to want SOME control over packed lunches?

[kinderfool]

DD's (6yo) first day back at school today and she was a bit nervous about her new class so in her packed lunch, besides her drinks bottle, ham sandwich, a plum, piece of cheese (proper cheese not cheese spread or something) and a box of cherry tomatoes (at least 10 or more), I put in a Kinder egg (a massive treat for her) to cheer her up.

Comes to pick up and she'd had a reasonable day but was anxious to tell me she'd really wanted to eat her egg but hadn't been allowed. Checked her lunch bag expecting that she'd tried to eat that first and been stopped but after checking first and asking her, found out she'd eaten every crumb of everything else and had one little bite of choc before the TA watching stopped her. And it wasn't as if certain things aren't allowed, there's no nut allergy notifications at her school, and no set down rules about what can/can't be brought.

Now I completely sympathise with the need to crack down on kids who get a lunch of Coke, crisps and chocolate AND would completely understand if it was the toy they'd objected to (but dd was told by me she could eat the egg but not to even open the toy bit, to bring it home with her instead and knowing her she'd have repeated this parrot-style to the TA), but this just seems completely overboard for the first day.

As far as I can see, what I sent her with is a balanced meal so as long as it stays that way it should be of no concern to anyone else what I want her to eat. Plus she's a skinny little thing (thanks to never staying still) so the very last thing I need is someone putting ideas into her head that it's only ever acceptable to eat uber-healthy foods.

AIBU to, in a very polite and reasonable way, tell the TA to keep her nose out?

flopalong, as I and others also keep pointing out, part of our objection to this type of ban is that they don't work.

Just because the majority think it is right to do things a certain way does not mean that it is OK to make it the law that everyone has to do it that way. Just look at other issues that people disagree over about parenting - ear piercing, childhood vaccinations, choice of clothing, sleeping arrangements for newborns, infant feeding, weaning. Take vaccinations - the state takes the view that all children should receive the MMR vaccination (I happen to agree). If it's OK to mandate to parents what they feed their children (whenever, wherever) then it's only a short hop from there to making the MMR compulsory. Would you advocate that? After all, it's for everyone's benefit - in fact the benefit to the majority is even greater than for the MMR and other vaccinations because of herd immunity. If not for MMR, why for packed lunches?

sorry - "the benefit to the majority is even greater for MMR" not than for.

Sorry, MsH, it's me again.

I think the distinction is between prescription & proscription, tbh.

If a hypothetical school was saying: 'Your dc's lunchbox must contain a cheese sandwich, 5 cherry tomatoes, 3 pieces of fruit (see enclosed list of permitted combinations) & a yoghurt (see enclosed list of approved yoghurt suppliers)', then I'd be manning the barricades with you.

If it's just: 'No sweets, cake or chocolate in lunch boxes', then I can see the thinking behind it, I don't assume it's a magic bullet but it may be helpful to some children with poor eating habits, & most importantly it's doing my dc no harm whatsoever & isn't actually that much of a PITA to comply with.

It's a daft battle to pick, anyway. Your dc's school will either not have a policy, or they will & will confiscate stuff on the proscribed list whether you agree or not. You'd be better off getting appointed as a Guv'nor & fighting it from there.

ravenAK, it's an artificial distinction.

Don't do school governors in Scotland, afaik. And there's nothing daft, imo, about standing up against unwarranted intrusion into my remit as my dd's parent, which is what this is. How much of a PITA it is is not the point.

Fair enough. We all make our own judgments about what constitutes 'unwarranted intrusion'.

I'm quite exercised, for example, that the person in charge of the '2+2=4' & 'c-a-t spells cat' aspect of ds's education is also solemnly telling him that her imaginary friend made the world in 7 days.

So, on the assumption that you're as pissed off about Lunchbox Policing as I am about that, I shall respect your POV & agree to differ with you.

YANBU. If you make the lunch, you decide what's in it.

Great link katiestar Especially where it says

"As is the case with bags, teachers cannot rifle through a lunch box unless the child says it is OK. You can only do it with a police officer present or with parental permission."

If they were going to ban chocolate and sugar from the shops I would agree that they are taking away our right to decide, but they havn't. It's one meal 5 times a week, give her a hunny sandwich if you must.
I they should weigh all children on entry an sutally keep an eye on the heavy ones

I do not remember asking your advice on how I could sneek something sweet in my dcs lunch box flopalong!

I am sorry, I am being really hard on you because I still get the feeling you know better what I should do for my Dcs when as a matter of fact you have absolutely no idea what they need! I feel personally attacked when someone not only tells me I am wrong (which to a certain extent I can take) but also tells me what I should be doing (In your case what you do/would do for your DCs). The truth is my children are mine and yours are yours and I am not allowing myself to tell you what you should or not do!

Other than that, I am usually... well sometimes...a very reasonable and nice person! I am certain on a different thread we would get along great. Just when I get the impression my parental skills are attacked the ogre in me just lashes out!

Sorry I missed a bit [blush} Don't you think that maybe you do not see the big issue because it is not directed at you and you would maybe, potentially feel different if it was?

