School stopping my child eating chocolate

kr15snw

I thought this was the norm to be honest?

When I was in primary (Im 22 now) we were not allowed chocolate / crisps for snack. Only fruit or a healthy alternative. At lunch time we were also allowed no chocolate in our lunch boxes or anything fizzy.

I have a few friends as teachers, and plenty of friends with primary aged children and its the same rules for them. Except some are only allowed water during the day, but other drinks (other than fizzy) are allowed at lunch time. Flavoured water is allowed during the day.

One of my friends little ones only started school this year and she was so embarassed when nearly her sons entire lunch (chocolate spread sandwhich, packet of crisps, yoghurt and chocolate bar) was confiscated. They left him with the yoghurt, but gave him a cheese and salad sandwhich and some fruit for no cost. They told mum not to worry as its normal for parents not to fully know the rules in the first few weeks, but not to do it again.

Personally I think its a good idea as if the kids arnt allowed it in schools, and then not at home they wont want it

gordikin

Here in Scotland schools get HMIe (Her Maj. Insp. of educ) inspected every 5 years or so. In the school where I worked on day one of the inspection they insisted that all choc. should be removed from the vending machines. But when they were served tea they wanted choc. biscuits rather than the muesli type bars they were served! They (and teachers) should be setting an example.

Ivory_Tinkler

When I went to school, centuries ago, we all stayed for a school lunch. We often had mountains of mashed potato, sometimes chips, sometimes pie with a big pastry topping and we always had a pudding, quite often something stodgy, sticky and loaded with calories and smothered in custard. I achieved well at school going on to pass all my O and A levels. So I don't hold with all this hype about a child having chocolate or a treat at lunchtime making them unruly or aggressive or simply not able to learn. I have old classmates who are barristers, solicitors and hospital consultants so if that argument holds then they certainly wouldn't have been able to get those jobs.

Agreed, some parents stuff their children full of junk and those type are never going to attend a "healthy lunchbox workshop." However, most people do have at least an ounce of common sense and know what is good for their kids or not so why on earth are they allowing school dinner ladies to dictate what can or cannot be eaten in their child's lunchbox?

For the record, my kids take water to school, often take fruit and sometimes might take a penguin or a kit kat....my son is in the gifted and talented programme so I think this whole exercise to brainwash parents into what their kids can eat at lunchtime is a load of tosh unless my son is an exception to the rule because he does, dare I say it, eat the occasional chocolate bar at lunchtime.

Let parents be parents for goodness sake otherwise we are going to end up with a nation of parents who don't know how to do the job because they have to wait for someone else to tell them what to do. A lot of parenting comes down to instinct and knowing what is right for your own individual and very unique child. Instead of trying to educate the parent, why not educate the child into wanting to eat healthily?

JasonLVC

Lifeisbutadream wrote: »

It is nothing like asking a child to wear uniform, or to follow the rules, it is a dictation of something that is nothing to do with anyone else - how and what we eat is up to us.

As parents we are happy for the state to dictate what our kids are taught (the curriculum), we have little say as to whether our kids are taught about sex, homosexuality, religion and what parts of history they forget to tell our kids.

As parents, we're happy to spend ££££'s on uniforms, blazers, sports kits and dance outfits. We're happy to abide by the school rules on behaviour, bullying, turning up on time, not taking holidays during term time, etc.

And yet we get into a fit and take the view that not having a piece of chocolate somehow is an infringment of our basic human rights . Some perspective is required.

As adults, we (generally) decide not to give our kids alcohol and many parents will kick off if our dears are caught smoking/having sex. As adults, we'll carefully read the ingredients of food we buy to avoid salt, fat and yet, we'll equally fight for the right for our child to have food that is arguably bad for them.

If we want to start a revolution then that is fine but lets make it a worthy cause.

Lifeisbutadream

JasonLVC wrote: »

As parents we are happy for the state to dictate what our kids are taught (the curriculum), we have little say as to whether our kids are taught about sex, homosexuality, religion and what parts of history they forget to tell our kids.

As parents, we're happy to spend ££££'s on uniforms, blazers, sports kits and dance outfits. We're happy to abide by the school rules on behaviour, bullying, turning up on time, not taking holidays during term time, etc.

And yet we get into a fit and take the view that not having a piece of chocolate somehow is an infringment of our basic human rights . Some perspective is required.

