No free school meals during Feb half term

[noblegiraffe]

The new guidance on free school meals says that schools should not provide food or vouchers during Feb half term.

This won’t be needed as some general funding is going to LAs and they will be expected to provide food/support for the week schools are off.

This is bonkers, right? They’ve only just sorted it so that kids get more than a manky banana, cheese and dry bread for lunch and they’re going to switch to a different system for a week?

Does this government just really hate feeding hungry kids?

YANBU: sticking with one system for feeding disadvantaged kids would be best

YABU: it’ll be fine, no one will fall through the cracks and the transition will be seamless.

Universal FSM for KS1 are not fully funded so I disagree with them too. Those who need it should get them but those who don't should pay.

@Lollolloll
Our LA is doing the same, the fact that it leaves low income working parents of FSM children, with no provided lunch to send to the paid holiday club does not seem to have occurred to them.
Also parents have to get the activities which isn’t possible if you are isolating, vulnerable, can’t afford the bus etc
Teens on FSM do not want to attend activities. It’s a really badly thought out idea. Vouchers were simple and children could easily access food without their parents jumping through hoops.

IIt’s not the responsibility of the school to feed the parents as well ffs!*

Where in my post did I say anything about feeding parents?
I said working parents who use childcare can’t access the free lunches for their children

Indeed, or all the way through. There must be many schools where very few are on FSM; would they all be assessed?
I really don’t believe that fsm children are ostracised or picked on theses days, not like when I was at school and the dinner register was called every day, and we answered with ‘dinner please’ or ‘sandwiches’ or ‘free dinner’. Surely teachers to out of their way to make sure that pupils are not aware who has free meals?
And as a pp poster said, why only ks1?

[quote MyDcAreMarvel]@Lollolloll
Our LA is doing the same, the fact that it leaves low income working parents of FSM children, with no provided lunch to send to the paid holiday club does not seem to have occurred to them.
Also parents have to get the activities which isn’t possible if you are isolating, vulnerable, can’t afford the bus etc
Teens on FSM do not want to attend activities. It’s a really badly thought out idea. Vouchers were simple and children could easily access food without their parents jumping through hoops.

IIt’s not the responsibility of the school to feed the parents as well ffs!*

Where in my post did I say anything about feeding parents?
I said working parents who use childcare can’t access the free lunches for their children[/quote]
Sorry I may have misinterpreted your post as I know many people feel that food should be supplied to the whole family not just the child.

I suppose their dc could always go to the free childcare with free meal instead if that were easier.

I mean, it’s better than nothing and much more than has ever been offered in the past by any party.

Pottedpalm
No one knows who pays or who doesn't most schools are cashless. The teachers know who are on FSM but they don't get asked dinners daily so the kids don't know. Teachers don't collect dinner information now at all it is all pre ordered by the parents in advance.

@Lollolloll I do think the vouchers should just be for children.
The problem is in my area all the holiday activity clubs that are run to provide lunch for fsm kids require parents to stay.
The vast majority of the paid childcare kids clubs for working parents require parents to provide a pack lunch.

@Pottedpalm

Indeed, or all the way through. There must be many schools where very few are on FSM; would they all be assessed? I really don’t believe that fsm children are ostracised or picked on theses days, not like when I was at school and the dinner register was called every day, and we answered with ‘dinner please’ or ‘sandwiches’ or ‘free dinner’. Surely teachers to out of their way to make sure that pupils are not aware who has free meals? And as a pp poster said, why only ks1?

Unfortunately it's really obvious who's on FSM as the vast majority who are not take packed lunches. This was the thinking behind making them universal. I think the plan was to extend up to KS2 if it was deemed successful at KS1.

Some on FSM in mine bring a packed lunch.

I also don't think the kids in our school realise that you can get free school meals unless their parents tell them. We never speak of FSM at school. There is a reasonable uptake of paid meals in all the schools I've worked at because parents want them to have a hot dinner at lunch so while lots do have packed lunches in KS2, some still do pay for lunches.

Some on FSM in mine bring a packed lunch.

And that's often in order to sit with their friends who have packed lunches- putting more pressure on the families who are eligible for FSM. Which goes back to why FSM were rolled out across KS1.