I'm sure you feed your children much healthier food then I feed mine really, I don't do organic food all the time or cook from scrach, I buy cakes from the shop and let them eat sweets too (sometimes) I just wouldn't kick up a fuss for them trying to do some good.
I did kick up a fuss when my son went into year 1 and the NQT was using sweets as an insentive to be good!! He was coming home with 5 packs a day, I left it for 2 weeks thinking she might slowly start to stop but it was just a thing she did. I had a word with the head one day, said I didn't really like their new reward system and could they do something else for him, she had no idea and the next day it stopped.
I'm not telling anyone what they should do, its just not a big deal to me

I really think the lunchbox police should have a nutrition qualification though, a healthy flapjack is compleatly different to a kinder egg.
There are parents in my kis school who all wore PJs to school because a letter home sked them not to, they did it for a week it was so childish, they were only asking them to get dressed.

What on earth has it to do with the school what the parents wear to school ?!
(Although I think its a bit weird to come in PJs never ever seen anyone do it)

Think they wanted to try and encoage parents to get dressed so they could be some sort of example to their kids, but the only reason some people take their kids to school is to watch that Idiot Jeremy Kyle in peace and before anyone jumps on me they say it with pride and mean it "cant wait to get this little sht in school, I need to get milk for my brew though, ad non dis mornin cos I ad to get me ciggys you know ad to giv em crisps for breaky init hahahaha fucn shit arnt they op I don't miss kyle only reason I get em er on time, av to drag em out o bed the fu**s won't sleep till 11 12 they just play xbox, least they leave me alone though init hahahahahaha" These are regulaar conversations had by lots (not all) of parents. I think they were just trying to point out that its not hard to get dressed. If you lived where I lived you lot might think like me. It's crap and is getting worse, one day I'll move

No, it's not hard to get dressed. But what people wear is their own business, not the school's. Teachers are there to educate children, not to patronise adults.

It was a request not a command, of course they can't TELL people what to wear. I think they will be able to teach the poor children of these scallys parents if they have to provide a healthy lunch. Thats just my opinion though

flopalong, it might have been presented as a "request" but you'd have to ask yourself what would happen if the "request" was regularly ignored (other than in what I presume was a protest). What inferences might the school have felt itself justified in drawing?

If you have such a terribly low opinion of so many of the parents at your dc's school, why do you not move?

ravenAK, interestingly, I would not be willing to tolerate any teacher at her school (once she starts going) telling my dd that the world was made in 7 days as we understand them and I'm a Christian. We go to church and my dh and I and our church will take care of educating her in the religious beliefs that we hold. There is likely also to be a chaplain at the school and s/he will contribute to that, too. It's not for the teaching staff to do it.

Btw, I wonder if you would mind containing your contempt. The phrase "imaginary friend" is hardly necessary to convey that you are not a believer, I think.

Gee, once upon a time they'd let it slide that time and send a letter home, asking you not to do it again. Schools really are turning into little dictatorships, aren't they?

My daughter's school would make a capital case out of what you did, and then send the child home with chocolate 'rewards' for academic accomplishments. I cannot stand the hypocrisy of it all.

I've tried very hard to have this 'treating' for rewards modified to something like book vouchers, or collector cards on various subject. I've even volunteered to provide the cards myself. It seems that it's totally up to the discretion of the head teacher, and though a little treat in the lunch box will have the sirens screaming, a regular hand-out of chocolate by the school is harmless. Apparently, "...a little bit won't hurt.", but only if it comes from them.

Faddles, of course I agree with you that the school should not have a rule for parents that they flout themselves. But that doesn't alter the fact that for the school to impose any rule about what parents can provide - at the parent's direct expense - for their child to eat at lunch time(with a very small number of specific exceptions) is inappropriate.

I just got the school menu, The meals look actually very good and they have made a lot of effort sincelast year to also cater for vegetarian children. I am just goint to concentrate on the deserts because I really cannot falt the menu (and I have tried!)

Desert as follow (3 weeks rotation over the term, will change next term. The Children can have fresh fruit instead of the desert if they wish)

WEEK 1

Monday : Ice cream sponge roll
Tuesday : Oaty apple slice and custard
Wednesday : Carrot cake
Thursday : Coconut sponge and custard
Friday : Fruit salad with vanilla cream

WEEK 2

Monday : Chocolate ice cream sponge roll
Tuesday : Oaty peach crumble and custard
Wednesday : St Clement cake
Thursday : cornflake tart and custard (?)
Friday : Fruit salad with chocolate cream

WEEK 3

Monday : Backcurrant ice cream
Tuesday : Chocolate & orange sponge
Wednesday : Rice pudding and Jam
Thursday : Syrup sponge and custard
Friday : Fruit salad with lemon crunch

It all sounds really good but how is it better than the ODD chocolate or biscuit?

Watchtheworldcomealivetonight, it doesn't seem right does it?

Well, I have to say that I think that the news story that someone linked to earlier on in the thread should spur on those of us who take the view that the food we provide to our dc is our business and not the school's to stand up for it. As I've already said, my dd doesn't go to school yet and, as yet, I've no reason to believe that the school she'll go to will have any rules like this but I am promising myself right now that, if it ever comes up, I will resist rules that interfere with matters that are my family's private business.

Rules like this are an empty, meaningless box-ticking exercise that I believe let schools - and the government off the hook while they actually fail to do what is genuinely within their power to improve the food education of children (and their parents).

(ooh, I feel all fired up now!)