School bans ALL processed foods in packed lunches

Ok, I'm guessing since this is a charter school that parents who send their kids there do it at their own discretion... but still. This is INSANE.

I mean, I'm a total food nazi when it comes to what my boys can/can't eat. They are super rarely allowed to have anything remotely processed. BUT... that's my choice. Just like it's my friend's choice to send her son with pop tarts every day. I certainly don't think it's the school's business at all what a parent packs for thier child. Especially since the very nature of a packed lunch limits the choices available to parents.

Not to mention that I make several varieties of cookies/cakes/desserts that are made with zero sugar (I use honey, maple syrup, or fruit to sweeten) and zero white flour. So what? Do I have to send the recipe to prove that I didn't use sugar before they'll let my child eat it? How crazy....

http://toddstarnes.com/?p=483

 

This is the point that people need to wake up and start pulling their kids out of school. If the school wants to be so nazi like with packed lunches, then maybe they should just start providing lunch for all the kids and not allow packed lunches. I mean come on! Seriously? Do they have to control every aspect of everyones lives?

And yes, you probably would have to send the recipe to prove what is in it. But I think that would not be enough, you would probably have to make it with them watching you to see exactly what went in it.

I could send my kids with a peanut butter and honey sandwich on whole wheat but, how are they going to tell if the PB has sugar in it? Are they going to taste each sandwich?

This really bothers me. It's not so much about getting kids to eat right, it's about control.

Edit: I just read the article to my dh and he says its not a bad idea. I agree that getting kids to eat right is a good idea...I just don't agree with the way they are doing it.

 

Charter school... that's like a private school, right?

I think the school can set whatever rules they please, short of anything outright illegal (ie, discriminating on the basis of race).

And I bet having the kids eat at least one sugar-free meal a day makes them easier to handle in the classroom. Pop Tarts at lunch may be a parent's prerogative - but it's the teacher who has to deal with the child first bouncing off the ceiling and then falling asleep at his desk.

This is a rule that's good for the kids, and makes life easier for the teachers. Parents can still feed them any junk they like for breakfast and dinner. I don't see any downside.

Unprocessed food doesn't have to be expensive - a sweet red pepper is cheaper than a candy bar and can be eaten raw. A bag of carrots breaks down to about 15 cents a carrot - another snack that's easy and good. I think people just don't realize how cheap some fresh veggies can be. Or how fast you can get at chopping up a pile of them in the morning.

Or realize how quickly your children will adapt and discover at least one fresh food they're willing to eat! Even my very picky daughter will eat apples and cucumbers.

 

NO... That's the problem.

A charter school is a PUBLIC SCHOOL, funded by taxpayers, etc. It's just experimental in one way or another compared to "normal" public schools.

1. Not true at all. Read The Omnivour's Dilema. The truth is that far more food (quantity) can be purcashed for each dollar spent if spent in the 'middle of the store.' Meaning the aisles where processed foods are located, as opposed to the edges of the store where produce, dairy, and meats are located.

2. Did you notice that NO lunch meat is allowed? So really, for a cold lunch, peanut butter or other nut butter is the only real option for proteins on a sandwich. And if your child is allergic to nuts? Yeah, that's a problem.

3. In truth, the price is not the point. The point is that it is NOT the school's place to tell parents what they can or can't send in their child's lunch. PERIOD. Aside from the fact that countless studies have determined that, barring allergies, sugar or other processed ingredients have no affect on a child's behavior. They call it the "Birthday Party effect." We perceive that children are affected by a piece of cake, when in reality, it's all the other stuff going on at the party that makes the child ramp up.

And it's still a matter of parental rights. Right or wrong, parents have the right to nourish their children any way they see fit (notice I said nourish.. which obviously excludes withholding food). It is not the school's business. ESPECIALLY not a public school.

Trust me when I say that you will rarely find a parent who is as strict about what they let their kids eat as I am. I am well aware of the health benefits and how there is no downside to eating healthy. But, once again, that's not the point.

 

I would be outraged if the school sent a note home to me saying I had to have no processed foods in their lunches! I have to say exactly what's been said up there:

1. What about proteins in a nut allergic child?
2. How would the school know what exactly is in someone's homemade unprocessed cake/cookie, or PB sandwich??

Are they goinng to create a food police?? For this being a public school of sorts, I think they are over stepping thier bounds.

 

I'm wondering if we have all the facts.

On the surface, I agree that it's a control issue. The school has WAY overstepped their bounds!

But from a special ed view, it MAY have some merit. I've known plenty of kids who freak out when given too much sugar or processed food. Parents pack what is appropriate for their child, only to have that kid trade with their friend or something. So IF this charter school is specifically geared toward those students and IF the parents sign up for it KNOWING that this is the rule, it can be an advantage. I know of parents that would jump at it. While a Charter School is considered public with tax dollars, you still have to sign up for it, and (I think) you can be kicked out if you don't abide by the rules.

 

I'm just thinking of the various school rules I've seen...

There's an alternative school here that requires parents volunteer at least twice a month in their child's classroom - which means taking a day off work! If you can't, then you don't send your kid to that school.

When I was a teenaged girl in a private school, they insisted we wear regulation underwear (thick cotton shorts, basically). In order to make sure we were in compliance they would line us up facing the wall and make us all flip the back of our skirts up. Anyone whose underwear didn't pass inspection would be sent home.

Schools in general frequently infringe children's freedoms. In high schools here they can search children's lockers and bags without a warrant. There was just a story in this same forum about American schools where teenagers can be PADDLED.

Personally I'd be a lot more outraged about that, than about rules on what I put in the lunchbox. Especially since there's already rules - our schools ban all nuts.