@noblegiraffe This is a genuine question, do you not believe that parents should be responsible for feeding their own children?

Why aren't parents made to make responsible choices re having children in the first place???? So many of these families couldn't afford kids to start with. I stopped at two kids as we could t afford more..... However, I wouldn't want any child out there to be go hungry and yes i do help provide meals during the school holidays for 10 children in my village.

@oviraptor21

Some on FSM in mine bring a packed lunch.

And that's often in order to sit with their friends who have packed lunches- putting more pressure on the families who are eligible for FSM. Which goes back to why FSM were rolled out across KS1.

Not at all, they all sit together in our school. Lunches and packed lunches on the same tables.

Universal FSM for KS1 put huge pressure on schools financially which in turn caused many to cut TAs to fund it so the kids are missing out on classroom support in their learning as a result.

[quote Mhingmighty]@noblegiraffe This is a genuine question, do you not believe that parents should be responsible for feeding their own children?[/quote]
In the first instance, of course, and most parents are both willing and able to do this. However society also has a duty towards children, and everyone who works with them has a safeguarding responsibility towards them. It is a failing of government, not individuals, that millions of children in the UK are living in poverty, and systems need to be in place to ensure their basic needs are met.

The idea of a child going hungry due to lack of food should be so abhorrent that the default should be to over-provide, not under-provide, as a child getting food that they might have been able to get at home (if only their parents stopped smoking etc etc) is far less of an issue than a child going hungry.

And the notion that children should be punished with lack of food for their parent's choices (as seen on this thread) is appalling.

I agree that this is a parental responsibility.

Ok - so you say ‘everyone who works with these children has a safeguarding responsibility towards them’. Fine, but would that not also looking at the reasons behind why the parents aren’t paying for the most basic needs of their children and then intervening if they are found inadequate.

You say the problem is bigger than whether or not the parents smoke (your example). Yes, it is. It shows a total lack of responsibility so again surely that shows a bigger problem than handing over free food can solve.

There’s the old adage, give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he can feed himself for life.

but would that not also looking at the reasons behind why the parents aren’t paying for the most basic needs of their children

Millions of them living in poverty is a good starting point. The government should be looking at how to lift them out of poverty, yes?

In the meantime, given the government is rather dragging its heels, shouldn’t the kids be fed?

Your default would seem to be to let them go hungry while waiting for societal issues which are no fault of their own are addressed (or in the case of this government, ignored).

give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he can feed himself for life.

As a teacher, I would point out that it is very hard to teach a child anything while they are hungry. So the free education we are giving them to enable them to fish for themselves in the future would be more effective if they were also fed.

There is an issue with parental irresponsibility and/or a lack of skills/knowledge to budget effectively, I think, coupled with just not having enough money to cover everything. We would do well as a society to Look more seriously at adult education around parenting and if necessary, making it compulsory in some instances. Sure Start was an ideal platform for this but is now sadly defunct. It shouldn’t be the case that we let children go hungry it beyond free school meals and holiday provision, there is little we can do directly to support individual households adequately. There is a whole family approach that is needed and that would take funding and that’s something this government is not prepared to address.

@whattodo2019

Why aren't parents made to make responsible choices re having children in the first place???? So many of these families couldn't afford kids to start with. I stopped at two kids as we could t afford more..... However, I wouldn't want any child out there to be go hungry and yes i do help provide meals during the school holidays for 10 children in my village.

How would you make people do that though? Forced abortion?

@Wannakisstheteacher

It is getting ridiculous now. Soon the school will be required to give out food for the weekend.

It feels like this at the school I work. The parents are unbelievable needy and then the next minute can't be bothered to send their kids in for days on end. Of course I don't think the kids should go hungry. I don't know a way around it whereby the kids get fed but the parents have to take some sort of responsibility

Perhaps blame the shit wages and high food prices and the fact that every bill has gone up.
Those on minimum wage have to pay the higher prices now but won't get a wage increase until April.
Also circumstances change. Job loss, death or long term illness can affect families ability to afford basic things for their children.
Some horrible judgmental attitudes. Instead of judging maybe show some sympathy for people less well off or at least be grateful you aren't in that position. Let's hope that if you ever are people won't just say well you should have had less children.