How to stop the lunchbox police!

moomoomama27

peachyprice wrote: »

And do you what conclusion I came to quite some time ago? Childhood is just too short to make a battle out of every mealtime.

My children are happy and healthy, I refuse to change that just because some people think they know my children better than me.

I agree! Although you know we'll have the stats thrown in our faces time and time again!

The way I also look at it is that life should be about moderation. I think when people become zealots with anything in life, that's truly when the problems begin!

Parenting makes you feel guilty enough at times, without people adding fuel to the fire over situations, really they know nothing about!

moomoomama27

Nicki wrote: »

I agree with this. Nowhere have I said I don't and if you read my first post I said that my own kids get sweets twice a week.

My posts are all directed at the posters who have said they put cakes, chocolate and crisps in their children's packed lunches every day of the week because their children are fussy eaters and they want to make sure they eat sufficient quantity of food. And my point is that if they will eat some healthy food, such as a sandwich, then there is no need to bulk things out with the junk, because this makes it less likely that they will in fact eat the whole sandwich which they otherwise would, because they have the option to fill themselves up with the treat.

My supplementary point was that if the child won't eat a sandwich, then surely there are things which carry some nutritional benefit, even if not ideal, which the child will eat which can be offered instead of chocolate, be that a slice of cold pizza or quiche, a sausage roll, a peanut butter sandwich, etc, rather than chocolate and crisps which have virtually none at all.

But I do that. I put a packet of crisps or a home made cake in every day, well most days. Everything else they get is healthy! I deem this to be a healthy balanced diet. They eat everything in their lunchbox, not just the cake/crisps. They lead very active lifestyles. The walk to school and back every day is well over half and hour, add that to the clubs and walking as I don't drive. I don't think obesity is a problem with our lifestyle, and I'm educated enough to be assured that I am NOT a bad parent, despite what people may think on here, where I've had to defend the use of crisps or cake, like I'm some child abuser! They wouldn't be satisfied with sandwhiches and fruit alone, their appetites are enormous, thankfully down to making sure they take regular exercise (I would be failing them being a PT) their waistlines are not!

We don't have pudding in the evening like those served at school, we have fruit salads or yoghurt and fruits for afters. So I don't see a problem with a homemade cake daily or every other day!

sassyblue

Sad to see this thread has descended into 'I'm a better parent than you'.

Peachyprice is right: There's NO one size fits all when it comes to children.

It's obvious as loving parents WE ALL do what we KNOW is best - and what works - for OUR children.

I'm sure we all agree, it's the parents who DON'T have the knowledge about nutrition we're talking about educating....

I think this is an excellent thread but as we can see from differing views - there's a multitude to learn about nutrition. This is where l agree with the Governments '5 a day' campaign as a good starting point, it's simple! If those parents who don't know much about nutrition could at least get some, if not more fruit and veg into their childs diet that's a good thing.

Group hugs now! :grouphug::kisses:

onlyroz

I do think, to a certain extent, that food fads are a Western luxury. If all you have to eat is rice and beans then you eat it or starve.

beth464

Nicki wrote: »

Am I the only person who thinks it is no wonder a child is a fussy eater if they are always offered a junky treat in place of food, rather than let them go hungry. If I was offered the choice as a child between eating a chocolate roll and packet of crisps rather than a sandwich, I know which one I'd have chosen.

Are there really no healthy foods at all the picky eater will eat? Even if they will only eat one type of sandwich what is wrong with sending them to school with 2 sandwiches and a piece of fruit, so that if they are hungry and won't eat the healthy fruit, they can fill up on more of the sandwich. That will be better for their blood sugar levels, concentration, teeth and overall health than a sandwich and a chocolate bar or bag of crisps surely?

I am not one of those parents who bans sweets completely, but I do think it is absurd to give them every day of the week in a lunchbox, and maybe more than once a day if they get treats after school too, or pocket money spent on crisps. My older kids are allowed sweets twice a week, and the younger one much less often than that.

