Packed lunch getting nicked

Doozergirl

jetta_wales wrote: »

Maybe you should re read the OP and make an attempt to stay somewhere near the actual questions asked.

I don't feed my kids crisps and chocolate in their lunch boxes but I also don't feel the need to preach about it and shove my advice down people's throats over and over.

Your point has been made, several times. Move on

I've answered the questions, about the emailing, said it's appropriate to leave it to the teachers and also suggested how it would stop in the meantime. As long as people are discussing it and putting forward arguments, I'm discussing it reasonably. I'm not preaching, I'm responding to knee-jerk comments about carrot munching and stripping supermarket shelves. People need to think a little bit harder about it than twisting my words to make it sound like I only feed my kids fruit and vegetables.

If people want to reply to what I've said, I'm equally entitled to reply - last time I checked, anyway. You don't want to talk about it, Move On :kisses3:

sock-knitter

maybe if crisps, chocolate and sweets werent in the lunch box, there would be no temptation for the thieves.
why wasnt there a sandwhich for the boys lunch?
deffo go in and speak to school, the lunches could be placed in a storecupboard maybe, also cooler that left in the classroom with the sun shining in
back when my sons were small, they are 16 now, sweets or chocolate was sometimes given on way home, as a treat, not in the middle of the day, when they needed to concentrate on their school work

pimento

Let your child have school dinners.

cheepskate_2

Thanks for the replys guys.

I cant really believe that people , i'm assuming that have children themselves are advocating that to stop a thief we have to stop putting a choc bar in the lunch box- thus avoid temptation.....crazy.

There are obviously issues for the child , altho we do not know who is doing it, my son believes it is xxx. Here lies the other big debate if it is.
The child he believes it is, does not really get chocolate etc in their lunch. If it is done because they do not get much access to them, then it really opens up a can of worms for their parents in regards to what they are teaching him

What would i rather have, a child who has a bar of chocolate , once too often or a thieving little toerag, that can never be trusted. Easy choice really.

As for the debate about health eating. This was never a topic about healthy eating, if that is what you want then start up a new thread, i am sure you will get a better discussion about it on a thread devoted to it.

Thanks to all reply's, school has been informed today, by letter as could not get in myself and we will see what is to be done

euronorris

Doozergirl wrote: »

Of course they are allowed treats.

Instead of asking pointless rhetorical questions about stripping supermarket shelves, perhaps people need to really think about what their child is eating in a day. If that is the only treat in a day, then okay but why does it have to be served at lunchtime when the child needs brain food during the day?

If we look at ourselves properly and look at our own waistlines, we might have to admit that perhaps we aren't setting the right example to our kids and that our own ideas of 'a little bit of everything does you good' are a bit too optimistic.

My kids do not eat healthy food all the time, but they like the taste of healthy food because they have been taught to. The other children in their classes don't have rubbish in their lunchboxes either, so collectively as parents, it's easy and good for our kids to eat healthily in the day. It makes sense. There is nothing wrong with it, it's not about policing, it's actually more about team work.

They don't need it in the lunchbox, why argue about putting it there? It isn't 'good' for them even in moderation. In moderation it isn't 'bad'.

And I would actually suggest that if there was less junk available in the supermarkets, or at least less choice, then the UK obesity rate would probably drop.

I only say this because there is a much smaller selection of junk food available in supermarkets here, and I dropped a stone within the first year of moving here without trying to diet.

It also helps that there is only one vending machine at work, on the ground floor, whereas in the UK office there is at least 1 (sometimes several) on each floor (and one of them was literally right behind my desk.

When the temptation is removed, it is MUCH easier for us to make healthy choices.

Back to the main topic, I think that you should, as others have suggested, talk to the school about it and let them deal with it. The child could be genuinely hungry, or could just be greedy (or any other reason), but you don't know the reasons yet. So leave it to them to investigate, and deal with.

I am curious though. Why where was there no sandwich in the lunchbox anyway? Even if the food hadn't been stolen, surely your child would still have been hungry anyway with only a fruit bag, crisps and a chocolate bar for lunch? I know my neices and nephew would. Had you perhaps run out of bread or something, and so sent them in with some money to buy something additional? (just curious)

euronorris

cheepskate wrote: »

What would i rather have, a child who has a bar of chocolate , once too often or a thieving little toerag, that can never be trusted. Easy choice really.

You can have a child that does neither or those things. I'm not sure why you think it is an either/or situation. They just need to be educated and disciplined appropriately on both subjects (as with anything else you teach them).

Although, if the child in question is stealing the treats because he never has any, it could suggest that his parents NEVER allow any treats and maybe they should relax this a little after dealing with the theft issue.

delain

cheepskate wrote: »

There are obviously issues for the child , altho we do not know who is doing it, my son believes it is xxx. Here lies the other big debate if it is.
The child he believes it is, does not really get chocolate etc in their lunch. If it is done because they do not get much access to them, then it really opens up a can of worms for their parents in regards to what they are teaching him

What would i rather have, a child who has a bar of chocolate , once too often or a thieving little toerag, that can never be trusted. Easy choice really.

His parents are trying to teach him not to eat crap all day - the fact that he steals it I'm sure will be dealt with by them when they find out!

Griizelda

I know you've already approached the school again, but you could try putting your son's food inside a plastic container inside his lunchbox. This would make it very much harder for an opportunist thief to take anything.

(

Gigglepig

Although this isn't a post about healthy eating, if you mention that the kid is being fed chocolate/crisps on a daily basis there will always be people who pick up on it and react.

If I hear about a kid who eats chocolates/crisps/junk/sweets every day I would feel sorry for them, every time, for being fed cr*p every day.

Molly41

cheepskate wrote: »

What would i rather have, a child who has a bar of chocolate , once too often or a thieving little toerag, that can never be trusted. Easy choice really.

You know it happens to us all as parents - our kids do something that they shouldn't. Even yours will one day !!! A bit of compassion and understanding will go a long way in helping to sort this situation.