Mother shamed for sending her child to school with oreos
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
I had a friend who imposed this on her child growing up. It doesn't always work. He's now 24 years old and obese. Why? Because when he became an adult and had free reign, he took advantage of it. Obviously enjoying eating tons of food stuffs he missed out on as a kid. There's NOTHING wrong with teaching daily moderation.lisafrancis888 wrote: »Whilst no one should shame a parent we should as a society start to see the growing problem of children's health.
For me an Oreo or cake or chocolate bar should be a treat for a child not an everyday normal part of lunch.
If all schools agreed to the same there should be no issues. Children will do what the grown ups tell them to. If the teacher says no sweet things and all the parents abide by it children will eat the sandwich or whatever they are given.
I actually wish only water was drunk at school not fruit juices.
We have to get tougher for the sake of our children.
As a parent we should not run out of a piece of fruit or a carrot.
The parents who put Oreos etc into their children's lunch packs are making it hard for every other parent to try and make healthy lunches as children will always complain they haven't got it. That's why I wish schools would ban sugary foods completely.
My DD's school has ice cream day after school on Wednesday's. Money made is used to help schools. Kids go crazy because for some of them, this may be their only treat for the week. My DD doesn't care. She gets her daily dose of "controlled" fun stuff a day, so ice cream day isn't a big deal to her.
If it's a private school, which it sounds like, then fine impose whatever restrictions they deem allowable. But kids aren't dumb. Give them an opportunity to break the "rules" and they will take as much advantage of it as they can. So where they may be restricted to eat only a certain way ALL the time, they will eventually break off and make their own decisions to satisfy their denied wants.
It not only happens with food, but money, dating, sex, game time, computer time, etc. can get abused when restrictions seem too tight.
Teaching moderation is okay. In fact most lean people in good shape will usually tell you that don't totally restrict to just healthy options. Most people who are always insisting on healthy options are usually the ones who seem to have weight and health issues.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
^^THIS. Describes my childhood perfectly.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
Yeah, because changing the scenario from a 5 year old to an adult is totally not moving the goalposts.mamapeach910 wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
What would make your boss right?YayFoodYayFood wrote: »carlaunderconstruction wrote: »Wow, I'm so amazed with how many people are defending processed sugar in kids lunches. I work in a private school in China, where the students are fed food prepared by the school. There is no added sugar! When we have special events where the students get sugar there is a drastic change in behaviour. Plus a lot of students almost never have sugar, so they have been physically sick (throwing up) after having something like a small piece of birthday cake, or two small pieces of chocolate. Of course I understand the need to teach kids self regulation, and moderation, but honestly I don't want to teach 25, 5 year old's that ate oreos as part of their lunch. Save the oreos for after school!
And I'm amazed how many people have made the choice to over consume food in their lives and not want to tell everyone else the stuff they eat is junk. Would you like it if you were eating something at lunch that your boss didn't think was the right choice and they took it from you and threw it away?
If my boss is right, then yeah.
You're okay with someone taking something you paid for and throwing it away?
Would you be okay with someone not agreeing with an SUV you might drive and taking it and dropping it off at the junk yard because they don't feel it's good for the environment?
Would you be okay with someone taking the Nkke running sneakers of your feet because they don't agree with their business practices?
Would you be okay with someone taking your diamond ring or earing from you because they might be from Sierra Leon?
Well, in nutrition, there is no doubt in my mind what is right and wrong based on literature and patterns over very long lengths of time. So because of the certainty, I'd be pretty sure if my boss's actions regarding food were right or wrong.
Knowing that, if my boss did what's right and took those oreos out of my hands, I'll be honest and say, thanks you're the man. This is the kind of company I want to work for. One that looks out for my best interests. One that doesn't bury their heads in the sand. One that is brutally forthcoming in it's intentions. That's not only a boss, but something I would expect from a true friend.
With regards to the rest of your examples, I don't have certainty on my side. I don't know enough about cars/SUVs to know if one is an outlier to justify his actions. Same with running shoe manufacturing. And even diamonds that claim to be "clean"... they are hard to trace. Many middle men in that business from my N=1 experience. So I wouldn't be so sure about that either.
