Should schools dictate what goes in your child's lunchbox?

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,
We've been asked by the Press Association to comment on the Packed Lunch Policy, which advises that lunch boxes should include at least one portion of fruit and one portion of vegetables every day and should avoid crisps, chocolate bars, biscuits and sweets. Maybe you've been told off for putting a treat in your child's lunchbox? Or maybe you're pleased that government's helping you stand up to pester power? Do you think the guidelines necessary/useful? (Thanks in advance)

Here's why they are asking:

By Rosa Silverman, Press Association

(ADVISORY: First ran yesterday under embargo)

Page 1: 02:47

Nearly two thirds of parents believe schools should not dictate what they put in their children's lunch boxes, according to new research released today.

The Government's School Food Trust (SFT) has issued advice on the subject and early last year drew up a Packed Lunch Policy schools could use.

But a survey suggests parents resent such intervention, with 64% saying schools should not tell them what to put in their children's packed lunches.

Just 10% of parents interviewed admitted that their children were not eating the healthy lunch they packed for them, the study by consumer researchers Mintel found.

Emmanuelle Bouvier, senior consumer analyst at Mintel, said: "Mums and dads may feel insulted at the assumption that they don't know what to put into a simple packed lunch.

"Many parents choose packed lunches precisely because it gives them greater control over what their child eats - much more so than with school dinners.

"These new guidelines clearly take this control away and understandably this is putting people's backs up."

But the survey also suggested that parents had been making healthier food choices for their children since the Government published its guidelines.

In 2006, before the latest initiatives were introduced, 66% of mothers said they tried to give their children a mixture of healthy food and treats.

In the latest survey this number rose to 86% of parents.

Nearly three quarters of parents (71%) thought school dinners were healthier than they used to be.

The SFT said its packed lunch guidance was intended to help schools work with parents to ensure as many children as possible received the fuel they needed to stay healthy and alert.

A spokesman said: "Our research has clearly shown that the average packed lunch is not as nutritionally sound as a school dinner which is, of course, now subject to rigorous standards.

"It is up to individual schools to adopt policies of their own but many parents have told us that school meals can take away the worry of putting together a packed lunch because they are nutritionally balanced."

The guidelines include advice that lunch boxes should include at least one portion of fruit and one portion of vegetables every day and should avoid crisps, chocolate bars, biscuits and sweets.

:: A sample of 532 parents or guardians of children aged four to 16 were interviewed.

end

No. I am the parent I will decide what to feed my child. School is there to educate my child not to police her food intake.

Encouraging healthy eating is fine but that should be the end of it. School dinners are quite often the most unhealthy pile of food I have ever seen. And a chocolate biscuit or slice of homemade cake is actually good for you in moderation compared to low fat yoghurt full of artificial junk!!!

Teachers are just that , not nutritionalists and should stick to teaching not analysing lunch boxes.

no

No
DS1 has had a delicate time adapting to being at school all day - lunchtimes have been a huge battle with him.
He is getting used to the process that is "school" He eats very healthily at home and eats at least his 5 a day excluding lunchtime.

so In his lunch box he gets a bread roll with bovril and a penguin biscuit with some apple juice.
He has milk at snack time (from school) and a piece of fruit at snack time (from school)

I will not feel pressured to change his lunchtime yet. Each term we are changing things slowly so that ultimately he doesn't eat "crap" at lunch but for the time being my priority is him being happy to go to school each day.

I am going to be the lone voice crying in the wilderness here. I think it's a very good idea that schools issue guidelines and have rules about lunch boxes.

I think that it helps parents resist "pester power" and it MIGHT encourage parents who otherwise wouldn't think about it to give their children something other than a kitkat, and marsbar and a can of coke. (not kidding. I have seen a lunchbox with just that in it!)

Agree with the idea that schools can promote healthy eating but must NOT order parents around. We are the parents, not them!

And many schools seem to have a very limited understanding of nutrition - you get so many posts on here about schools that have criticised children, in public, for having a slice of home-made cake and insisted it should be a bloody cereal bar. Clearly they haven't bothered to check the relative nutritional content - home made cake probably has no more fat and suger and certainly does NOT contain hydrogenated fat.

We are in danger of raising a whole generation with food 'issues'. They are beaten around the head by school and the ruddy BB ruddy C with the healthy eating message to the point where they will either a. become neurotic or b. rebel and spend their adult years scoffing twenty Mars Bars a day.

Yes they should not allow sweets, crisps and fizzy drinks - total ban.

They should allow home made stuff and chocolate.

They should issue guidelines and police lunch boxes.

Some people are far too ignorant about healthy eating and need to be told. It's too difficult to pick out one or two parents and talk to them.

If you have parents who are so thick that they put a chocolate bar, some fizzy pop and nothing else in a lunchbox, deal with them. Don't bash everyone else over the head. Send some bloody healthy eating guidelines home if you really must but stop treating every single parent as if we are incapable of bringing up our own children!

I don't assume all government ministers are incompetent or on the take, even though there have been examples of both. It would be nice if they could extend the same courtesy to the rest of us.

No, schools shouldn't dictate. I'm the Chair of Governors at an infant school and this is seomthing we've talked about recently. Our view is that while we can educate the children about the importance of a mixed diet and 5 a day etc, we can't impose that on families who might not have the money or wherewithal to provide the packed lunch we dictate. I don't think the onus on schools to deliver Every Child Matters framework (the "Be Healthy" bit) is intended to cover that level of intervention.

