Dravin Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Chicago school bans some lunches brought from home - Chicago TribuneIn an effort to combat children bringing less than healthy lunches from home I guess the nuclear option appeared the way to go. Honestly, if it was my kid's school (hypothetically speaking of course), I would not be happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john doe Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 It's part of becoming a nanny state. The state knows better than the parents what is best for their kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Well, if the mystery meat shown in the picture is supposedly healthier than what the kids were bringing, then I guess we can't argue with that, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted April 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Well, if the mystery meat shown in the picture is supposedly healthier than what the kids were bringing, then I guess we can't argue with that, right?After consulting with the other moderators about the poor quality of some poster's sarcasm we have decided that posters bringing their own sarcasm to the boards is now against policy. All sarcasm, of the utmost quality we assure you, will now be furnished by the establishment. The line starts over there. *points* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backroads Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Read this very thing the other day. It's ridiculous, not to mention expensive. It's generally cheaper to bring a home lunch, and that way you can control. Dern nanny state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 After consulting with the other moderators about the poor quality of some poster's sarcasm we have decided that posters bringing their own sarcasm to the boards is now against policy. All sarcasm, of the utmost quality we assure you, will now be furnished by the establishment. The line starts over there. *points*Should I be flattered or insulted? Are you threatened by my sarcasm, or just bored by it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrinceofLight2000 Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 LOL @ school lunches being anything resembling healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightynancy Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 I know of a private school here, and a public school my friend's kids attend in France, that are the same. It's a problem for my friend to work out, though; her daughter was recently diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. The school will have to accomodate her; it would be much easier for the little one to carry lunch from home. That said, I see what the kids eat/don't eat at my school - it's pretty much a wash whether it's school lunch or lunch from home. They serve a lovely "healthy choices" bar with fresh veggies, fruits, and other yummy, healthy foods. I think the kids who actually eat the veggies from the bar are the ones who also eat them at home. The other kids just take the crackers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backroads Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 When teaching first graders, it was next to impossible to get them to eat what was healthy in the school lunch. The healthy stuff usually equaled nasty, and the kids would eat just enough to get by and out to recess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted April 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Should I be flattered or insulted? Are you threatened by my sarcasm, or just bored by it?We'll go with flattered. Your high quality of sarcasm reminded me of all those poor posters who really could use better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEthePrimate Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 The state knows better than the parents what is best for their kids.The sad thing is, sometimes that's true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahone Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) Is Jamie Oliver behind this somewhere? He has been pushing healthy school meals in the UK for years now, and largely succeeded. The last I read about him though, he had tried to do the same thing in the USA, but he just got laughed away, with burgers thrown at him. Edited April 13, 2011 by Mahone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEthePrimate Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 Is Jamie Oliver behind this somewhere?He has been pushing healthy school meals in the UK for years now, and largely succeeded.The last I read about him though, he had tried to do the same thing in the USA, but he just got laughed away, with burgers thrown at him.Apparently Oliver was banned from filming in the LA school district! I wonder if one concern people have is that eating healthy might actually be more expensive. I could be wrong, but when I shop, it seems that things like fresh vegetables cost more than canned or frozen, and that the cheapest foods are often the least healthy. It's a bit frustrating when you want to eat better, but you're on a budget. I seem to remember somebody bringing this up on Oliver's show last year, that whatever school district he was working with was strapped for money, and they needed him to come up with a cost-effective plan. Maybe he did--I don't know, I didn't watch the whole season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted April 13, 2011 Report Share Posted April 13, 2011 After consulting with the other moderators about the poor quality of some poster's sarcasm we have decided that posters bringing their own sarcasm to the boards is now against policy. All sarcasm, of the utmost quality we assure you, will now be furnished by the establishment. The line starts over there. *points* No cutting in line Dravin. Now move it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierGuy Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 It's part of becoming a nanny state. The state knows better than the parents