So you want to be baby sat? You want someone to take those dastardly oreos away from you so someone else can decide what your best interests are. In moderation, for a child a treat is a treat. If you teach your child a treat is a treat and not an all consuming thing then they grow up to learn what moderation is. They grow up learning what a treat is. No need to bury your head in the sand, we should be educating our children instead of depriving them and vilifying foods.
We have different views on parenting I guess.
Moving goalposts. You were asked about your boss taking something away from you and you said you'd welcome it.
I don't know about you, but I didn't spend all this time becoming an adult just for other people to treat me like a child.
It's ok, we are actually all guilty of moving the goalposts. All the time. But this is status quo. If you point me to an MFP forum thread where goalposts aren't moved or when the same crew that moved the goalposts then blames you for moving the goalposts then it would be kinda weird.
Actually, I think my overall sentiment got lost in trying to answer all these specific examples which got us sidetracked. It all of a sudden became about control and baby sitting and blood diamonds and SUVs. And when it's a free for all, somebody is bound to get disturbed or pissed off. Smart tactic actually.
Lost in all of this stuff... was my overall sentiment. I consider Oreos, and all other junk food to be garbage that I would never eat and would hope my kids don't eat. If this happened to my kid (it wouldn't b/c I would never willfully give them oreos or any junk for that matter), but let's say, somebody else gave them oreos, and the teacher took them away, I would call that teacher and say thank you. And ask them to do it again next time. And the next.
Of course I am in the vast minority here in that most people think oreos are food that can fit into a balanced diet as a treat. That. Is. Fine. I'm not trying to tell you or your kids what to eat, and that wouldn't work anyway. "Lots of people" eat this stuff. But I don't consider anyone in my household to be "lots of people". They get taken care of first, second and third. Like any family. It's not like I don't care about other kids, it's just that I keep a boundary where their family culture is their own business.
So, if I was the teacher I wouldn't have plucked the oreo from the kids hand, because it is a social faux pas. But I see that as a failing on my part. I really do wish I was the kind of person that enforced what is right and took the blame as the @#$hole to the unappreciated benefit of other kids. I admire that.
But it's not really about oreos either. Its about whether the teacher/school/government has the right to override the patent's choices of food for their kids. You view oreos as unhealthy and not good for your kids, fine no problem.
What happens when the school disapproves of something you are fine with your kids having? Maybe homemade, low sugar black bean brownies or homemade organic fruit leather whatever you consider a healthy treat. Do they have the right to take it away, even though you dream it healthy and are OK with your kids eating it? Do they have the right to determine what is healthy for your child, no matter your opinion on the issue?
Oh no. In that case I'd just take them out of the school. That teacher would then be an idiot. See, to me, it is all about the Oreos.
Are you being intentionally obtuse? So in your world there is no room for differing opinions. Those who agree with you are RIGHT and should be allowed to impose their way of doing things on others and those who disagree are idiots. Or at least, you can impose your way on our children and save them from their parents' wrong thinking.0 -
Absolutely parents should teach their children about food including what is a treat vs what is not and about limiting intake of stuff you don't need, but like. We never frequent McDonalds so my kids naturally didn't either, but we didn't stop them from attending other kid's parties at McD's. Except for Christmas / special occasions we never have soda in our home, but again we never stopped them from having it when visiting others. They learned through example and teaching that some things are treats, and some things are foods.
Now that both are teenagers earning some money we do not find them spending their time and money at the golden arches drinking pop.
Teaching children the meaning of "treat" - something out of the ordinary that gives pleasure - is very important. Kids get this and will internalize it well if parents are consistent, but if you blur the lines, who can blame them for mistaking "treat" for "food".
