School lunch rant - Would you complain?

poet123

DVardysShadow wrote: »

I don't think that is the point. The real point is to make yourself such a PITA, by making them justify everything they challenge, that they will give up and leave your child's lunch box alone.

No, the point is to tell them quite firmly that those are guidelines, not laws(!) or rules, and that you will be sending xyz in for your child's lunch, and that is what they will be eating. End of.

Do not put the power into their hands, they don't currently have it, so don't give it to them.

MrsE_2

poet123 wrote: »

No, the point is to tell them quite firmly that those are guidelines, not laws(!) or rules, and that you will be sending xyz in for your child's lunch, and that is what they will be eating. End of.

Do not put the power into their hands, they don't currently have it, so don't give it to them.

I agree, let them know firmly that you have no need of their "dietary advice" for your child's nutrition & save it for someone who needs it;)

DVardysShadow

poet123 wrote: »

No, the point is to tell them quite firmly that those are guidelines, not laws(!) or rules, and that you will be sending xyz in for your child's lunch, and that is what they will be eating. End of.

Do not put the power into their hands, they don't currently have it, so don't give it to them.

I beg to differ. What you say above is what you would do. I think I captured babyshoes' point quite accurately.

seraphina

elvis86 wrote: »

I have to say I disagree with you there. Its pretty unrealistic to expect a school to have a varied vegetarian menu every day of the week. Perhaps on 1 or 2 days they could make clear that all the food on offer will be vegetarian so that vegetarian children can have a schol dinner that day if they wish? After all, non-vegetarian kids can stomach a meal without meat occasionally too!

At the end of the day vegetarianism is a choice, one can't expect it to be indulged to that degree, IMO. What the school should do is allow vegetarian children to bring a healthy packd lunch without fear of having it taken off them!:cool:

What utter tosh. Eating meat 3 meals a day, 7 days a week is not healthy, and I think it's a fab idea to have vegetarian options promoted to the mainstream, and not as a choice for weirdos. And I thought you'd be glad taht they're serving vegetarian food, which is cheaper!

I have been vegetarian all my life, and my state school in 1990s Belfast, where meat and two veg was (and still is!) the norm managed to provide freshly cooked, varied and fabulously tasting vegetarian meals every day.

I do worry about this healthy eating stuff in schools. Very few schools have the slightest clue about proper nutrition for children, who have vastly different nutritional needs than adults. They need calories - in fact nutritionists advise things like sponge and custard and white bread for children because they provide easily digestable and accessible calories for kids.

poet123

DVardysShadow wrote: »

I beg to differ. What you say above is what you would do. I think I captured babyshoes' point quite accurately.

I understood babyshoes point when she made it, and I disagree with it because by making yourself a PITA you are also causing yourself uneccesary inconvenience and having to indulge in repetition.

You are also by conferring validity on their POV by asking for their blessing/judgement on your childs lunchbox. Why bother to do this?

I re iterate, the healthy eating poliices are based on guidelines, nothing more, as a parent you are not obliged to adhere to those guidelines or justify your choices.

So, I am not only outlining what I would do but explaining why it is unecessary to do as Babyshoes advised, although if you have unlimited time and patience, you could take that course of action.

GobbledyGook

UPDATE -

Rather frustratingly it's turned into a huge saga. The TA is now on "non-child facing duties" as she categorically told me and the Head she did not say that eating an inappropriate lunch would make children fat. However before I'd even got to the school another parent had complained about what was said as her child was in ear shot. 4 other children have corroborated what my daughter said including 2 older children that I don't know (so no possibly way of me telling them what to say etc). The Head is obviously fuming about the TA basically telling a lie to both of us in her office. The TA is also point blank refusing to apologise to my daughter which the Head is unhappy with as she accepts my point about the fact that I either have to tell my child that the TA was right, which I won't do because she wasn't, or that the TA was wrong. I'll also have to explain somehow why the TA doesn't have to apologise when the children have to apologise when they get things wrong and if I have to tell my daughter it's because the TA is rude (which is what I say my daughter will be if she doesn't apologise when she needs to) then that will undermine the TA more than any apology.

I've also spoken to the Education Dept for clarification on the rules and been told that there are no rules - just guidelines. A friend of my MIL's who is a Head Teacher locally has confirmed that as she is having a nightmare at the moment with chicken crisps - she has a child with a massive nut allergy and chicken crisps set of a massive reaction (something to do with the cooking oil/process) and she sent out a letter basically banning them on this basis. Another parent is protesting about "her child's rights" so much and the HT has been told she can't ban them, only ask.

So the HT is going to completely review their policy as they should not be removing items from children. If they are to remove them then I've said that they must get the staff involved the proper training to know what they are doing otherwise it's massively unfair on the children. I've also put in a formal complaint about the "catering manager" (lol she was a cook when I was at school) because the menus are shocking. Every other school locally that has a website has a 3 or 4 week rotation menu online, with 1 meat and 1 non-meat option available everyday along with meat and non-meat sandwich options. The same item doesn't appear fortnightly never mind 3/4 times a week. Basically this woman is saving lots of money in her budget, but she's doing so at the expense of the children.

