to think that my DSs should be allowed to eat what I give them at breaktime?

[lonelymom]

My DSs school seems to have an unwritten rule that they are ONLY allowed fruit at breaktime. Problem is one of my DSs only eats bananas unsupervised. Any other fruit and I have to stand over him saying 'Git it down yer throat NOW!'. Anyway as his bananas have been coming home uneaten and bashed (even though he has a 'bananaguard' being the height of coolness that he is) I started to give him 'schoolbars' and apple crisps but he is coming home saying that his teacher will not let him eat them and he has to put them back in his bag . Now come on - these are a form of fruit , they contain lots of fruit anyway. I am furious about the apple crisps as these are essentially dried apple slices dipped in lemon juice. I have spoken to his teacher about this a few times and she has said that it's OK so I don't know what the hells going on. This nanny state we live in makes me bloody angry. I am a grown adult who should be able to decide what my kid eats!! If I want to give him a Mars Bar, I should be able to, fgs. By the way, my other DS (in a different class) gets to eat his.

Do you wear a seatbelt?

Yes, I do. And I would do so even if it were not compulsory by law. But I never thought it should be compulsory for an adult to wear a seatbelt (no problem with adult driver having to ensure child passengers are belted up).

But my argument here has never been that I don't want my dd to eat fruit. Only that if I want to give her something else from time to time, the school should not feel entitled to confiscate it.

Had enough. Going to bed.

Ah so you agree it IS a good idea to have rules/laws that force all adults to do something that benefits children. Glad to have cleared that up!

Nice try, mabanana. A simple risk assessment ought to differentiate between the unreasonableness of compelling all parents to provide nothing but fruit for a snack (minimal risk of minimal harm) and the sense of it being mandatory for adults to ensure children are belted up in cars (variable, but significant, risk of major injury or death).

Don't forget, mabanana, just because it is a good idea for people to do a thing doesn't mean it is acceptable to compel them to do it.

hm, but MsH...surely until people might be educated enough to make the right choices those rules will be a benefit rather then anything else, though?
In a school the problem is, that y sees x eating a chocolatecake for snacktime, so, ys will tell mum that x had that....now lets imagine x has a all rounded and balanced diet but y already eats a mostly rubbish and processed diet, which could easily enough lead us to the assumption that y's parent isn't very clued up about these things, therefor y's parent will NOT realise that it is o.k. to have the odd cake as part of a balanced diet, but it would not be a good diea to add any additional processed food to an already dire diet....
not sure that makes sense, lol....

but yes, I suppose I am saying that overall those kind of rules are a good idea if they force other people to do something healthy...
tbh, I really can't see why it is really such an issue...
as I said before though, I do think you had some very good ideas in order to educate people...and who knows, if people are more educated then maybe the rules wont be necessary anymore (although, not sure that will ever happen, lol)

Then, FairLady, we have to disagree. There are too many unknowns such as who will decide when people are "educated enough to make the right choices" and what else would be subject to such rules until people can make the "right" choices for themselves? Who decides what the "right" choices are?

Just a thought for you to ponder.

Being an OT means being concerned with a person's ability to live their own life according to their own choices. As an OT, you will be involved in trying to dismantle, overcome and eliminate the obstacles to them doing so that illness or disability might put in their way. It means supporting people to make their own choices whether you think they are the right choices or not.

An example. As a student OT, I was asked to come up with a solution for a young spinal injured man. He smoked but his injury meant that he had poor grip and kept dropping lit cigarettes with all the attendant risks of burning himself (or worse) that that entailed. I made him a cigarette holder out of pliable wire to fit over his index finger. Provided someone inserted a cigarette and assisted him to light it, he could smoke independently and safely (with only a minimum of supervision). Some of the nurses thought I should not have done this because "he shouldn't be smoking". As far as I was concerned (both professionally and personally), that was his choice to make and not mine. What do you think?

MsH, maybe by the end of this course we wpould agree, who knows...
I can see where you are coming from, especially from an OT point of view...BUT, I don't think it necessary means there should be no rules like this.

