Can school force my child to stay in during lunchtime

ben500

vaio wrote: »

I can see the marketing meeting now “and this design of flask doesn’t really work but instead of scrapping it we’re going to sell them as soup flasks for babies”

They'll be on dragons den before the year is out you watch.

vaio

Along with little paper note things they invented because they had a big vat of glue that didn’t stick very well

looby-loo_2

Back to the origional question. We do not know the reason for the change of rules. It may be for several reasons. The pupils who go off site (not the OP son if he goes to his grans) may be causing trouble round the local shops or estate. There may be another school nearby and there could be trouble with gangs or groups of students meeting and causing trouble. The children might just be being 'teenagers', not really doing anything wrong other than being rather intimidating when wandering about in groups outside school in the lunchtime. Litter could be a problem. There could be undesirable adults about.

The headteacher may be acting upon the advice of the police or community leaders. We don't know the full story. There must be a reason for a sudden change. It would probably have been better to give notice.

If the boy is 16 and in Y11 I would think it best to just get put up with it for the next 6 months until he moves on to college.

BTW the electronic finger print system was developed by someone I know. They way it works means that the finger print is matched when used but that the school can't do a 'print out' of the finger prints. I asked an IT specialist how it worked and two hours later :rolleyes: I still dind't understand other than it isn't really stored, just there in code

shellsuit

ben500 wrote: »

I'm assuming that you had no prior knowledge of this then as surely you would have objected to your child being fingerprinted for a system he wouldn't be using wouldn't you? You are concerned about him being able to leave school during lunchtimes, I'd be more concerned with the infringement of his human rights myself.

ben500 wrote: »

Something doesn't sit right here, a child cannot legally give consent to having their fingerprints taken, the school would need to seek this from the parent beforehand, surely the question of his needing his fingerprints recorded would have resulted in the obvious, "my child will not be using the facility therefore no need for his prints to be taken response"? I can't see any school just marching all the children off and printing them without some kind of consultation.

With regards to the finger prints being taken, my kids school does the same. We had no say in it as we didn't know it was going to be done and once it was done it was too late to do anything about it.

Infact I'm sure I started a thread about it ages ago.



I would be so angry if my kids school would only allow the children to eat lunch which was bought at school. Have you seen the prices of school meals lately?

If you have 2 or more kids then it can be VERY expensive. And before anyone says "it was your choice to have 1,2,3,4+ children", of course it was, but I don't agree with not having a choice at lunchtime.


Just a thought...

Do ALL the teachers and staff have to eat from the canteen, or are they allowed to take sandwiches in?? :cool:

shellsuit

looby-loo wrote: »

Back to the origional question. We do not know the reason for the change of rules. It may be for several reasons. The pupils who go off site (not the OP son if he goes to his grans) may be causing trouble round the local shops or estate. There may be another school nearby and there could be trouble with gangs or groups of students meeting and causing trouble. The children might just be being 'teenagers', not really doing anything wrong other than being rather intimidating when wandering about in groups outside school in the lunchtime. Litter could be a problem. There could be undesirable adults about.

The headteacher may be acting upon the advice of the police or community leaders. We don't know the full story. There must be a reason for a sudden change. It would probably have been better to give notice.

If the boy is 16 and in Y11 I would think it best to just get put up with it for the next 6 months until he moves on to college.

BTW the electronic finger print system was developed by someone I know. They way it works means that the finger print is matched when used but that the school can't do a 'print out' of the finger prints. I asked an IT specialist how it worked and two hours later :rolleyes: I still dind't understand other than it isn't really stored, just there in code

You don't know the reason for the change??

Here is a clue...

1000+ children.

1000+ meals bought every school day.

Ker-ching.

ben500

Wonder if this is the school?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8309094.stm

InaPickle

thorsoak wrote: »

If you look at this link here :- http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1007/1007640_mum_fights_lunch_ban.html

It would appear that it is not lawful for the school to insist upon every pupil purchasing a school meal.

Thinking about it in terms of finance, wouldn't prohibiting children from bringing in food from outside count as a monopoly which could be referred to the Competition Commission?!

Susan_Frost

Does it have to be very obvious that the boy takes a sandwich into school ? Even 4 slices of bread, with ham or cheese or something not too messy, wrapped in cling film, does not have to be that big. Slipped into a large coat pocket - who is to know ? Just eat it somewhere discreet, there must be some hideaways in the playground. Or is every child searched before going in to school. (probably are, actually).

Would food really be confiscated and a child left with nothing to eat ? A child cannot help it if he does not have any money given, but is given food to take.

What would they do if gran passed a sandwich through the school fence, or are children (I find it difficult calling a 16 yr old a child in this sense !!) be prevented from going within 6 ft of the fence.

My son enjoyed, and ate, his school dinners, and my preference was that he stayed on the premises all day. I was a single, working mum and wanted to be sure if there were to be any accidents, then he was where people would be able to look after him. But no way would I feel it right to tell other parents what to do.

And if it is about children not behaving outside - well - as usual - the good get roped in with the bad dont they ?

In this instance though, I feel above posts are correct, the school have to sell 1000 meals a day and this is how they ensure they do.

Bye the way, how much will this boy have to pay for his meals ?

achtunglady

iamana1ias wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Human rights (from Wiki):

"Human rights are "basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled."[1] Examples of rights and freedoms which have come to be commonly thought of as human rights include civil and political rights, such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of expression, and equality before the law; and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to participate in culture, the right to food, the right to work, and the right to education.""

Note that that's the right to food, not the right to chips with every meal :rolleyes:

Best laugh I've had all day though, so thanks for that! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

iamana1ias wrote: »

Is there something wrong with you? My first post on here was in response to someone saying that their child regularly went to the chippy for lunch :rolleyes:

Your first post was about another posters children, but the first quote above referred to the original poster as it was his rights contravened to which you put "not the right to chips with every meal", the OP is NOT asking for him to have chips with his meal, perhaps the CHIP on your shoulder is giving you tunnel vision where all you see is chips.

Zazen999

If the punishment for leaving the premises is impalement, then ask politely what the punishment for taking a packed lunch in would be; so that you can make an educated decision of which would be worse for your son as you are not buying from the canteen.

Do it in writing, and ask for a response by return as you don't want him to starve waiting for them to respond.


[Seriously, what can they actually DO if he stays in, eats a packed lunch and and doesn't buy from the canteen?]