As an example if someone were to give two cookies to a child (or an adult!) every day that means the cookies are no longer a treat but part of that child's (or adult's) regular diet. IMO that's not a lesson anyone should be teaching a child.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
Yeah, because changing the scenario from a 5 year old to an adult is totally not moving the goalposts.mamapeach910 wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
What would make your boss right?YayFoodYayFood wrote: »carlaunderconstruction wrote: »Wow, I'm so amazed with how many people are defending processed sugar in kids lunches. I work in a private school in China, where the students are fed food prepared by the school. There is no added sugar! When we have special events where the students get sugar there is a drastic change in behaviour. Plus a lot of students almost never have sugar, so they have been physically sick (throwing up) after having something like a small piece of birthday cake, or two small pieces of chocolate. Of course I understand the need to teach kids self regulation, and moderation, but honestly I don't want to teach 25, 5 year old's that ate oreos as part of their lunch. Save the oreos for after school!
And I'm amazed how many people have made the choice to over consume food in their lives and not want to tell everyone else the stuff they eat is junk. Would you like it if you were eating something at lunch that your boss didn't think was the right choice and they took it from you and threw it away?
If my boss is right, then yeah.
You're okay with someone taking something you paid for and throwing it away?
Would you be okay with someone not agreeing with an SUV you might drive and taking it and dropping it off at the junk yard because they don't feel it's good for the environment?
Would you be okay with someone taking the Nkke running sneakers of your feet because they don't agree with their business practices?
Would you be okay with someone taking your diamond ring or earing from you because they might be from Sierra Leon?
Well, in nutrition, there is no doubt in my mind what is right and wrong based on literature and patterns over very long lengths of time. So because of the certainty, I'd be pretty sure if my boss's actions regarding food were right or wrong.
Knowing that, if my boss did what's right and took those oreos out of my hands, I'll be honest and say, thanks you're the man. This is the kind of company I want to work for. One that looks out for my best interests. One that doesn't bury their heads in the sand. One that is brutally forthcoming in it's intentions. That's not only a boss, but something I would expect from a true friend.
With regards to the rest of your examples, I don't have certainty on my side. I don't know enough about cars/SUVs to know if one is an outlier to justify his actions. Same with running shoe manufacturing. And even diamonds that claim to be "clean"... they are hard to trace. Many middle men in that business from my N=1 experience. So I wouldn't be so sure about that either.
So you want to be baby sat? You want someone to take those dastardly oreos away from you so someone else can decide what your best interests are. In moderation, for a child a treat is a treat. If you teach your child a treat is a treat and not an all consuming thing then they grow up to learn what moderation is. They grow up learning what a treat is. No need to bury your head in the sand, we should be educating our children instead of depriving them and vilifying foods.
We have different views on parenting I guess.
Moving goalposts. You were asked about your boss taking something away from you and you said you'd welcome it.
I don't know about you, but I didn't spend all this time becoming an adult just for other people to treat me like a child.
It's ok, we are actually all guilty of moving the goalposts. All the time. But this is status quo. If you point me to an MFP forum thread where goalposts aren't moved or when the same crew that moved the goalposts then blames you for moving the goalposts then it would be kinda weird.
Actually, I think my overall sentiment got lost in trying to answer all these specific examples which got us sidetracked. It all of a sudden became about control and baby sitting and blood diamonds and SUVs. And when it's a free for all, somebody is bound to get disturbed or pissed off. Smart tactic actually.
Lost in all of this stuff... was my overall sentiment. I consider Oreos, and all other junk food to be garbage that I would never eat and would hope my kids don't eat. If this happened to my kid (it wouldn't b/c I would never willfully give them oreos or any junk for that matter), but let's say, somebody else gave them oreos, and the teacher took them away, I would call that teacher and say thank you. And ask them to do it again next time. And the next.
Of course I am in the vast minority here in that most people think oreos are food that can fit into a balanced diet as a treat. That. Is. Fine. I'm not trying to tell you or your kids what to eat, and that wouldn't work anyway. "Lots of people" eat this stuff. But I don't consider anyone in my household to be "lots of people". They get taken care of first, second and third. Like any family. It's not like I don't care about other kids, it's just that I keep a boundary where their family culture is their own business.
