To think it’s a bit unreasonable that children have to have fruit for school snack.

[MyLittleLove1]

DD’s school have sent a reminder that parents must send their children to school with a fruit snack for morning break. They will not be allowed to have anything else. This is to encourage healthy eating. I do understand this, but my daughter has breakfast at 7 as she is starving when she wakes up, and feel that a piece of fruit isn’t really that substantial for a snack. She would normally have fruit and a snack like some malt loaf. I feel a little against this also because there is so much to having a healthy diet. Many foods are healthy and make a great, filling snack. Why are we being policed on this? Or am I BU?

Not being unreasonable, I don't like the policing of pack lunches or snacks either. If she eats breakfast that early though, I can't see why you can't give her a bit of malt loaf before you leave.

Great for those middle class parents who can pop in to Waitrose to pick up the papaya for their kids’ snacks. Those who live in food deserts will find this much harder.

If schools want kids to eat more fruit, they should provide it as part of the school lunch. There are other healthy snacks kids can have, just restricting it to fruit is ridiculous.

In my infants and junior school we weren't allowed to take any food or drinks in at all for playtime not even fruit. If we did it would be confiscated. I sometimes didn't feel like breakfast so went until dinner time before eating anything. As others have said send her with a banana they're quite filling. You can get 1 of those plastic cases to put them in so it doesn't get squashed.

Fruit is available at the school I work at for morning snack, and the school provide it free of charge. Fruit is also available at lunchtime for those children who have a school dinner. Once children reach a certain age (it was Year 3 onwards) school lunches aren't free if charge, unless parents are on a low income/benefits. Mist children from this point stop having school lunches and bring in a packed lunch instead.

I sent fruit but also a couple of digestives or what I thought appropriate which were consumed discreetly if needed in loo 😬Not all people can eat at ordered times first thing in the morning.

@BoredZelda
Apples keep for three or four months if stored in a cool dry place.
As others have said, it's not that there aren't healthy alternatives to fruit, it's simply that the rule needs to be clear.
Of course, OP, you could always send her with an avocado .... I defy anyone to be hungry after eating one of those.

At all the schools I worked in KS1 children were given a free piece of fruit or veg each day, which we gave out at break time. Children could bring in their own if they liked but it had to be fruit or veg. If the children didn’t want a particular fruit that day they would just say ‘no thank you’ and go out to play. Not a big deal. Most children had something most days but not all. There was the occasional fruit and veg fiend who loved everything and the occasional child who wouldn’t eat or try anything at all, but that’s life.

As another PP has said, schools choose to put guidelines in place for such things because the alternative is then issues when some children are sent into school with sweets or a crunchie bar or similar. Then other parents complain that they’re trying to encourage healthy habits but it’s hard when school is allowing unhealthy snacks…..

At home you can give your child whatever you want her to eat whenever you want to give it but at school there will have to be some restrictions. That’s because dealing with lots of children from lots of different backgrounds and trying to do the best for all of them means that your individual child might not get to do what you would optimally like them to do. You can’t school a class of 30 at an individual level for every part of the day, you just can’t. There is already too much ‘Oh but MY child…’ going on in schools where parents want to dodge the rules for their own child but not for others and it is just untenable. And before I get a pile- on, yes of course medical needs and certain SEN requirements need reasonable adjustments, but a ‘my child’s personal timetable and preferences requires that she needs x’ does not come into this category.

Do what you can at home to give her an adequate breakfast at a reasonable time and then let her have the fruit at break time.

Absolutely. My daughter´s best friend is given just fruit and is always asking my daughter and other friends for other items in their lunch boxes, especially protein she is starving.

I don't understand the snacking culture we have created. Everywhere you go people are constantly eating something.
My time at the school gates is over but I observed that snack straight after school every day was the norm, rather than a weekly or occasional treat. A chocolate bar on a Friday for example.
As PP feeling hungry is a normal response.

She’s hungry not starving. Very few are actually starving in this country.
Are you actually leaving the house at 7? If not give her a second breakfast at 8 high in protein like scrambled eggs; it will keep her satisfied for longer.
Nice medium apple at break time will last her till lunch.

I wonder what they do about children who have dietary issues which means they have to limit fruit intake and fibre intake generally? Additionally this is intersting...https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730322-100-bitter-truth-how-were-making-fruit-and-veg-less-healthy/

I don’t have an issue with snacking. Why must people consume all the calories they need at set times of day in a certain form and location? That doesn’t work for everyone. I appreciate that it’s more convenient.

