Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,108
The next logical step in this matter is for the father to loudly protest outside the school, while dressed as a giant doughnut.
Six-year-old schoolboy suspended for having Mini Cheddars in his lunchbox...
- Thread starter Overslop
- Start date
Political corectness has nothing to do with this.
The parents refused to follow the school's rules and they went to the media to give them bad press. The school's reaction was normal and yes, the kid will suffer the consequences but that's the parents' responsability.
There's nothing wrong with teaching children good eating habits along with mathematics, punctuality etc. Many parents feed their children rubbish, which is borderline child abuse (although in this case it's more about the principle), good for the school for having rules on the matter.
The parents refused to follow the school's rules and they went to the media to give them bad press. The school's reaction was normal and yes, the kid will suffer the consequences but that's the parents' responsability.
There's nothing wrong with teaching children good eating habits along with mathematics, punctuality etc. Many parents feed their children rubbish, which is borderline child abuse (although in this case it's more about the principle), good for the school for having rules on the matter.
Same here. In fact I love them as well - nothing like a juicy fresh carrot straight from the fridge! When I lived I Germany a company I worked for handed out free fruit every day and one of the boxes would be raw carrots. From then on I started eating them regularly.
Although we do give our son 'junk' food sometimes as well like tacos with Mexican or as a treat we have a Happy Meal on the last Thursday of the month on the way home from school when I pick him up. But he have a very balanced diet on the whole. I find sugar really changes behaviour so we limit things like sweets, cakes or chocolate. Fruit doesn't seem to have the same effect for some reason so we always have grapes, blueberries, bananas etc. for a sweet replacement.
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 3,783
Hahaha, either you are trolling (noticed a lot of ridiculously idiotic replies from you), or you are genuinely retarded.
So the parents don't have the responsibility of choosing their own childs lunch.............but have the responsibility of having to take their child away.
Just wat.
People genuinely need to cop on a bit more. Rights are being eroded at an alarming rate. Your child is your own, you make the decisions you think are best, and within the broad parameter of the law, that is all that is important.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Indeed, it's all down to what they're used to eating and what the parents regard treats as. If you as a parent make a fuss about how amazing strawberries are in the summer and go to a pick your own farm, chances are your kid will think they're amazing too.
Doesn't happen often but i'm mind blown by this whole thing. Even for the school to take it out on the other child by cancelling his nursery seat...
Maybe the school isn't worth attending.
There is a Chippy at our school gates. I had sausage chips and curry sauce every dinner.. I turned out okay is. The GF loves my Muffin top
Maybe the school isn't worth attending.
There is a Chippy at our school gates. I had sausage chips and curry sauce every dinner.. I turned out okay is. The GF loves my Muffin top
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
I think a balance needs to be made. For parents who stuff burgers through the bars of school gates like when Jamie Oliver tried to improve school dinners, you can't leave a parent like that to damage their child's health in school time.
However, when you have someone like dannyjo22 putting in a rare cocolate covered cereal bar into a lunchbox (perhaps needed for a swimming lesson later), there needs to be a realisation that it's part of a balanced diet just as much as fruit or anything else.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 May 2004
- Posts
- 4,488
- Location
- Tall building nearby
My boys do too; and girls, here's a picture of Tyler my youngest devouring some of his favourite treats, olives and sun dried tomatoes. When I ask him what treat he wants from shopping olives are always top of his list; not too many though, everything in moderation. I think the only vegetable they won't eat is celery.
I think both the parents and the school went about the whole issue in the wrong way, now two young children suffer the consequences.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 3,975
Poor kid.
What about the rights of the child? They just eat what's put in front of them, whether that's substantially bad for their health or not. Whilst the parents have them in their care, they can dose them up on junk as much as they like - but the school shouldn't have to be party to it.
That's 3 junk items, one good one (water), and a sandwich (which may be healthy or junk, depending on contents and bread).The Independent said:
Many parents need educating, since most don't recognise what is and isn't healthy (e.g. kids yoghurts are usually really awful and NOT the healthy option people think). THe school tried to work with the parents to educate them and help understand the policy - the parents refused to take on board the advice.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 May 2006
- Posts
- 1,965
Mini Cheddars = Crack.....
Given that a standard bag is like 130cals as long as they are eaten as part of a healthy diet I don't see the problem. If the kids bag is filled with rubbish then yes its wrong.
My daughter has a small penguin bar with her fruit and a sandwich I don't see the harm as she is a fit and active child that takes part in sport and after school clubs as well as dance classes and swimming at the weekends.
What I have a problem with... which will sound wrong and come across wrong im sure. My problem is over weight children that are clearly being over feed and do limited or no exercise. Schools should take action against these children first and parents first. I'm sure for the parents here there will be some that know what im talking about and see the type of child/parents.
Given that a standard bag is like 130cals as long as they are eaten as part of a healthy diet I don't see the problem. If the kids bag is filled with rubbish then yes its wrong.
My daughter has a small penguin bar with her fruit and a sandwich I don't see the harm as she is a fit and active child that takes part in sport and after school clubs as well as dance classes and swimming at the weekends.
What I have a problem with... which will sound wrong and come across wrong im sure. My problem is over weight children that are clearly being over feed and do limited or no exercise. Schools should take action against these children first and parents first. I'm sure for the parents here there will be some that know what im talking about and see the type of child/parents.
Do you even lift, brah?
The parents have the responsability to follow the school's rules. If they sent the kid to school 30 mins late every day, the consequences would be similar, it's that simple. Are rights eroded when schools enforce punctuality?
There's a difference between rules which are reasonable and those which are not.
If there was a school rule that said all children had to be in neon pink tutus at all times, would you feel that the parents were equally responsible to follow it?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
The school is not dictating what goes in a lunch box. They are dictating what can be consumed on their premises. An entirely reasonable request on their part, given that there is ample research to show that a balanced diet ensures the best learning outcomes for children.
Ensuring that parents are providing adequate nutrition for their children is one of the few legitimate reasons for the state to interfere in domestic family life.
If there is broad opposition to the rule from other parents, then you've a point. But is there any evidence of this being the case? If not, then the rule would appear to be very reasonable.
Individuals don't decide what rules they will follow. They either follow them or leave.
Ensuring that parents are providing adequate nutrition for their children is one of the few legitimate reasons for the state to interfere in domestic family life.
If there is broad opposition to the rule from other parents, then you've a point. But is there any evidence of this being the case? If not, then the rule would appear to be very reasonable.
Individuals don't decide what rules they will follow. They either follow them or leave.
Last edited:
Perverse!
Expelling someone is not reasonable. That's ignoring the fact that obesity is caused by excess calorie intake which will happen if you eat too much fruit and vegetables...
Absurd. It's a packet of cheddars in a lunchbox, let's try keeping some perspective here. And to answer your question, it's a tax funded institution, that's why.
Last edited:
30% = child obesity rate in the UK. Is it reasonable to have rules tackling this important issue in school? You're damn right it is.
Your child is not "yours"; you do not own children. Neither state nor parents have total control, nor should they. Children are not property. Parents do not have unlimited rights to make bad choices for their children, nor should they and the state does not have unlimited rights to make choices about how children are raised, nor should they.
Personally I find the fines for in-term holidays more offensive than healthy eating policies; and after the behaviour of these parents I don't see how the school can continue to be effective in educating the children.