School bans crisps and chocolate - (some) parents in uproar

[Clary]

here

What does everyone think?

Personally I wouldn't say a packet of crisps (or Skips, or Wotsits) and a chocolate mini roll constitute an acceptable lunch. But I have seen children provided with just that. Is that OK because it is their parents' choice?

the point of the rules is to avoid a lunchbox inspection

also to achieve the Healthy Schools thing (mark? can't remember)

i can think of worse things for schools to ban tbh

Anda s a recent poster said, when our school can provide a healthy lunch instead of chips twice a week with the option of mayo smothered sarnies (bearing in mind the gluten free thing for ds1) then I will take their nutritionala dvice seriously. My ds1 sees a private nutritionist who is more than happy with his overall diet- do the school ahve her qualifications I wonder?

My daughter's school requests no chocolate, sweets or fizzy drinks in lunchboxes. Fair enough I think.

But I wouldn't be impressed if they banned her from having a cereal bar or the odd bag of crisps. She knows that as long as she eats her veg/fruit Monday to Thursday she can have a treat (bag of Quavers!) on Friday.

A cereal bar often has as much sugar as a twix. What's a teacher going to know? Going to inspect the labels of them all to see what crap a lot of "marketed healthy" snacks have in them?

It is up to the parents. Healthy Schools mark whatever. It should be up to the parents.

Our school has been doing this for ages, certainly since ds1 started in 2005.

I have a real problem with this because its just so random and shows no understanding of what the constituent parts of food are.

Our bodies can't tell the difference between a boiled sweet and undiluted concentrated orange juice (not the kind with the pulp and the fibre) we just react to what the constituent sugars are.

In a completely biological way crisps have very little nutritional value but chocolate is actually fairly good nutritionally.

Telling children they can't bring in a piece of home made cake but instead providing for example those fabulous bakin' boys muffin is just madness. (have you seen the list of ingredients on one of those)

Whats next, a school banning coke cos of all the sugar but saying its ok to have diet coke with all the aspartame in it?

I appreciate what they think they are trying to do but frankly it just gives a very fucked up message of what food is in my opinion.

And yes if you add up all the physical constituent parts of a granary sandwich with nutella on compared to a white bread sandwich with pepperami on I know which I would eat/feed my children.

Well said Lauriefairycake, it is the random element that riles me too.

Oh for heavens sake. I would be so utterly pissed off if my son and daughter's school did this. And I agree with Madamez entirely. I think that some parents do need some advice over their kids diets (as proved by the three mars bars boy - WTF?!)
I mean for allergies sake, yes it is essential to ban some items in some schools (which are unfortunately often healthy ones like nuts) but to tell a child 'you can't eat that' while the school dinners children tuck in to no nutritional value cakes and biscuits just because they are 'freshly made' is insane and goes to show how little the school council thinks things through sometimes.

I often put in a treat item such as a soy pudding which is high in calcium and travels well or a vegan flapjack/choc bar as I think that kids should be able to enjoy a sweet every now and then. Mine are both incredibly active and slim as well, so why should they be told that they can't have these foods along with their healthier foods?

If the rest of the lunch is balanced and the child obviously doesn't have a weight problem, then why try to dictate what a parent sends to school. And it's still probably all healthier than their bloody chips, burgers and salty lasagne slops.

Wonder if the policy exists in the staff room also. I know where I work there are always biscuits in the staffroom - also coffee, tea. Often chocolates too.

It's part and parcel, really, of the same awful shift that has happened in this country since the farking Blair Govt got going. Now everything is about harassing the innocent rather than stopping the guilty ie a small minority of parents send their kids in with 3 mars bars or a half-eaten cheeseburger and a red bull for lunch, so let's put RULES in place and treat ALL the parents and kids as though they don't know the differents between shit on a stick and lentil sandwiches. If they hadn't sold off all the school dinner franchises to the lowest bidders who churn out not only unhealthy but profoundly unappetizing food, then there might be some sort of moral authority behind this kind of totalitarian meddling, but (as I said) it's classic Blairite stuff - 'we and our rich mates can do what we like, but all you plebs can just do what you're told or you'll be punished'.

Message withdrawn

well said madamez

My dd is only 2 but when she goes to school, if the school try to institute any rule like this they will have a fight on their hands. I'd accept a peanut ban because of the risk of harming another child, but not this. This does not mean that I think 3 Mars bars constitutes an acceptable lunch, before anyone gets on their high horse about it.

A school is there to educate so let them educate - about healthy eating, too, of course - and put the jackboots away.

This is another example of the growing "freedom" we are all experiencing - freedom to think and act only the way the authorities tell you is right, or else.

What my child eats is a matter for me, my dh and my dd. As long as she can be seen to be healthy and thriving, there is no excuse and no justification for her school to know or care what is in her lunchbox.

