Kids snacks at school - white carbs twice before lunch

[prettyflowersinthesky]

DD is in y4.

I seriously don't want to be "that" parent so am wondering on the consensus on this.

DD's school has started giving the whole school's kids stodgy white carbs with jam twice before lunchtime (bagels).

Once when they arrive in the morning, and then again at break time.

DD is coming home with most of her lunch uneaten.

I fully appreciate about food poverty and that giving the kids food in this blanket way is a way of addressing that without singling out or embarrassing hungry children or families.

But I question

1. Whether or not the white carbs plus jam is appropriate nutrition
2. Whether or not most kids really need this
3. Whether or not two snacks between breakfast and lunch is excessive

There is no requirement for the kids to take and eat the snacks but to say to my child not to take them when the other kids are seems unfair.

I'm a bit torn, and certainly don't want to deny hungry kids access to food. But also wonder if the school needs to give this twice and also maybe the nutritional content of the snacks could be improved (e.g. fruit, whole grain snacks or something instead). I do appreciate that kids need more carbs than adults.

What does everyone think? Is this appropriate? I feel for the vast majority of kids without food poverty issues this is not necessary, so by serving all the kids a snack it is enforcing bad snacking habits, poor food choices as well as encouraging childhood obesity.

In many very healthy countries no snacking is allowed although I appreciate for very young children it may be necessary.

I am wondering whether or not to speak to the school about my concerns about them finding a better way to address the issues for the hungry kids.

But I do not want to speak up if I am seriously misinformed about all of this, hence interested in your responses. Thanks.

Yanbu = this is not appropriate / YABU - give the kids the snacks

@Scaraffito

Not only are jam bagels sugary crap but is this not also covering up a problem? Surely if you aren't giving your child a breakfast then social care need to be involved with the family to work on why that's happening and prevent it from being ongoing?

I longed for someone to help me when I was at school, rather than free school meals or being able to go in the 'beggars box' (not my name for it but widely acceptable then) for uniform, but to realise that I had a shit home life and deserved better. That's why all of those crowing how amazing it is that those poor, hungry children can have some sugary shit for breakfast and how amazing that is is pretty sad. It's terrible that people know some children live in shitty homes with shitty parents and there's fuck all they can do about it.

I totally agree.

I’ve not read the full thread, but need to dash off. Our school gets sponsored by Greg’s. We get paid per slice of bread we give out! In other words this bread heavy offering might be a source of finance to the school.

I totally agree too

Don't feed kids crap - just give them brown bread at least!!!!!!

I would give DD something yummy but healthy for break (whatever she is most likely to eat) so she is less tempted by the crap.

@Marmitecrackers

*Yet still nobody has offered a viable alternative which is deliverable in schools with no budget for this, in a no-mixed-bubbles environment. The hungry children still need feeding, yet somehow it’s intolerable that parents of well-fed children could teach their children that it’s fine to say no thanks they are not hungry.*

Porridge? Wholemeal toast?

And just 1 breakfast is plenty & only short term for the kids that need it whilst you resolve why its not happening at home.

I can see why we have so many chubby children if people think jam bagels twice a morning is normal.

Who's cooking the porridge? Who's cooking the toast? Who's washing up 400 porridge-encrusted bowls and spoons plus a pile of pans, or putting them through the dishwasher?

Schools do not have TAs available to do this. Where schools still have TAs, they are generally there because there are children who require 1:1 support. Most schools no longer have the budget to employ class TAs. They certainly don't have the budget to employ kitchen staff all day- and often the catering staff work for an external provider. Some schools don't have any kitchen facilities, the lunches are cooked elsewhere and transferred in.

Who's actually paying for the food? There is zero budget for this, and schools are already sinking under budget cuts. The bagel initiative comes from a charity. Schools are trying to stay open while hoping desperately that no staff become ill, because the supply costs are unmanageable.

It's easy to airily declare that schools must do better. If you want schools to have the funding to provide nutritionally ideal breakfasts and snacks, then the country needs to vote in a government that will provide this (and the staffing for it). Better still, vote in a government which aims to end child poverty, rather than stigmatising families in poverty.

It's easy to airily declare that schools must do better

Or to expect more for our children?

fluffums, I don't think anyone is twisting anything. OP's intention is clear. Some pp provided the info about this charity scheme. If the OP's school is doing this, there must be info why they started this. Instead of adjusting the breakfast and contents of lunch, she wants the school to stop this because her dd can't say no. She didn't even say how big the portion was, despite many pp asking.

I can't seem to copy and paste but yes to whoever seemed alarmed that I would want social services to know about children not bring fed. It's really the most basic it of parenting to actually feed your own child. If you aren't doing that the chances are there are other problems going on.

Don't feed them a bagel, work out why the parents aren't parenting. Does the parent need budgeting support, cooking support, do they have mental health or learning difficulties. Are they just a bit feckless? We shouldn't just pick u after poor parenting and hope for the best, we should address the problems so there are not children in poor living conditions.

Don't feed them a bagel, work out why the parents aren't parenting. Does the parent need budgeting support, cooking support, do they have mental health or learning difficulties. Are they just a bit feckless? We shouldn't just pick u after poor parenting and hope for the best, we should address the problems so there are not children in poor living conditions.

On here you'll find a lot of people who have never been in the situation themselves as a child, or indeed an adult, and say it's cruel and horrible to suggest that some parents are just feckless, don't prioritise buying food, or have other issues which mean that they find it challenging to provide a breakfast before school. It's always that they physically dont have enough money, and that's that. Of course that's not the truth, and whilst these initiatives are a sticking plaster, they are by no means enough- that's not a schools responsibility btw so not a criticism of them.