I’m a sensible adult who is educated in nutrition. None of my children have ever been overweight or unhealthy. I understand what they need. They don’t work well when hungry and my priority is their wellbeing and educational progress. So I always paid lip service and showed open compliance with school rules while doing what I thought was best including surreptitious snacks if necessary.

And after school I found that my son in particular when very small was appallingly ‘hangry’ to his detriment unless fed a small something immediately after school which provided energy for play park and good run about on way home and to fuel homework pre nutritious dinner.

I haven’t read the full thread since my first post, but a few things I want to explain in case they are relevant.

Both of my children are very slim. They are very active and so I suppose their growing bodies need lots of calories. My children don’t attend the same school, and thank goodness for that, as my eldest is rarely hungry in the mornings. I do ensure she has something before school, but sometimes I’ll be lucky if that’s half a slice of toast. She then tends to eat something substantial at break time and then a decent sized lunch. As I said in my OP, my youngest wakes up starving, and she usually has overnight oats with some fruit. She is then full and I would struggle for her to eat something else before school due to how filling her breakfast is. However, with just a piece of fruit for snack (even a banana), she finds herself starving.

I understand that the school have the children’s best interests at heart, but anecdotally, fruit as a morning snack doesn’t really work for either of my children. Placing restrictions around food will often have the opposite effect when it comes to promoting a healthy diet. I feel like my child is being penalised because other parents aren’t offering their child a balanced diet. In the nicest possible way, that’s really not my issue. It’s obvious that this country has got “healthy eating” wrong, by the level of obesity. And that’s with most adults on this thread having had a fruit snack during their school days or no snack at all.

If my child benefits from something more substantial to feel satiated throughout the morning, why is that against the rules? I just think it’s bonkers and don’t think it’s the schools right to dictate or control my child’s food and eating habits.

I agree with this entirely.
Children concentrate, perform and behave better when adequately nourished. If it suits a child better to have their daily calories spread throughout the day rather than at 3 distinct meal times, why is that an issue?
I was a very slim child, but couldn’t force myself to eat a large meal so functioned far better if I had a mid morning and mid afternoon snack. My overall calorie consumption was no more than someone’s who had 3 meals and no snacks.

Another point is that on these threads, there are many adults mentioning that they didn’t snack as children, they were often ravenous etc and it didn’t do them any harm.
Adult obesity is at its highest ever level. The food habits learned in childhood has contributed to these high obesity levels. I don’t think we can say ‘we did this as kids and were much healthier than today’s kids’, when those same kids are today’s obese adults.

Restricting to fruit only is ridiculous. Policing this is so unnecessary. Plenty of healthy things rather than fruit. Parents should make the choice what their children should have to eat.

But your example of some malt loaf isn't actually going to be any more filling than a banana. Are you sure she would be starving? It might just be a mental thing, because there's no real reason for what is essentially a small piece of cake to feel more substantial than a banana.

We never had snacks when I was at school. I dont think they really need a snack tbh. I think its just to cover if any kids have missed breakfast or are actually really hungry, had a tiny breakfast etc.
Most kids can live fine with breakfast and then make it to lunch without a snack.
Saying fruit only just helps the school to manage snack time. Ensure kids arent bouncing up the walls as their snack was a chocolate cookie or there ends up being a snack tier system whereby some kids parents buy them crisps and a penguine and they flaunt it all ovet rh playground and others have a dried apricot.
My kid eats a lot but i am sure they could live without a snack time.

Assuming she has her lunch at usual school time 12pm or 12:30pm, a fruit is substantial enough to tide her over. Perhaps pack a banana? Does the school offer milk still?

And we wonder why we have an obesity epidemic in this country. Teaching your child to smuggle in biscuits and eat them in secret in the toilets?! I was obese and a secret eater with huge food issues and a lot of internalised shame.....your approach sounds like a guaranteed way to ensure the same for your kids.

In my example, i said she would normally have fruit and malt loaf. Malt loaf (plus butter) and a banana is significantly more satiating than an apple/tangerine or banana. Also, DD wouldn’t particularly enjoy having the same snack every day and many fruits are not as filling as a banana.

So give her some carrot sticks as well as the banana/apple/orange whatever?

I don’t think a child eating a snack in a loo is a good idea in any way, shape or form, but this issue is deriving from restrictions being placed around food in the first place, and the child not being allowed to eat more than their fruit unless they do so in secret.

Try skipping the fruits in her breakfast then. More oats or some protein instead.
If you really think fruit doesn't fill her up, don't give it to her for breakfast.

This was a rule in my school 25 years ago! We all survived 😊