If a child is SO picky that they wont eat any healthy food, then that is a result of poor parenting and the child not being given sufficient exposure to a wide range of choices. I have a child with autism who is fussy about flavours and textures and won't eat lots of foods, but even she has never been allowed to subsist on crisps and sweets and eats fairly healthily albeit within a narrower range than I would ideally like.

I was a fussy eater in that I didn't (and still don't really) enjoy sandwiches or cold lunches. I would happily eat fruit and my mum knew that when it came to the evening at home, I'd be getting a properly balanced hot meal with plenty of veg. Of course I wouldn't have been allowed to exist on sweets and cake, but my mum took the view that rather than have me starve all day and not eat anything, it was better to get some calories in me and then make sure I ate properly at home. Even if, as some posters have suggested, I literally had a sandwich and nothing else in my lunchbox, I would have happily gone all day without eating rather than eat the sandwich. She would never dream of letting me go to school with a can of coke though.
My point was more about how kids find things that are "bad" to be more attractive and I think making such a huge deal out of what they can and can't eat is a slippery slope. A small chocolate biscuit as part of a packed lunch is not going to make them obese but if it has been restricted all their lives, as soon as they can make their own decisions they will overindulge just because they can.
School staff need to use their common sense - if a mother sends in a child with a slightly less than healthy lunchbox (the malt loaf for example) but is otherwise a good mother and the child is not overweight or having problems with concentration, they should be left alone.

embob74

My youngest DD has been told about what is acceptable in her lunch box which really irritates me. She eats well and will happily eat fruit and salad but I don't think that means I should exclude a treat from her lunch box.
Having previously worked as a dinner lady I don't feel the lunch menu's were as healthy as I would choose to cook at home. Cake mixes were used and pudding was often the little frozen tubs of ice cream which contained mostly artificial products rather than anything natural.
We had to ensure every child had some salad and/ or veg on their plate only to watch them throw it in the bin - I never saw the lunch monitors stop this but it is ok to hassle children who brought in their own lunch.

euronorris

meritaten wrote: »

I take the point of the two posts above - BUT - I had an incredibly faddy fussy child and two children who would literally eat anything which was put in front of them - so dont say MY childs faddyness was BAD parenting - you obviously know nothing about it! I found that inference insulting!

My siblings would all eat pretty much anything put in front of them too, but that is only because they didn't take issue with the texture of foods.

I did, and my Mum caved. If she'd persevered, she'd have found that I would get over the texture issue pretty quickly.

I have to add, that I have had really terrible problems with my teeth too. I think it is largely due to poor diet in the past, as they are finally beginning to improve. It certainly wasn't due to dental hygeine as I've always brushed my teeth thoroughly, day and night. Yet, I have very few teeth without fillings. I've had 3 root canals, and a crown, and I'm only 29.

Sugar does so much more damage than people realise (myself included).

meritaten

I dont want this thread to degenerate into a discussion on 'good' or 'bad' parenting decided by lunchbox!
I went off on a rant - and if I annoyed anyone I am sorry. Of course people didnt realise what my circumstances were - I dont really expect them to. This applies as well to those parents who even in these days are decried because the child is sent into school with an inadequate lunch! Perhaps their child is underwieght and has doctors orders to 'up the calories - with anything' - perhaps the parent is unaware of what constitutes a 'healthy diet' but, I am fairly sure that there is, and perhaps always will be, some parents who are downright lazy and uncaring!
From my own experience MSE parents definately are NOT the last!
I think we have established now that some of us HAVE sent the kids with 'awful' lunchboxes, for whatever reason!
Can we move on now?????????????????

most of the suggestions about changine attitudes about lunchboxes seem to be about educating the parents and the Schools/Heads/Dinner staff!
now, how would we go about this?

VikkiiKawaii

Teerah wrote: »

a lot of children will drink juice over water, let it go on long enough and they will refuse water altogether.

Have to agree on that one. My sister and brother both refuse to drink water, and currently the main thing my brother drinks is orange juice and lemonade, while my sister drinks (admittedly slightly better, sparkling lemon and lime water). Saying that, when I was younger I drank a lot of Ribena and fizzy drinks and now I mainly drink milk/water. So it does depend on the person.