As adults, we (generally) decide not to give our kids alcohol and many parents will kick off if our dears are caught smoking/having sex. As adults, we'll carefully read the ingredients of food we buy to avoid salt, fat and yet, we'll equally fight for the right for our child to have food that is arguably bad for them.

If we want to start a revolution then that is fine but lets make it a worthy cause.

I think that you are getting yourself on your high horse because you think that everyone wants to stuff their children with crap. Take a second look. I want my children to be healthy and if someone came along and decided that what I was feeding my children wasnt what they thought was right, then it is an infringement of basic human rights when in some cases they are WRONG.

I personally do not give my children chocolate bars and sweets in their pack ups, but I will often give them homemade chocolate buns, flapjack etc. I would be furious if they were taken away from my children because someone else thought they were not healthy. They contain unrefined sugar and butter, all natural foods.

These same people think that giving children additives from 'sugar free' food is OK and then wonder why they bounce off the walls???

As I said before, unless they actually know what they are doing (i.e. are a dietition or nutricionalist (sp) then I would not be happy for anyone to dictate what my child can or cannot eat.

iamana1ias

Barneysmom wrote: »

Put it in her coat pocket and let her eat it when nobody's looking.
The school is wrong, kids should be allowed a treat.
I think the 'powers that be' have gone too far in their quest for the perfect human being.

You are the parent and you're being dictated to...

It's not a treat if they get it every day. No wonder there are so many obese kids nowadays if your stuffing them full of sugar and fat!

maybe parents should be dictated to a bit more if they think teaching their kids to ignore rules is appropriate. :rolleyes:

woohoo_postingid

Ok, slightly off-topic but I find it amusing none the less.

A friend of mine's daughter was sent home with a note saying something along the lines of:
"Please do not allow your child to bring bacon flavoured crisps to school as it offends children of various religions"

My friends response was not to jump up and down and scream and shout, he simply sent a note in the following day saying:
"Please stop these children from eating my daughters lunch".

iamana1ias

Ivory_Tinkler wrote: »

When I went to school, centuries ago, we all stayed for a school lunch. We often had mountains of mashed potato, sometimes chips, sometimes pie with a big pastry topping and we always had a pudding, quite often something stodgy, sticky and loaded with calories and smothered in custard. I achieved well at school going on to pass all my O and A levels. So I don't hold with all this hype about a child having chocolate or a treat at lunchtime making them unruly or aggressive or simply not able to learn. I have old classmates who are barristers, solicitors and hospital consultants so if that argument holds then they certainly wouldn't have been able to get those jobs.

?

But you also would have done about a thousand times more exercise to burn it off than the playstation generation and would most likely have had a bit of respect for your teachers/school/education (unlike today's brats whose parents have taught them to do whatever they like)

Ivory_Tinkler

iamana1ias wrote: »

But you also would have done about a thousand times more exercise to burn it off than the playstation generation and would most likely have had a bit of respect for your teachers/school/education (unlike today's brats whose parents have taught them to do whatever they like)

Playstation generation or not, school dinner ladies and teachers are not qualified to root around in lunchboxes deciding what can and can't be eaten, particularly as it is the responsibility of a parent to feed their child. I am certainly not against healthy eating, in fact I encourage it and my kids actually prefer a home cooked meal to a macdonalds meal. What I object to is someone else taking away parental responsibility and choice.

Not all children are brats you know, most of them are quite nice with perfectly good manners and respect. It's a pity that you take that view.

Alikay

I'm amazed that a simple request from a school for no sweets or chocolate in lunchboxes can have people thinking it's an infringement of their civil liberties or teachers attempting to control pupils nutrition or undermine parents! As a cub leader we also ban chocolates and sweets from camps. Why? Not to force our superior views on nutrition on parents, but...

1. Kids who've been snacking on sweets won't eat meals, so we have them whingeing that they're hungry an hour after dinner when all's been cleared away (no fridges/microwaves to save and zap leftovers on camp!)
2. Sweets get lost or stolen. We have to spend time sorting it out
3. Ants like sweets. Ants, tents and kids are not a good combo.
4. Melted chocolate all over someone's sleeping bag and rucksac is a major hassle
5. Haribo or Starburst sick is very sticky and a nightmare to get out of minibus upholstery

Are you absolutely sure schools want to take control away from parents, or might it just make life simpler in a variety of ways to ask that chocolate is held back just a couple of hours or so until home-time?