I've been promised that C's lunch will never be touched again, but I'm also pushing the PTA to ensure that NO child loses their lunch like that again because it's simply not the child's fault if the parent gets it wrong. I do understand them saying that for some of the children in their catchment area lunch is the main meal of the day and by being involved the school can ensure that the children have at least 1 decent meal a day, but they need to do it in a reasonable way - not one that upsets the children in front of everyone.

Thanks for all the suggestions and support. I'm not letting this with the TA go (she can't be allowed to say children are liars, then be proved to have lied herself without some sort of comeback imo) so will update if I hear anymore.

Thanks
Gemma x

Zazen999

Interesting; and glad to hear you aren't letting this one drop.

May I recommend that you tell the Head about the Food For Life Partnership [link above] who can assist on getting menus that offer good food to the children at school. Now's a good a time as any to show that everyone else is doing it, and that they are miles behind the times!

moggylover

poet123 wrote: »

Sorry, but as a parent there is no one more qualified than me to decide what my child eats for lunch, I would certainly not hand over that responsibility to anyone else, or allow them to vet, or veto, my choices for my child.

Which is all very well and fine if we assume that all parents are intelligent, educated and able to decide what is and what is not a balanced lunch box.

However, having seen the dross thrown into many of the lunch boxes that some of the children were taking into primary school whilst my sons were there I fear that it appears few parents know what constitutes a healthy lunch for their children: or alternatively they are too mean and/or too lazy to provide such a lunch.

Since there is much pressure upon schools to try to improve the health of the children placed in their care I am afraid that whilst I do understand your stance, I think it places them in a very unenviable position and that a far better situation would be achieved by parents being more willing to assist schools in managing the cases of "problem" lunchboxes, which can often result in "problem children" for the afternoon.

My own thoughts are that school lunches should return to the kind of plain and sensible food (leaving little room for fads and fancies I'm afraid, but healthy) that my own school days (60's and 70's) involved and NO packed lunches allowed AT ALL. They were not allowed then, you either ate a school lunch or went home for lunch if your parents felt they could do better for the price.

Perhaps then the kids would learn to eat food without the sad and irritating fussiness that seems the norm nowadays, as well as eating healthier meals.

Yes, I do realise that many schools would have to bring their catering up to scratch (indeed a return to proper school cooks employed by the LEA would probably go a long way to ensuring this and cutting out the added expense of lining the pockets of private catering companies) but in the long run it would be best for the children and the cheapest alternative. Very few children (even the least sporty amongst us) managed to get fat in those days: but then food was not the big (and rather stupid) issue that people insist on making it into today.

clairehi

GobbledyGook wrote: »

UPDATE -

Rather frustratingly it's turned into a huge saga. The TA is now on "non-child facing duties"

Good!
I realise you would rather this had never happened, but thank goodness the head teacher is apparently disciplining the TA, and the menu choices are being questioned.
One point though - you mention pushing the PTA re the schools packed lunch policy. A PTA (parent teacher association) is a fund raising group and does not have responsibililty for running the school. I think you actually mean the school governors here.

poet123

moggylover wrote: »

Which is all very well and fine if we assume that all parents are intelligent, educated and able to decide what is and what is not a balanced lunch box.

However, having seen the dross thrown into many of the lunch boxes that some of the children were taking into primary school whilst my sons were there I fear that it appears few parents know what constitutes a healthy lunch for their children: or alternatively they are too mean and/or too lazy to provide such a lunch.

Since there is much pressure upon schools to try to improve the health of the children placed in their care I am afraid that whilst I do understand your stance, I think it places them in a very unenviable position and that a far better situation would be achieved by parents being more willing to assist schools in managing the cases of "problem" lunchboxes, which can often result in "problem children" for the afternoon.

My own thoughts are that school lunches should return to the kind of plain and sensible food (leaving little room for fads and fancies I'm afraid, but healthy) that my own school days (60's and 70's) involved and NO packed lunches allowed AT ALL. They were not allowed then, you either ate a school lunch or went home for lunch if your parents felt they could do better for the price.

Perhaps then the kids would learn to eat food without the sad and irritating fussiness that seems the norm nowadays, as well as eating healthier meals.

Yes, I do realise that many schools would have to bring their catering up to scratch (indeed a return to proper school cooks employed by the LEA would probably go a long way to ensuring this and cutting out the added expense of lining the pockets of private catering companies) but in the long run it would be best for the children and the cheapest alternative. Very few children (even the least sporty amongst us) managed to get fat in those days: but then food was not the big (and rather stupid) issue that people insist on making it into today.

I think it is rather patronising to assume others cannot provide suitable lunches but "we" can.

There will be kids who take in unsuitable lunches, just as many kids watch unsuitable films/TV,are exposed to unsuitable or unpalatable facts of life, but where do you draw the line? to me, there are far more important issues around child welfare than a lunchbox containing some crisps. In fact, I think we are taking action is this area because we are impotent in so many other areas of infuence which affect the lives of kids.

The behaviour of kids in school is dependent on many factors, the least of those imo is often the contents of their lunchbox.

In my school in the 60's and 70's we were allowed packed lunches, so I assume yours must have been somewhat different.