I can't seem to copy and paste but yes to whoever seemed alarmed that I would want social services to know about children not bring fed. It's really the most basic it of parenting to actually feed your own child. If you aren't doing that the chances are there are other problems going on

Yes I agree. But as long as we chuck those kids a jam bagel twice a day then we don't have to think about that do we?

The hungry children still need feeding, yet somehow it’s intolerable that parents of well-fed children could teach their children that it’s fine to say no thanks they are not hungry.

The OP can at least try to do that as she is aware. There will be many parents of well fed children who are none the wiser. Maybe her DD is a little bit hungry by the snack time bagel so will eat it. The time gap between the second bagel and lunch may be quite short.

That's sadly too true. "At least they have had something to eat." Well no actually, that's not good enough for my children so it shouldn't be good enough for anyone else's either.

Nobody is saying that wider issues don’t also need tackling but that takes time and it takes a lot of resources outside of the school. It’s not an easy fix.

So a universal breakfast scheme alongside looking at individual cases to see what support is needed isn’t a bad thing. It doesn’t need to be an either or.

I thought all children in reception and Y1 were supposed to receive a government funded fruit or vegetable snack. I'd be questioning why they are not getting this instead of the second piece of bread and jam.

I don't think anyone is saying it's intolerable for OP to tell her child to say no, just that they are being realistic about an 8 year old being able to do this when their friends are all eating the free snack etc

I know if someone offered me a free cake not long before lunch, I'd find it hard to say no! And I take nutrition reasonably seriously and enjoy eating other foods

If this is a shortish term solution during Covid it may make a bit of sense due to the bubbles etc. Also think @Scaraffito post is a good point. I don't have any of the answers but think this is letting down a lot of children

OP, what have school told parents about this new policy?

Because I wonder if it’s not exactly as you perceive it.

Yes, they might be offering jam bagels twice a day to the whole school five days a week.

But it seems more likely to me that something has got lost in the retelling of it by your 8 year old.

@Twigletmama I think this stopped with the introduction of free school meals for infants, my dd is in year 3 and didn't get the free fruit. They were only allowed to bring fruit or veg for snack though but we had to provide it. I think some schools still fund it themselves.

Not necessarily. OP was alerted to it by the barely touched contents of the lunchbox.

@pastandpresent the poster said "@CloudyVanilla "Don't ask them to stop providing food, lots of kids rely on it."

The OP has been clear throughout that she does not want to take away food from children who need it. The amount of people trying to say she does is unbelievable. Read through the OPs posts if you can't understand this.

@pastaandpresent - from the OP

"I certainly don't want to deny hungry kids access to food."

and another from the OP

"And at NO time during my posts have I ever suggested that hungry children get denied free food, I am all for it. Please don't suggest that I want to take away food from them. I do not. Please re-read my OP if you think that."

@CecilyP

Not necessarily. OP was alerted to it by the barely touched contents of the lunchbox.

Were you replying to me Cecily? I’m not suggesting the OP’s DD hasn’t had jam bagels at school & failed to eat her lunch - just that as a policy it sounds unlikely and if school haven’t informed parents officially also odd, so it’s worth getting the official reasoning - because I can imagine a scenario where e.g. one particular week there’s bagels left over from a universal breakfast that are then reoffered at break time, ideally to those who didn’t get one earlier - and some kids (not all) end up eating twice. If so, that’s quite an easy fix for school.

fluffums, I am aware what OP has said.

Then solution is simple. Adjust breakfast/lunch, or tell her dd to say no. How else can she change the fact they give out free breakfast/snack to the children who wants them, rather than stopping this scheme? Singling out and stigmatizing children isn't the aim of this policy.

@prettyflowersinthesky

There's a research paper that suggests that 86% of primary children have had breakfast before school:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-3010.2012.01973.x

that means you're feeding up to 86% of kids an unnecessary snack of white carbs.

I appreciate 14% of kids being hungry is not good. Could there be a better way of addressing this though that doesn't negatively impact the health of the rest of them?

The way you suggest could well end up singing out the children who require the free breakfasts and then a lot of children may refuse because they will be embarrassed. The school's approach will ensure no child feels they are being singled out for being too poor for breakfast

@CakeGirl2020

Not ideal really.

Can anyone really not afford a value loaf of bread & jam or a box of value cornflakes to feed a child breakfast before school? I mean come on, any decent parent would go without so the child could have breakfast.

Let’s just say all these parents really can’t afford to even provide a slice of value bread, feeding all the children rubbish each day is not the answer.

Also why are 2 bagels offered anyway? Fine, first one could be called breakfast buy why the second? Surely the poor starving no food at home ones are provided with a free school dinner so no need for the second bag,e. Surely fruit could replace the second bagel? It’s 1 a day then at least for the children.

Trying talking to your DD and say you know if you don’t want the bagel sweetheart, you can say no when it’s offered and remeber you do have x in your lunch box and that’s your favourite isn’t it.

Many. As PP said , people need to open their eyes to food poverty.

But in addition , some can afford it and just don't bother buying it. Some don't get up or have already gone to work. Some withold food as a punishment. Some don't think children need breakfast.

It's blue sky thinking to think a parent struggling financially would just go without.

[quote fluffums]**@pastandpresent* the poster said "@CloudyVanilla* "Don't ask them to stop providing food, lots of kids rely on it."

The OP has been clear throughout that she does not want to take away food from children who need it. The amount of people trying to say she does is unbelievable. Read through the OPs posts if you can't understand this.[/quote]
I think the point PP and I were trying to make is that causing a fuss about what is in it or raising it as an issue may well have it removed completely. While this isn't OPs intention that is the risk .