 

I am coming at the from a different standpoint. I suffer from migraines, and one of the triggers is food - I need a complete diet, and that includes sugars! I can get them from fruit usually, but in the blood sugar is really low, my doctor told me to eat chocolate. When I was pregnant they recommended reeses' bars (or chocolate covered peanut butter granola bars) to get the protien and sugar I needed. My dilemma -- my son has the exact same problem! What if he as a migraine attack and NEEDS some quick sugar to get his brain back on track? What school is going to tell me my son needs to suffer a migraine because no sugar is allowed at school? It all comes down to parent's rights, and that is a right we are quickly losing in the country!!!

 

I understand where you're coming from. I know as a teacher I had a student with diabetes. We kept a roll of lifesavers in the desk in case of low blood sugar. And that can be a life-and-death situation.

But I don't see ONE school doing this for a specific group of students whose parents HAVE CHOSEN to put them there knowing full well what the rules are as a bad thing. Now, if this was a district-wide rule, I'd be having fits.

BTW, Meg, I think one of the problems with schools today is that corporal punishment has been removed from them. My husband is a high school teacher, and there is total lack of discipline. While I don't think kids should be whacked for every little thing, I believe it should be an option when necessary.

 

I agree with this, and I would hope that if the school has a child with diabetes that they would be flexible enough to keep some orange juice or a roll of lifesavers on hand, in the teacher's desk.

I would also hope that the school announced this policy last year with enough time for parents to find another placement for their children, if they object strongly to the rule. If they are clear and upfront about the rules, and you choose to send your child, then you're choosing to abide by them.

I don't think smacking/paddling teenagers teaches them anything. They're practically adults and we need to start treating them as such - with appropriate consequences. And we certainly don't paddle misbehaving employees in the office.

My other concern around paddling has to do with a teenager's hormones - almost anything will turn a teenager on, and I can't imagine the confusion a teen would feel if he happened to get excited during a paddling session in the principal's office. So I really don't think adults (other than doctors) should be doing *anything* to a teenager's bottom - even if it's supposed to be painful.

I think if there's any corporal punishment going on it should be the sole prerogative of the parents - and administered by them.

 

You know, I've been on this board for YEARS, and I STILL don't know how to interrupt quotes, lol!!!

That's pretty much how I feel about this school. If it's not FORCED on anyone, it can be a benefical thing. As far as the paddling, I think it's one of those areas where we'll simply have to disagree !

 

It's easy... see the (QUOTE=name) before and the (/QUOTE) after the previous quote, when you hit reply? Just put those around whatever you want to quote. Me, I copy and paste the (QUOTE=name) part.

HTML is your friend!

My view on paddling is probably influenced by the last place I saw it - an adult trade show! I was doing research for a book (got some great interview quotes!) and I happened to wander by when they were demonstrating the "Art of Paddling" on a volunteer who was fastened to a bed with velcro straps.

While it was undeniably hilarious to see the lad's giggling girlfriend going to town on his rear with a ping pong paddle, I'd still really prefer my kids to not know anything about these sorts of grownup games. And I don't think it has any place in school.

So, yes! I'll agree to disagree.

 

OK! I think I got this! (I had Rachael stand over my shoulder to see if it made sense, and she thinks this is right....)

Now, THAT sounds totally inappropriate!!! I won't argue that it has any place in a school! So what kind of a trade show was this?


HEY!!! IT WORKED!!! THANKS!!!

 

It's called "Sexapalooza". Victoria Dunn over at "Handmade By Mother" has a good (and totally work-and-kid-safe!) post explaining it:

Sexapalooza is Coming to Your Town!

As well as a knitting pattern for vintage seventies hot pants, which are hilarious.

You're welcome! :love:

 

Huh. I totally don't equate that with corporal punishment.

(As far as knitted "hot pants", if I knew how to knit well enough, I'd love to make me a pair as a joke...never mind the amount of yarn I'd have to buy to get them to fit my much-too-large middle would be mind-boggling!!!)

 

I just know that when I was spanked as a 12yo, it did cross my mind that it was totally inappropriate to have my bare behind hanging out in front of an adult - any adult, even my mother. It felt like a violation.

Besides, I don't want any daughter of mind EVER thinking her husband or boyfriend has a right to punish her (the way her parents and teachers did). I think as adults we set the patterns for how our children will react to authority figures in later life. Whether it's with respect, or defiance, or resentment, or submission.

P.S. I love the patterns on Handmade By Mother! It's all vintage stuff, and really funny.

 

Charter schools are created as alternatives to standard public eduation. Usually, there is a particular philosphy motivating its creation. It seems that this school was created with the idea that educational success is directly linked to nutritional factors. This isn't just one of the rules; it's what the schools all about. Here's the founder's page explaining why she started it.

http://www.childrenssuccess.org/2-Dr-Aiken.htm

 

EXACTLY!!! I read the link; thanks! It seems to be a school SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED for children with behavior problems. The diet is an integral part of the child's behavioral program. It is NOT a school designed for the average kid off the street, and shouldn't be evaluated as such.

 

I would disagree with it if it was a school for your average child. However having worked in a daycare that was known for accepting "troubled" children I know first hand that some children do react poorly to certain diet items. When we gave the children popsicles we had to be very careful with one of the children to not give him anything with red coloring otherwise he was unmanageable and if we asked him not to do something he's bite himself to the point of bleeding. For him almost all of his behavioral issues were directly related to food and sleep. I can certainly understand the school limiting those foods and as has already been stated it's a charter school so the parents don't have to send their child there if they disagree with the rules.