Am I the only person who thinks parents should feed their kids outside of school?

[HalloweenDoughnutAnyone]

Obviously it goes without saying I don't want any child to go hungry. But. Am I the only person who thinks parents should feed their kids outside of school?

Just that really.. it's free school dinners. Not free lunch all year round.

I don't understand why people think the tax payer should be paying even more? Maybe, if you can't afford to cover the basics (food and clothing) you should think twice before having a child?

Or should we extend free school dinners, to cover all the food a child needs inside and outside of school ?

I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush but I know people who rely on free school dinners. But have sky tv, expensive mobile contracts etc

That should have said ‘aren’t they exactly the people some are arguing shouldn’t help?

OP you're missing 🇬🇧 from your username 🙄

@PatriciaPerch you're telling me!!! crazy.

@rainyoutside

The point I’m making is that actions that can appear kind (giving you as a hungry youngster something to eat) actually are not, because that prevented you being helped.

IME parents who do not provide food for their children are astoundingly rare. Astoundingly so. I bitterly resent MN piling in all parents who claim benefits (“it’s a deprived area”) with drug addicts and Daniel Pelka’s mother, FFS!

They might not have free range egg on whole meal toast with avocado. Many of them might not have breakfasts you or I would give to a child.

But. State interference can be malignant. It is not always a wise move to interfere too much in peoples family lives.

What the actual f**K are you talking about? There is no state intervention, the threshold is too high low because no funding.

So teachers shouldn't intervene, the state shouldn't intervene? Do you want more Daniel Pelkas?

@rainyoutside

The point I’m making is that actions that can appear kind (giving you as a hungry youngster something to eat) actually are not, because that prevented you being helped.

IME parents who do not provide food for their children are astoundingly rare. Astoundingly so. I bitterly resent MN piling in all parents who claim benefits (“it’s a deprived area”) with drug addicts and Daniel Pelka’s mother, FFS!

They might not have free range egg on whole meal toast with avocado. Many of them might not have breakfasts you or I would give to a child.

But. State interference can be malignant. It is not always a wise move to interfere too much in peoples family lives.

That's not remotely relevant to the vast majority of children who would be helped by vouchers in the holidays.

As I've said numerous times in this thread the decision about holiday lunches cannot and should not be made on the basis that all parents are deliberately neglectful.

When it comes to hungry children there needs to be interference. Whilst more should have been done in my case, in most cases problems could be massively lessened by not withdrawing the help of a meal/funds for a meal each day.

rainyoutside he knows because we are a community in schools and we have.amzing pastoral care staff who know the kids and their families inside out. It's, like, our job.

I certainly wouldn't have been better off if they'd chosen not to feed me at all.

lyra recounted a story where she was given breakfast by teachers.

She then had a teacher who wouldn’t. Because of this, her case was elevated.

It’s a bit like when people buy a puppy or kitten from a pet shop or puppy farm to ‘save’ it. It’s a lovely action borne from good intent but it perpetuates the problem.

I don’t think we should begin from a place of assumption that parents will not provide food for their kids.

Offer financial assistance and food parcels - I am all for it. But it is assistance. It is not and should not be feeding the starving. That is not what it is in most cases. And if a child IS starving that urgently needs referring.

Fucking hell. Some of the comments on this thread.

Anyway, if there is anything I've learned from 10 years in frontline healthcare it's this: accident or ill health (mental or physical) can strike any of us and our lives can change irrevocably in an instant.

Yes there are parents that are abusive, neglectful and make bad choices. There are parents who are in poverty through circumstance. So what? I dgaf why a child is hungry, if it is within our bloody ability to feed them and support them to meet their potential and not continue the poverty cycle forever then we should, as a society, be doing it.

@Puffalicious

rainyoutside he knows because we are a community in schools and we have.amzing pastoral care staff who know the kids and their families inside out. It's, like, our job.

Yes I teach too. How do you know? You have a ‘community’ - when you go on SIMs, does it say ‘drug dealer’? I’m guessing not.

@rainyoutside

How pray do tell does he know?

Is that in response to me?

He is more than a teacher it's a pastoral role. These children are known to social services. They haven't intervened and the children are still hungry.

What is surprising about this is the fact that people are blissfully unaware that this goes on.

So the children are hungry; but SS won’t intervene.

You’ve been home with them?

Seen what’s in their cupboards?

Seen where and how they sleep?

Knocked on their door in the morning and seen what they’ve had for breakfast?

@tazmac
I’m sorry to hear that and I have no issue with you receiving support. However, I was responding to the post you made, claiming that you were a net contributor. You aren’t.

It would be wonderful to know how you personally know that I am not, besides reliance upon average figures over an entire lifespan.

Without even asking any questions regarding health, schooling, pensions etc..

But whatever allows you to feel superior. Go ahead.

@rainyoutside

So the children are hungry; but SS won’t intervene.

You’ve been home with them?

Seen what’s in their cupboards?

Seen where and how they sleep?

Knocked on their door in the morning and seen what they’ve had for breakfast?

No I haven't but nor have you.

Are you calling my brother a liar? He knows they are hungry.

The threshold for removing kids is extremely high.

He has delivered food to their homes though, I haven't asked what he's seen beyond the front door. It isn't really my business.

rainyoutside exactly like can't says he knows because he's in a pastoral role. I know nothing about SIMS as I'm in Scotland (probably Seemis) but here our pastoral care teachers know their cohort inside out and liaise with many, many outside agencies. And, yes, we are a community in my school, providing kids with care, love, emotional, social and educational need. If you don't work in one of those it's a sad day.