Where there is a child who is obese or has health problems that can be directly related to a poor diet, then the school can and should provide support and information to that family.

Edam, this is probably the same as the nit problem - no one is going to go up to the constantly nitty kid and tell mum to treat them. Instead we get a blanket letter. I overheard one mum saying she never bothers to treat hers as they 'just come back' - stupid bint its her feckin kid passing it on.

So we issue a newsletter that says "All you middle class parents with your home made cake and flapjacks and home made soup in flasks - carry on. The rest of you, your are ignorant morons, with your marsbars and coke - it's brown bread sandwiches and a carrot stick for you!"

Sorry - there has to be a one rule for everyone. If it inconveniences us home made cake brigade, then so be it!

No, but I think they should dictate what doesn't go in.
Our school has banned sweets, fizzy drinks and crisps and I'm fine with that.

No, they should not dictate, although I think sending guidelines home is probably OK, although bloody hypocritical when they also send basically adverts for sugar stuffed foods like Petits Filous patronisingly headed "Nutritional advice for parents/carers". Full of goodness and calcium apparently. They don't mention the sugar.
Agree with edam - take it up with individual parents who only ever send crisps and sweets.

well,my kids get x 2 whole baps with eg.tuna,mayo and sweetcorn;ham and ketchup;beef paste;chicken and mayo;etc!Plus,a penguin or similar,pack of crisps and a piece of fruit....what do you think of that then?!

cutekids - I'm not sure it's OK to have a packet of crisps and a penguin every day - that's a lot of sale and sugar, don't you think?

Seeker - everyone (who has said much!) has said 'guidelines - fine' and been happy about a ban on fizz and sweets.

It's the idea of dictating what it SHOULD contain, being prescriptive abou the amount of fruit and veg, and having the box opened and checked on that is off limits - imo.

I honestly can't imagine teachers wanting to do it, either.

I don't think children should be eating crisps frankly unless they are special low salt versions.

Crisps are the devils food

If the rest of the diet for that day is not one sugary or salty snack after another, I think one pkt crisps and one penguin biscuit, amongst nutritious food, is FINE!

Our school provides snack for break time, they provide fruit and therefore no parents send anything in - meaning there are no rows about the snack to be had.

For lunch they provide stodge, saturated fat, something that looks a bit like a vegetable and some "sugar free" custard with more stodge for after. If the ban on biscuits was carried through would the school stop serving "Shortbread with Custard" or will this be allowed because it is the school serving it?

Our school have banned fizzy drinks because they are unnecessary and nuts because we have a high number who are highly allergic. These bans I endorse, they are made by MY school for MY children, we were consulted, they are thought through and anyone with a problem will be heard out.

I absolutely do NOT endorse any kind of ban that is not brought about by individual circumstances within a school especially if that means any situation where a child is picked out for having the "wrong" lunch or - even worse not ALLOWED to eat their food

Encourage, Educate but do not Dictate.

(DS has one sandwich - homemade brown bread, cheese, egg'n'cress, mackerel, avocado or something, a chicken leg or piece of cheese, and a cereal bar or yogurt or choc biscuit or cake. And a smoothie)

I think one packet of crisps and one penguin is fine, when you balance that with a cheese and cucumber sandwich and an apple.

Much of the hysteria over salt and sugar was whipped up after that poor baby died of salt poisoning. School children are not babies and one packet of crisps a day will not overload a healthy set of 8 year old kidneys.

There also seems to be some confusion generally (not on here, I hasten to add) about the difference between 'Guidlines' and 'The Law'.
My worry is that county councils tend to see Guidelines as Writ In Stone (Like when they tried to close our paddling pools after H&S 'guidelines' were taken to mean that they had to have a full time life guard on duty and, as this was not possible, they closed all the district paddling pools down for a year

So, while 'guidlines' are great and can be sent home to parents and children to help them, perhaps, make healthier choices, I will not stand for anything too prescriptive about what goes into my child's lunchbox.

It woudn't, coldtits, if that was the only salt they had in a day. But it won't be.

It's not the fact that they're eating it every day now that would worry me. It's encouraging poor eating habits which may remain into adulthood.

No! When my SS is with us during the week I give him sandwiches, box of: cheese & apple sliced, cucumber slices, grapes etc. A yoghurt, a whole piece of fruit and a penguin sized biscuit. He has crisps too if it is a day that he has PE as is usually extra hungry. He has healthy home cooked meals every night and breakfast every morning.

His school have insisted that they only have the fruit out of their lunchboxes as their breaktime snack but other than that haven't commented. I do think that promotion of healthy eating is acceptable though, but not police every choccy bar

Our children are born perfect, and we as parents corrupt them. Next it will be the kibbutz. I do not WANT to raise my child according to government guidelines, I want to raise my child as well as I know how. The government should make the information available and digestable. They should then BACK OFF unless they really think it is a child protection issue.

The salt guidelines for a child aged 7-10 is 5 grams a day. In a 20g packet of crisps there is tpically 0.3/0.4 grams (at least, that's what's in the TV crisps in my cupboard)

So you are going to have to be really pushing it to go over the daily guideline amount.