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.

oh come on onager - if a child has a proper breakfast - they're hardly going to die of hunger by breaktime are they?

And if they're really that hungry - they'll eat the sodding fruit!

And if that's so vital then all companies should have a policy regarding food eaten during and before work by employees.

What right have you to choose your own diet when the company is paying for your concentrated attention to the work.

You should come home with little lists you can take to the restaurant with you.

Well, I can see the point entirely that school bars and apple crisps are fruit. But unfortunatley its that whole thing of sticking to rules rigidly else they get stretched and stretched. Apple crisps are in a packet and look like crisps, therefore others might see no diff between them and a packet of monster munch.

Ds1 is about to have his first school dinner tomorrow; I've opted for dinner rather than packed lunch in the hope that peer pressure and hunger guide him into trying a wider variety of things than I can co erce him into at home. I'm reckoning if he's hungry, he'll eat, and he'll soon learn the score.

They are saying no to the parents. The kid just gets what he is given to take to school.

It is interesting, as Expat says, that diet can affect concentration levels and so many of these unnatural drinks etc have huge amounts of aspartame which are known to cause hyperactivity in children.

Kids are trying to bring in flavoured water for their waterbottles but the added ingredients are shocking.

The Gov is talking about giving free hot school meals to everyone and trialling it soon to see if good hot meal affects the concentration levels of children and improves them academically.

Eat the damn fruit and be done with it.

And how do you feel about applying it to adults in the workplace?

It does seem nanny state. Unfortunately educated middle class people have to go through this in order to protect less advantaged children.

At our school, or prep children get fruit for break, and seniors use the tuck shop - fruit, homemade shortbread and flapjacks. We are really strict about where they can eat, so not many of them do. All of our children have school lunches, so no one brings in their own food/snacks.

Well when I was at school we weren't allowed to take in any snacks for breaktime, so allowing fruit is good IMO.

Actually at DD's school you can take in any healthy snack, and it is't policed hat heavily either. But from what I see everyone is sensible, and there are def no chocolates or sweets in there. I think allowing a range of healthy snacks is better, however rules are rules. But I would go in and check anyway.

yanbu
I agree that we should rise up against these tyrannies.
Do they allow him to smoke in the playground during breaks? As there has been a lot of discussion on MN about how unreasonable smokers are as well. Perhaps the smoking would curb his fruit appetite...just a suggestion
Freedom for all
Power to the people

I wouldnt go in and check.

I would say 'ds, rules are rules and fresh fruit is what you are allowed and that is it.'

end of

and offer him a container with

berries
plum
peaches
grapes

if hungry, he will eat.

Didn't suggest that, SGM. I was saying that less advantaged children are being protected by nanny state policy. I didn't imply that all less advantaged children were protected, or that only middle class parents were made to suffer.

The whinge came from a presumably middle class and educated mother, although clearly I may be wrong in this assumption.

Sheesh.

I didn't mention poverty at all.

"Unfortunately educated middle class people have to go through this in order to protect less advantaged children."

If that's not judgmental.........

mmmm I don't know about this. I think it's great that we should all be helping our children to eat more healthily but I too object to being told what my child can and can't eat. If the school provide a snack (like they do in ds's nursery) then it's up to them, otherwise I would expect it to be up to me. I would be happy if the school explained that they wanted to encourage healthy eating and hoped that parents would take this into account when packing their child's snack and lunch. After all lots of things are healthy- not just fruit or veg.

I also don't understand why children should be so affected by what someone else has got- if they have to just accept that 'rules are rules and that's it' they could just as easily accept 'that's what x is having and that's what you're having and that's that'.

Actually I know quite a few working mothers/middle class who give in to their children through guilt of working and not wanting to ruin the time at home with arguments about it. I know stats suggest lower economic background but it isn't exclusively so.

You make up your own boundaries.

I know where mine are, and I wouldn't want to impose them on anyone (across the SES spectrum).

Why the posturing? Do we not know who we are talking about?

My infant school had this rule 25 years ago!
It's hardly a new thing.
Give him fruit, if he leaves it he's not hungry enough.
I bet the apple crisps are not allowed because they look too simialr to other stuff pretending to be full of fruity goodness, when it's little more than crap.

I think my comparison is reasonable. If the true reasons are for health and concentration then I see no reason not to apply it to adults. Presumably those parents who send their children to school with chocolate bars also eat badly themselves. This affects their ability to do the work they are paid for.

For example don't you want the teachers to be alert and able to do their job efficiently? How about surgeons and pilots?

Or perhaps you feel it would be petty and controlling for your employer to specify what you can have for lunch and breakfast?

Perhaps they should just say 'no snacks' if it is going to cause a problem.
It is proved that fruit and veg are good for you and you should have 5 portions a day and yet people are complaining because they want the freedom to feed their DC junk!!