School withholding snack as punishment?

[cjs99x]

Hi all,

I wanted your opinion on something that’s happened today at school. For context - in my son’s class they have a morning snack (during juice/milk time on the carpet), lunch time (in the dinner hall) & afternoon snack (outside on the playground).

Today my 5 year old DS was kept inside for afternoon break time as he and another boy had a fight. My son getting into trouble at school is a very rare occurrence and that particular situation has been sorted out.

My concern is that, because he was kept inside for afternoon break time, he was told he wasn’t allowed to have his afternoon snack. All the children in the class was able to have their snack outside as usual, and he was told he wasn’t allowed as part of a consequence of missing his playtime. I mean keeping him inside as a consequence is fair enough, but not allowing him his food that I’ve packed?

I have briefly heard another parent mention something like this before but I wasn’t part of the conversation so I didn’t hear the full story. Obviously my son may be mixed up but he was really upset when he came out saying he was really hungry and is usually accurate when explaining things (even if it means he’ll be in trouble).

Am I being too sensitive here or is this just a very odd punishment for a 5 year old child? I just can’t see how the school is able to withhold a child’s food from them.

I will be speaking to this teacher tomorrow but I guess I’m just wondering if this a normal thing that happens in schools? He’s my only child so this is all knew to me but it just seems extreme

First world problem.

This was a teachable moment missed, he did something wrong tells you he missed something and is hungry …you say you pushed someone that’s not ok, so you lost your break time because you did something wrong…his picking up on any excuse from you undermines all the learning he might have done about his reaction ..this is important he needs to know you have expectations about his behaviour and won’t step in and make the events about something else…this sort of parental ‘not my boy’ never ends well…focus on the real issue

It defeats me why children can't go two hours without food. We had three balanced meals a day. There was no need for snacks. No wonder this country has an obesity problem.

Presumably it's a deterrent to stop kids from fighting. When you say that, do you mean physical fighting? Hurting eachother?

That's out of order and he can wait an extra couple of hours for his snack. Why was he hungry when he's had lunch and another snack and breakfast?

We didn't get anything at school except lunch and if we didn't like what was offered we got nothing. Not ideal but we didn't starve.

You may well be right…I think it more likely that snacks are sent in for the children by parents due to the fact there is an afternoon break and it’s become custom and practice to provide one: I am sure that not every kid has a snack.

My kids had an afternoon play and a snack wasn’t suggested to parents or provided by school in the afternoon (unlike morning break). It was more a 10 min chance to run about and let off steam.

Like I said, I couldn’t get upset about this but others clearly disagree. The question was asked in AIBU and my response was yes.

When Inwent to school we had breakfast at home, lunch at school, dinner at home.

He"ll be fine and no wonder children are obese.

The bigger issue is that age 5 he got into a fight. I'm glad the school gave him a punishment.

He’s just learned that actions have consequences. You should support the school and tell him to behave himself in future

I agree, it’s not a good approach. He was probably mortified about having to stay in - it wasn’t necessary to add to that. My son’s school doesn’t do afternoon snacks, but you get used to food routines whatever they are. There’s no need to make a child feel hungry on top of the reasonable punishment of staying in.

We really have a strange generation of gentle parents who want children to be raised with the notion that even their negative behaviours should have no consequences. No wonder so many are ill equipped to deal with reality once they hit adulthood.

It's the weirdest thing but I have managed so far to raise a pretty well behaved child without withholding food, play, affection and without raising my hands to her. Insane right.

Who is withholding food from adults as a punishment anyway? As far as I know time outside is only taken away from adults as a punishment for breaking the actual law and being sentence to prison. Taking away food and playtime teaches children fuck all but resentment.

Feeling hungry is hardly the end of the world. A kid should be able to put up with feeling hungry for a few hours. It won't hurt him.

I agree , withholding food is wrong. Kids get really hungry, it’s just wrong to deny the child his food. I also think wrong to take away a full playtime. Being kept back just 5 minutes while his friends went out to play would have seemed like an eternity.

I really agree

Going hungry for a few hours is not going to stunt any child's growth.

In the minority here but I really don’t agree with him not getting his snack and that being tied up with the punishment because I don’t think food should be linked to good behaviour. Missing out on playtime is enough. OP I would be upset by this too and would mention to the teacher, see what they say.

He could have eaten his snack in the room. if they really withheld food it’s unacceptable

I agree, I'm so surprised that people think it's acceptable. I'd be pretty strict in my parenting re behaviour but don't think missing a snack is appropriate punishment. Especially at 5. Poor boy.

TBF I’d be raging!
Do not ever withhold food from a child!
Yes, deal with the fighting, kids fight, no big deal!
Yes, I’d be cross.
I’d ask the teacher the right way of it first tho….

As a teacher I was trained to never use food as an incentive or punishment 🤔 however this may have changed. I agree that he obviously won't starve but IMO that's not the point here, the punishment is losing break.

He didnt eat for 3 hours. He isn't going to starve.
None of my kids had afternoon snack at primary. Lunch was often 11.45-12.15 then they didnt eat until dinner time at 5pm. It was fine

Have a conversation and find out what the fight was over, in case it was linked to the snack.

He's not 'a boy that fights' 🙄🙄

at least have the courtesy to read the OP's posts if not the whole thread.

Even prisoners get fed. 🙄
Behave!
It was a snack. Presumably you gave hom breakfast and he would have had his dinner at lunch time.
The have not withheld a meal which would have been an issue, but not a snack.

My kids ( and as far as I remember their class mates ) never had snacks between meals . They functioned perfectly well with a balanced breakfast that wasn't shit in a box like cocopops or similar and a decent meal at lunch time.
I would think theres no need for snacks for the majority of children as long as there is no medical need.

let us know how you get on tomorrow xx

give your violent offender an extra hug on your way to bed!