I do think though, aswell, that from an OT point of view you did the right thing in your example....but this was a young man, able to decide for himself, as such...only that the application had become impossible for him....I think, in this case it would be ethically wrong not too...
however, the example of fruit in school is different, because the children don't have a choice what their parents put into the lunchbox, and that is a concern....if the parent want to eat crap, then fine, but the child deserves better...not sure if that makes sense...

FairLady, the child has no choice (other than what the parent chooses to allow them) about what they get to eat at home or about a whole lot of other things. It is the nature of being a parent that we have the responsibility to make choices for them until they are old enough to make the choices for themselves (and, as a parent, we often have to decide when that time has come, too).

You are arguing that the state, in this case the school, has the right to overrule the parent when the school "knows better". I see that as a very slippery slope. Today it's fruit. What will it be tomorrow?

And, I repeat, it's not about being able to feed your child nothing but crap. Having a "fruit only" rule has a subtext that says "You can't be trusted to make this choice. We know best". I reject that.

A law about seatbelts says, 'We don't trust you to make this decision sensibly for your children'.
A rule about school uniforms says blah blah blah...

You seem to be terribly confused between adults and children here, frankly. Would you have made the wire thing for a CHILD? Even if the parent asked for it? Or would that be overruling the parent?

mabanana, I refer you to my earlier comment about risk assessment.

For a child to smoke is illegal. It would not be ethical of me to assist someone to break the law.

This thread reminds me of that sketch in the Fast Show where there are 2 gladiators that have an endless fight scene with no discernable end........

You are right June. This is utter nonsense! If you want to fight about this MrsH, I'll leave you to try your luck in this epic battle for kids to eat crap in school human rights with the European Court of Human Rights. Good luck

MsH, tbh....I ust can't see anything wrong with a rule that benefits, iykwim...I can see where you are coming from, I can...I just don't agree, in this case...
tbh, my big gripe about schools in the UK is the whole Uniform crap issue....possibly because I grew up without it, as german school didn't have them....I find school uniforms horrible, but I still comply with it, because I chose to send my kids to the schools they are going to, and therefore I said I agree with the rules...
another, far bigger issue I have with the UK schoolsystem is that early schoolage....it's rubbbish to send kids to big school that young, but as a parent you don't really get a true choice, because it's starting them in reception even if just turned 4 (as in ys case) or "opt out" of reception and start at year 1...what sort of option is that? ...so, to me....the issue of fruit is a positive one and not an issue...

I never said it was the most important issue in my life. You should seem me when I really get passionate about something .

oh god, was not suggesting it was the most important issue in your life....was just saying why it wasn't that important to me, iytkwim...
I can just imagine you in a truely passionate issue for yourself...I suppose that makes you a fab OT, though
like I said, can see where you re coming from from the OT angle....and have been thin king about it....but right now to overwhelmed wih all the things surrounding my actual course, trying to get that sorted in my head, lol....

Well, my brain is available to be picked, any time. Bear in mind that I'm so old that my qualification is a diploma, not a degree!

lol, you are not a lecturer at northamton university, are you...otherwise I will be easy to find...but thanks for offering the "brain picking" I probab;y will come back to that!

'Fraid not . I'm to be found rather further north.

Back in the 70's we were only allowed to bring in fruit for a snack. The reason had nothing to do with health. The headmaster didn't like litter. His school, his rules.

Presumably the OP would be allowed to bring in a vegetable instead.

I think children today get off lightly. At least nobody is force feeding them warm milk.

Scottish Government has just announced plans to give all children in P1-3 in Scottish schools free school meals .

Back in the dark ages when I was at primary school, we were only allowed to bring in either a raw carrot or an apple for break.

anything else, even from the fruit of veg genre, would be confiscated.

haven't read the whole thread, but 2 points i wanted to make

fruit being the only choice at breaktime. it's not only a lesson in nutrition but also in children obeying rules that are there for their own good. support them and the school, it's not just about the food, it's a lesson in life. we mostly have rules for a reason and children need to learn to obey them.

just because a person in their teens or even early twneties is slim and has eaten crap doesn't mean they're healthy. healthy eating is about making choices throughout life. sometimes children need to devlop a taste for healthy food that will serve them well in their thirties, forties and beyond, not just when they're young with fast metabolisms. it all catches up with you as you get older (as i know all too well)

obeying rules just because they are there is not a lesson in making choices.