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

We’ve been through this ineed.

And associating sugary fattening food with ‘comfort’ is not kind. It might seem it. It isn’t.

Hold on. Why are the kids being given 2 bagels? Are the going to breakfast club? If a child is having breakfast at home then they're surely only going to be getting one bagel? When is the first bagel coming into play?

They're not getting two whole bagels, they're getting portions.

I think you are being unreasonable I’m afraid.
I do agree that big breakfast+ 2 jam bagels + bready lunch is very carby and probably not that healthy but if your school have chosen to do this it must be because a lot of children need it?
My kids would do exactly as yours, luckily our school is only offering fruit. But I think your only option are either tell your child not to have the bagels because it’s unhealthy. Or control the food you give her, do more vegetables, protein, fruit for breakfast and lunch and skip the toast, bread, cereal. As you know she will be given that from school. Probably the easiest solution.

But at breakfast club and snack time? If that's the case they're only getting half a bagel as a mid morning snack. Truly cannot see the issue if that is the case. Growing children need carbs far more than we do.

It's excess and lack of balance that causes obesity. There seem to be 2 types of kids going to school being discussed on this thread - those fed healthy food and those fed inadequately.

If a child is fed healthily then a half bagel snack is not going to undo that healthy balanced diet. If a child is fed inadequately that half bagel snack is going to push them to a more complete diet. So what's the issue?

I remember watching documentaries about the USA and obesity years ago and being really shocked, but we are following suit.

We have this tiered system, where we have the macro watching diet orientated middle class who are baffled by schools going against nutritionally advice, and the financially crippled working class who can't afford to feed their kids properly and schools trying to fill that gap with starchy foods usually from charity sources. All existing within a society with a devastating obesity epidemic.

We didn't learn any of the lessons we should have done from the states doing it first. We decided to take the seedlings of this mess and water them with fat shaming and austerity policy.

Do I want my kids being fed back to back carbs? No. Are there times the school breakfast club meant they got something hot for breakfast when we were at our financially worst? Yes. Same with school dinners. I would much rather they get healthy fare, but I have also had times in my life where I learnt that beggars cannot he choosers

Too many snacks.

@rainyoutside

We’ve been through this ineed.

And associating sugary fattening food with ‘comfort’ is not kind. It might seem it. It isn’t.

Except you've provided no evidence that a bagel a day is fattening for 8 year olds, and the amount of jam used from what teachers have said is likely minuscule.

Fucking hell. I cannot believe this thread (not you OP, just some of the comments on here, including those from people working in schools.).

CHILDREN NEED CARBS!!!!
They are not post-40 year old women who gain a bit of weight as soon as they look at bread!

YOU CANNOT SEGREGATE THEM
Stigmatisation is SOO dangerous - it is what prevents parents applying for FSM. It is what prevents parents saying they cannot afford xyz. No-one wants any child to feel like the "poor kid". It leads to them feeling ostracised and will stop them accessing the help they can get.

COVID
Options available to normal breakfast clubs are NOT OPEN at the moment. There are no/less before school clubs where other foods can be offered. Though in my opinion a lot of cereals are worse than a bagel and a scraping of jam.

BUDGETS
The school is very unlikely to be paying for these - they are undoubtedly provided by a charity - for which you have to have evidence and numbers of a fairly deprived cohort.

WATCH YOUR PRIVILEGE AND INCREASE YOUR EMPATHY - people struggle. Mental health, physical health, coping with other caring responsibilities. It is not great, but our society does not have enough support in place to help many families. So feeding everyone captures those that need help, without stigmatising them. And really, @Janevaljane just because (and how smug did you sound) you couldn't recognise if one of your own children was hungry - which probably shows they never have been - doesn't mean there are not hungry children coming to school every day.

Jeez.

I agree with @ineedaholidaynow. Humanity has long associated food with comfort. It is not a trait uniquely or exclusively linked to obesity.

Telling the kid who gets no breakfast that they can't have a warm bagel because kids like Timothy have had 3 croissants and a fruit platter for breakfast and his doting parents don't want him overloaded with carbs is cracked.

If you know the school provides a universal carby breakfast then adjust your own provisions as you have the means to. Give your children a fresh fruit and veg selection and a piece of protein and allow them the carb snack later so that neither socialising/enjoyment or nutrition are compromised.

I agree there are a few posters on this thread who need to check their privilege; have thought that for a while.

A jam bagel for breakfast and snack is shit nutrition. If teachers and parents posting here are happy for the most deprived kids in society to eat that, then who am I to give an opinion.

I would advise you provide your child's own snacks. Honestly, as much as yes, ok it's probably a little unnecessary, they have far bigger fish to fry at the moment as do most parents to worry about it. I think we need to be grateful they're fed & in education with how things are right now.

And you are right, my children have never gone hungry (the same as 99% of mumsnetters kids), I'm happy with that though, I don't see it as a marker of intense privilege.

Are kids having only that for breakfast day in and day out though? Is it a whole bagel? Is jam the only available topping? Is a bagel the only food available? I think you're being a little hyperbolic and also disingenuously missing the point that there are areas of the country where a)parents can't feed their children adequately and b)schools don't have the resources to provide better

You're choosing to be mad at the people at the bottom rather than the systemic issues that have resulted in that being the case. Don't worry that's nothing new, there are many likeminded people in the world.

99% of mumsnetters maybe but evidently not 99% of the population. Child poverty is increasing.

@Janevaljane

And you are right, my children have never gone hungry (the same as 99% of mumsnetters kids), I'm happy with that though, I don't see it as a marker of intense privilege.

Did I mention smug? Oh yes.

If it's smug not to be apologetic that my kids, along with the majority of kids, have never gone seriously hungry, then I'm happy to be smug.

But why are you ignoring the fact @Janevaljane that in some schools there are a large number of children who are going without. Should they continue to go without

child poverty is increasing

And in most of those cases the parent will choose to go hungry rather than have their child do so.

It is so othering to assume the poor are a mass of people who routinely neglect their children. They don’t. The privilege of which you speak is meaningless in this discussion, where we have posters assuming that because of someone’s lack of income, they will not provide basic meals for their children. In my experience, they can and do.

@ineedaholidaynow

But why are you ignoring the fact *@Janevaljane* that in some schools there are a large number of children who are going without. Should they continue to go without

Have I said they should go without?

I’ve worked in some very deprived areas; I’ve never worked anywhere where the ‘majority go without’.

I’ve worked in places where the majority are on FSM. Their parents still love them and do their best by them. Funny, that. Anyone would think poor people love their kids the same as middle class parents do

Yes you're happy to be smug, that's great. I'm quietly happy that despite struggling at periods in my life I am very grateful my children have also never gone hungry.

You equating your own experience with the large majority of children is what is woefully misguided. You are literally the definition of privilege and that is not a compliment. It means you cannot see past your own sheltered experience and that is influencing your opinion on issues that it becomes increasingly you have no insight of.

You equating your own experience with the large majority of children is what is woefully misguided. You are literally the definition of privilege and that is not a compliment. It means you cannot see past your own sheltered experience and that is influencing your opinion on issues that it becomes increasingly you have no insight of

You know nothing about me, but carry on being so rude if it makes you feel better.

If there are no children going without then why are there so many large charities with the sole aim of providing breakfast so that children go hungry? The point is supposed to be that we are focusing of what is best for the majority of children at risk. Anecdotal evidence of "well I worked in a poor area and don't think most children went without" doesn't over ride that.