recently that that bloody sunshine orange drink stuff came out (keep it in the fridge? Nah, keep it in the lab, more like), and you get stuff appearing on our shelves every week that kind of looks healthy enough if you don't read the ingredients closely (ever read what is in a tin of hot dogs, anyone?). I have no problem whatsoever in this kind of intervention, just so long as people have an opportunity within the process to vigourously defend what they believe to be entirely innocent, be it apple pie or whatever. With the amount of choice around some mums may not actually know best and the last couple of generations of parents have, in general, excercised their freedom of choice inappropriately - as the issues of diabetes and so on testify. If we don't actively do something about it and support well-intentioned attempts to address this, it is our kids that will suffer for it.

One poster argued that this idea involved punishing the child for the actions of the parent, but I disagree. NOT encouraging good eating via plans like this will punish the children of the less well-informed parents to a much greater extent.

Rant over, Tie up the pie and throw him in the back, Sarge, I'm off back to the station to weave me some lentils...

We also used to have a sandwich, pack of crisps, yoghurt and penguin or simliar, and apple or orange. I used to eat it all, I think.

I have heard of lists of stuff that you can't bring and just KNOW it will piss me off.
Also agree with all the stuff about bad food, esp when they are talking bollocks. I thought kids should have full fat stuff til they are 5. ie milk and cheese and stuff, but that after that lower fat in cheese and milk is preferable.

BOM, don't know about other products but a child can have semi skimmed milk from 2yrs. I think they can have skimmed from 5

SMS yes they CAN but if you have a really fussy or skinny child or child that doesn't eat much then you wouldn't WANT to reduce their fat intake

BoM it is recomended that unless specified by a doctor then no child under 5 should hvea low fat diet

I know that they can, but I heard that full is preferable til they are 5 cos they need the fats. also yoghurts and other things like that. I hate that girls are bothered by fat and calories so young now.

I have a friend who was concerned her 9 yo dd was throwing up after meals cos some girls at school call her fat She's a teeny little thing, a real bean pole and not near enought to being fat in any one's vivid imagination, it's so ridiculous.

MP - I agree totally, I have 2 of those v skinny shildren - I was just pointing out a minor inaccuracy in BOMs post....wasn't trying to say that we should do it, just that guidlines say we can.