There are ways for the appropriate authorities to intervene when children are not being well enough looked after by their parents - schools have their part to play in the process.

This is completely wrong and I'm frankly quite shocked that anyone would defend it.

Totally agree with MsHighwater - bans are not the answer.

This country is fast becoming some sort of 1984 nightmare and the saddest thing is that people are being sucked into it on the pretext that this is 'the right thing to do'.

Totally agree with MsHighwater - bans are not the answer.

This country is fast becoming some sort of 1984 nightmare and the saddest thing is that people are being sucked into it on the pretext that this is 'the right thing to do'.

As you can tell, I feel strongly enough about this to post twice

all this smacks of just another way for the government to 'nanny state' us, and make us feel as tho we don;t know how to raise our children.

for goodness sake, we all agree that some parents need educating in ways to feed our children, but banning foods and taking said food away just makes it more attractive IMHO.

whatever happened to food being food being food, and us learning about healthy eating and nutrition as part of home ecenomic lessons at school?? (oh, I forgot, the government banned those lessons as part of budget cuts!!).

In our school, we are advised as to what to provide our children in their lunchboxes, and once every 6wks the whole school take part in a 'make your own lunchbox up' day. they children take their empty lunchbox to school, and then the teachers lay on buffet style food and teach the children how to make up their sandwiches etc......the emphesis on healthy food that the children may have not had or even seen before. Then the parents get given a list of what the children tried and liked, and then we can but said food for our kiddies lunches.
Mine learnt that salad foods are possibly nice, and not poison like they previously tried to claim!

I am so fed up with all these food nazi's tho, and all the smugness that is generated by the 'my lunch is soooo much better than yours' mentality that it stirs up.

I'm beginning to think I'm going to SO embarrass my dd when she goes to school!

Glad to say that I see no sign of any such nonsense at our local school.

my ds's school has a no sweets, cakes or crisps ban at playtime. theyb have healthy snacks instead. (although ds doesnt take anything as it means if he eats it he has less time to run and play apparently!!) they do have a healthy eating policy and are encouraged to have healthy packed luches but they are banned from lunchtime (well fizzy drink IS banned) they try to get them to choose healthy choices. i rememeber my cousins school banning junk at playtime when we were little must be 20 years ago at least, and i though it was a horrible thing to do!! but can now see why it was done

ooh, make your own lunchbox day sounds v. good, might suggest that...

What gets me about the sort of rules mentioned is that they are profoundly daft. If you are going to introduce nutritional rules, you should make sure you know something about nutrition first. A cereal bar is not healthier than chocolate - in fact most cereal bars are full of hydrogenated fats which are a. unnatural (as in do not exist in nature) and b. very bad for you - much worse than saturated fat.

Bossiness allied to ignorance is soo irritating.

see, what I find is the main problem with regards to 'bad' lunches, are that the parents who make them up are those who are the least well educated in nutrition and also the least well off too.

I mean, the cheapest food for us to buy is the worst food that we could possibly eat.
If they made the fresh fruit and veg and 'proper' foods more atainable price-wise, then that would be the food bought in more abundance IYGWIM.

Plus, if they gave the parents at more risk some decent advice without it coming across as patronising then they would absorb the info much more willingly and would be more likely to practice what they are taught.

so much better to go down that route than doing an outright ban, because surely even if they DO ban said foods at school, then those children would just as soon fill up on it at home?.

and also........

why is it such a big deal......children have maximum of 5 lunches per week at school.......out of the 21+ meals they have altogether in a week.
is 5 healthy lunches really going to make an impact on that grand a scale?????

I THINK NOT!

cat64 that's a very good post.

Actually as I observed to a colleague astonished at this, yes, chocolate is not allowed in our school either, except on friday "treat day" for snacks.

I agree with others that one good reason is that the teachers have to work with children who have had nothing substantial for lunch, or just sthg that will give them a sugar high and then resultant low - rather than slow release apple, flapjack etc.

Sorry but am rather at a child having 4 packets of crisps a day. Overweight or not, that's a lot of salt and oil and not a great message on eating all round.

Psychomum I like the sound of that lunchbox day - what a good idea!

Peachy they have chips once a month IIRC at our schools (and many others). I do think that if your child had allergies you would reasonably be excepted from a lot of these sort of rules. shrooms I wonder if you have looked at a school lunch menu lately?

Anyway, to reiterate what another poster says, the school hasn't banned cakes and biscuits to packed lunch eaters can still have a sweet treat. Just not a chocolate bar. I guess I agree it is a bit random, but I think it's about steps in the right direction. Pudding at DD's school today (I know cause I was there) was yogurt or fruit salad which is not exactly sticky chocolate pudding is it?