My ravenous child is only allowed fruit at snack time. I am furious.

[Avocadoes]

My 4 year old DD started Reception class last week. She seems very happy but also very hungry. She is not a great breakfast eater, no matter how hard I try, so at home she used to get a mid morning plate of toast to boost her energy. At school her mid morning snack must be fruit and nothing else. Is that normal?

On her first day I sent her in with sliced apple and raisens. She ate them all, ate all her lunch, but still came home at 3.30pm starving. She then consumed two slices of toast and ate three large plates of spag bol at dinner time.

The next day I put dry cereal (Raisen Wheats) in her snack box to give her some carbs. She came home and told me the teacher had told her she wasn't allowed to eat it. She was very embarrassed about this.

When I dropped her off on the third day I asked the teacher what I could give her to fill her up mid morning. The teacher said it had to be fresh fruit or veg.

AIBU to think a growing child should be allowed a proper energy boost mid morning? I am not suggesting chocolate or crisps, but a health bar, or crackers, or dry cereal should surely be allowed.

MRZ - OP said she has to provide the snack and was only allowed to provide fruit/veg. When she had provided something else her DD hadnt been allowed to eat it.

Exactly. If its a problem for an individual, like anything else, there is probably a solution.

(last post referred to hellymelly's post)

But, had the OP discussed it with/cleared it with the class teacher?

Yes but she is providing a mid morning snack not a packed lunch and it would be unusual if the school isn't providing fruit and milk too

I think it depends on the school, our primary does not provide any snack for free.

Do infants not get the free fruit and veg provided by the government?

The School Fruit and Vegetable Scheme is part of the 5 A DAY programme to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. All four to six year old children in LEA maintained infant, primary and special schools are entitled to a free piece of fruit or vegetable each school day.

Elibean - the OP had discussed this with the teacher but the school had insisted that the snack could only be fruit/veg.

IMO it is for the parent to decide what is a suitable snack not the school. My DCs have a long walk to/from school. I want to be free to decide what I give my DCs and when. I certainly dont want a school prying into my DCs lunch/snack box.

I would not want the school to dictate what my child has in their lunchbox either - we intervene if lunch is a Mars bar and a packet of crisps, obviously, but I think it's a very different kettle of ish, so to speak. That would feel like interfering to me.

That's interesting mrz - I was wondering why it wasn't free here, but my children are juniors so obviously not worthy Thanks for the dental link.

Thanks Blu, that's a shame really. FWIW, I hate most fruit but my kids love it all. I used to think they would notice that I don't eat it at all but they never have.

Is this the British class system in action?

Teaching the children of the lower orders that they do not matter as individuals and must conform so as not to cause a fuss.

It's fascinating how many on this thread are happy for their children to learn this.

Do you think that's what they teach at expensive private and prep schools?

spid - yes and no. Those type of schools also foster a sense of entitlement.

'av a banana

spidookly I think you will find it is the middle orders who have a problem with fruit.

Expensive private/ prep schools don't usually give a choice

Spidookly you are incredibly antagonistic towards state education, aren't you?

To me it's obvious that it's most sensible just to say that fruit is what you can bring - the massive range within the band 'cereal bars' would mean some kids did bring very sugary/unhealthy snacks, others would be aggrieved, before you know it you'd have people claiming a fruit 'n' nut bar was a healthy snack....

I don't think expensive private and prep schools teach 'the children of lower orders' anything at all, cos they don't go there!

I've no problem with state education in other countries.

American children certainly aren't schooled in their own insignificance.

When I was a teacher in a deprived city school the thing that caused the biggest problems for pupils in terms of inability to concentrate was hunger.

But in some English state schools, with the support if many of you, it is OK for a 4 year old child to be hungry all morning because his body clock needs resetting so that he can conform to the correct eating schedule.

Rules are so important that they must be applied without any exception because it is too much trouble (and not as much fun) to apply them judiciously.

What is important here, that a small child in his first year of school can concentrate all morning, or that rules are rigidly enforced?

And lol @ middle orders. Yeah, you just keep telling yourself there's such a thing.

spidookly well lots of Mnetters classify themselves as middle order

God, this thread has grown and grown, over nothing! Thank goodness there are lots of posters with common sense, saying:

1)Kids dont die of starvation if they dont eat for a few hours
2)If your child ate breakfast, you wouldnt worry so much about the snacks
3)your child would eat breakfast if she didnt have such a huge tea. If I had 3 plates of pasta, I wouldnt be hungry first thing in the morning either!
4)rules are there for reasons, 95% of the time. The fruit rule is there to simplify life; its the food equivalent of school uniform. Plus can you imagine how long it takes nursery&reception age children to eat? It has to be kept basic, or their whole day would consist of just eating!

I am imprssed that this is now a private v state school issue!
At DS's state school they can wear what they like - no state diktat re standard issue sweat shirts etc, whereas I believe that most private schools are very pernickety indeed about all aspects of uniform, sometimes even down to colour of underwear. So I think that theory is dead in the water.

Although I a sometimes v eye rolly about the riduculous implementation of many healthy eating policies and being told what I can feed my child for the 6 hours he is in school each day, I am quite pleased that it provides a social setting where they are free from the image of non-stop snack junk stuffing. If anything was allowed as playground snacks, I know DS's school would be full of kids eating crisps and slabs of hydrogenated fat covered in chocolate flavoured coating. It isn't normal in any other European country (as far as I know) for children to munch on junk food between meals, and whereas it didn't do ds any harm to decline the offer of fruit and wait til lunch, it may well have done hi and other kids harm, to develop a junk food expectation.

It was different when I was a child - we didn't et as much procesed food, it wasn't targetted at children, and we didn't have the money for it - it's relatively so much cheaper now.

Yes spidookly, children do have to readjust their body clocks once they start school. Thats real life. We cant all just get up and do whatever we want when we want, we have to interact with the rest of humanity. So if that means learning to eat breakfast and tea so that you can survive a few hours without passing out, then, yes.
Can you imagine at owrk ; 'ok I've just got to stop for half an hour and prepare some food now, because I've been here two hours and I'm going to shrivel if I dont eat; you lot all just carry on without me ' . That wouldnt look at all rude, and like you were shirking your work would it?

Hooray for common sense readingsteadnow!
It is all something over nothing. I don't see anything wrong in a 4 yr old being hungry. People are supposed to get hungry before a meal.

Sidookly?

Discipline and order don't tell children they are insignificant, it is stressing the importance that every single one of them counts and that they need to play their part in the school and work hard to achieve. If they were insignificant then nobody would care what they ate at all...

Isn't that the attraction of private schools? The fact that they can and do set stricter rules for everything from behaviour, to uniform to attendance etc (and probably snacks too)

yes Spidookly, they have the fruit rule because it's a massive laugh to force fruit onto children and they get a sadistic kick out of it, as well as by making them be hungry all day....

Reading is bang right.

Hurray, someone agrees with me on mn! Its only taken 6.5years