Also the teachers feeding me didn't prevent any grand intervention by social workers.

They weren't interested. We attended school each day (because my parents wanted us out the way) and we were fed enough that we weren't in starvation (my father was clever like that)

The only reason my life changed is because my HT called my grandparents, explained the situation and said if they were to turn up early to collect me then they would turn a blind eye. My GP's then basically dared my parents to try and get us back.

No-one is rescuing children from being hungry by grand intervention. Social services is cut to the bone. Sure Start adn other schemes have been scrapped. In many areas breakfast clubs aren't running because of Covid. Feeding children is the most basic intervention, but it's necessary.

I worked in a school where a child's parents were given more than twenty "You need to do this better" chats with social workers. Should the school have let the child starve until then?

The vast majority of children who are hungry and hungry because their parents can't feed them. For that reason vouchers should be given. These children are in those circumstances through no fault of their own and no fault of their parents. No-one could see this pandemic coming.

That some children like me may or may not be caught by a scheme like that is not an excuse not to have the scheme at all.

It's not directly related but my autistic teen can't access mental health services because he's autistic. He has periods that he is suicidal and I've had to call the police who tell me to contact mental health services, it is a never ending circle.

People assume that help is there for our children when it is need, it isn't.

Also we DO have staff who home visit regularly and do see that there's nothing in cupboards and no heating and that their beds are inadequate.

Some people end up as single parents due to marital/partnership breakdown, no fault of their own and something that wasn't planned for when they decided to have children - this is why the government provides child related benefits which are enough to provide the basics for the children. If that money is not being spent on the children, then the parent is neglectful and social services should be involved. Responsible people see this and ask why their taxes should be spent on irresponsible adults who won't prioritise their children.

We also live in a country where contraception, the morning after pill and abortion are all free and widely available. There is no need for women to give birth to children that they can't afford to care for. There is no denying that this happens. This is also why responsible people have an issue that their taxes are spent on rewarding this behaviour.

I don't think that children should be punished for their parents shit behaviour, they are children and they can't fend for themselves. This is something that shouldn't even be up for debate. What should be up for debate is how do we, as a society get the food, clothing, care directly to the children of shit parents.

@cantdothisnow1

lyra my brother is a secondary teacher. He knows which children do the drugs run in the morning before school and feed their younger siblings.

He makes sure they are fed.

Some didn't turn up to school during lockdown, he delivered their meals.

Thank god there are good teachers out there.

I'm sorry you had to go through that.

Good teachers are worth their weight in gold

There's a teacher local to us who has organised so many uniform bank parcels for people who need them, but feel embarassed or worried about coming forward (the downside to a small area is that people sometimes don't want to ask for help from people they might know).

He always picks up the uniforms and delivers them in his own time.

@Dugee

Some people end up as single parents due to marital/partnership breakdown, no fault of their own and something that wasn't planned for when they decided to have children - this is why the government provides child related benefits which are enough to provide the basics for the children. If that money is not being spent on the children, then the parent is neglectful and social services should be involved. Responsible people see this and ask why their taxes should be spent on irresponsible adults who won't prioritise their children.

We also live in a country where contraception, the morning after pill and abortion are all free and widely available. There is no need for women to give birth to children that they can't afford to care for. There is no denying that this happens. This is also why responsible people have an issue that their taxes are spent on rewarding this behaviour.

I don't think that children should be punished for their parents shit behaviour, they are children and they can't fend for themselves. This is something that shouldn't even be up for debate. What should be up for debate is how do we, as a society get the food, clothing, care directly to the children of shit parents.

If the benefits were enough to provide food, clothes and shelter then there wouldn't be so many hungry children.

It's precisely because they are not (in no small part due to the cost of housing) that there are so many children in need of this help at the moment.

The vast majority of families who would benefit from this intervention are people who can't afford anymore, especially given the increase in the cost of shopping recently, rather than those who won't.

@dottypotter

Another thing teach people how to cook. How many people today know how to cook. Know about cuts of meat etc. Instead of bunging food at them teach them how to cook and make meals on a budget.

Everything has gone downhill. Attitudes. Abilities etc.

@dottypotter

I agree, I was shocked recently when one of my colleagues said her child and their partner (in their early 30’s, working but on minimum wage, with 3 kids) had never cooked a meal!

@rainyoutside teachers who live in deprived areas and have not had the sterotypical middle class background know a lot.

I've been shocked by some of the teachers I've met and their middle class attitudes in the last 10 years. Even the straight Tory voting teachers I had at my comp knew about disadvantaged pupils in my school. The teachers I personally have known and are friends with since I have been an adult are more selective with who they vote for.

I don't think any child should be hungry in this day and age. However I do believe that we need to re-educate certain sections of society that the welfare state and benefits are there to support people until they get back on their feet, they are absolutely not a lifestyle choice. There is learned dependency going on in generation after generation in some cases!

*If the benefits were enough to provide food, clothes and shelter then there wouldn't be so many hungry children.

It's precisely because they are not (in no small part due to the cost of housing) that there are so many children in need of this help at the moment.*

Child related benefits do pay for the basics, they don't pay off debt, pay for holidays or nights out though because they aren't meant to.

Regarding the extortionate cost of housing, that's a London and SE centric comment. There are areas in the rest of the country where housing isn't extortionate.