what is best for their kids. Nope. The parents are too busy working or dealing with their own problems and don't have the time or money or desire to pack a good lunch. So the schools stepping in and making sure the students lunches are healthy is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Nope. The parents are too busy working or dealing with their own problems and don't have the time or money or desire to pack a good lunch. So the schools stepping in and making sure the students lunches are healthy is a good thing.Some parents are too busy. Not all. It should not be a universal ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still_Small_Voice Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 I think it is a violation of parental rights to ban parents from feeding their children what they want at school. There are many reasons I would not want to live in Illinois and this certainly adds to the list reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 Nope. The parents are too busy working or dealing with their own problems and don't have the time or money or desire to pack a good lunch. So the schools stepping in and making sure the students lunches are healthy is a good thing.Take it back and apologize. You just insulted me.Sometimes I wish people like you would live one year in Russia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backroads Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 I don't think it's necessarily parents are all busy as much as it is some don't know any better or don't think it's a big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbanFool Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 My first thought was to be appalled, but I have to agree with some of the posters here and say it's the sad truth that some kids don't even take a remote resemblence of sustainable food for lunch. And look where it's at. My grandmother was the cook for the high school cafeteria here, and I have her recipes now. They don't look anything like the regurgitated mystery in that photo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backroads Posted April 14, 2011 Report Share Posted April 14, 2011 It is a sad truth they can't have those meals, but what about the parents that honestly can't afford to pay 2.50$ a day? Many parents can serve healthy lunches for much cheaper. Suddenly they are being told they have to spend money they can't afford. What if it's not bad enough they can't apply for free/reduced lunch? And how do these parents all feel being told they're losers who don't know how to provide for their kids? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhura Posted April 17, 2011 Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 I work at a school and what upsets me is that if someone were vegan there would be nothing they could get. Even in the salad bar, they have to get cheese or meat. What about vegetarians and vegans? What about those on gluten free/casiene (speling?) free diets? Or other allergies? If there is no control over what the kitchen utensils touch, then won't the number of allergic reactions go up? I support home lunches. And I wouldn't be surprised if, even though the school lunches look like they have all the food groups, they also have a lot of sodium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted April 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 (edited) I work at a school and what upsets me is that if someone were vegan there would be nothing they could get. Even in the salad bar, they have to get cheese or meat. What about vegetarians and vegans? What about those on gluten free/casiene (speling?) free diets? Or other allergies? If there is no control over what the kitchen utensils touch, then won't the number of allergic reactions go up? I support home lunches. And I wouldn't be surprised if, even though the school lunches look like they have all the food groups, they also have a lot of sodium.The article mentions that exceptions for allergies are taken into account, but I think the point about food preferences* is entirely valid.*Versus medical necessity, there are things people don't want their kids to eat that won't give them hives. Religious prohibitions is a prime example, will the entire kitchen be kosher to account for a Jewish kid in the school? Or say will everything be organic? And of course your vegan/vegetarian example. Edited April 17, 2011 by Dravin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elphaba Posted April 17, 2011 Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 (edited) And how do these parents all feel being told they're losers who don't know how to provide for their kids?I think this school has clearly overstepped its bounds; however, the fact is, some of the parents don't know how to provide proper food for their kids. The ever-growing obesity and diabetes problems among American children today are a result of that.Additionally, poor nourishment negatively affects the cognitive abilities of school-age children, and I suspect this was a consideration in the school's decision.Again, I think the school was wrong to do so, but if the factors listed above were instrumental in its choice, I can see why it did.Elphaba Edited April 17, 2011 by Elphaba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravin Posted April 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 I think this school has clearly overstepped its bounds; however, the fact is, some of the parents don't know how to provide proper food for their kids. The ever-growing obesity and diabetes problems among American children today are a direct result of that.Additionally, poor nourishment negatively affects the cognitive abilities of school-age children, and I suspect this was a consideration in the school's decision.Again, I think the school was wrong to do so, but if the factors listed above were instrumental in its choice, I can see why it did.ElphabaI think it's an example of noble intentions and lousy execution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.