So, if I was the teacher I wouldn't have plucked the oreo from the kids hand, because it is a social faux pas. But I see that as a failing on my part. I really do wish I was the kind of person that enforced what is right and took the blame as the @#$hole to the unappreciated benefit of other kids. I admire that.
But it's not really about oreos either. Its about whether the teacher/school/government has the right to override the patent's choices of food for their kids. You view oreos as unhealthy and not good for your kids, fine no problem.
What happens when the school disapproves of something you are fine with your kids having? Maybe homemade, low sugar black bean brownies or homemade organic fruit leather whatever you consider a healthy treat. Do they have the right to take it away, even though you dream it healthy and are OK with your kids eating it? Do they have the right to determine what is healthy for your child, no matter your opinion on the issue?
Oh no. In that case I'd just take them out of the school. That teacher would then be an idiot. See, to me, it is all about the Oreos.
You're flip flopping in your own argument. It's okay if a teacher of a boss takes something away from a kid or yourself if it's Oreos but if they take something away they think is bad but you don't think so then you're removing your kid from the school all of a sudden. It's okay for the teacher to take away cookies from the kid because you feel they aren't healthy but if you don't think it's unhealthy then they can't? Well many people don't consider Oreos unhealthy but their opinion including the mother in the article doesn't count because you feel it's unhealthy even though they are fine with it, you're suddenly setting the standards for other people based on your beliefs. You all of a sudden have the right to tell people they are wrong simply based on your beliefs. Your stance makes no sense.
You never answered my question, I eat ice cream every night, am I unhealthy?
Oh sorry. Been busy today didn't see all posts.
1). Regarding ice cream, depends what it's made of. If it's conventional ice cream, I wouldn't touch it. So if you're eating it every night, yeah, From my standpoint, I wouldn't want to be you. I think that's unhealthy. You asked. But you don't care about my opinion anyways, which is fine. I'm just answering your question which you have asked twice. Even if it's organic and ingredients carefully selected, I would moderate carefully. Again, only because u asked.
2). I'm not actually flip flopping. I've ways been against the Oreo in the argument. For me and my kids. Not for the mother in question. So yeah, sounds harsh, but if the teachers actions are in line with my beliefs, he gets my support. If not, he doesn't. I'm not taking a stance on teachers taking things away from kids. That's not the issue for me. I just care about the food choices. And if they are in line with mine. My agenda in the conversation was that all I care about is the endpoint of what my kids eat. I don't care how that endpoint is achieved.
What other sorts of personal beliefs (outside of the realm of keeping an orderly, lawful society) is it okay for the state to impose on children in schools?
0 -
Absolutely parents should teach their children about food including what is a treat vs what is not and about limiting intake of stuff you don't need, but like. We never frequent McDonalds so my kids naturally didn't either, but we didn't stop them from attending other kid's parties at McD's. Except for Christmas / special occasions we never have soda in our home, but again we never stopped them from having it when visiting others. They learned through example and teaching that some things are treats, and some things are foods.
Now that both are teenagers earning some money we do not find them spending their time and money at the golden arches drinking pop.
Teaching children the meaning of "treat" - something out of the ordinary that gives pleasure - is very important. Kids get this and will internalize it well if parents are consistent, but if you blur the lines, who can blame them for mistaking "treat" for "food".
As an example if someone were to give two cookies to a child (or an adult!) every day that means the cookies are no longer a treat but part of that child's (or adult's) regular diet. IMO that's not a lesson anyone should be teaching a child.
See I don't see a problem with 2 Oreos, or an equivalent treat, a day as a part of a kid's regular diet as long they are balanced by fruits, veggies and protein.
I did some googling. Using my 50 pound 7 year old as an example. One source said she should be getting between 34-41 calories per pound. That's 1700-2050 calories a day. The USDA says between 1200-1600, depending on activity level. And the American Heart Association recommends that 25-35% of that comes from fat.
2 Double Stuff Oreos have 142 calories and 6.6 grams of fat. That's gonna fit pretty easily into the above guidelines.
And that's why schools shouldn't be policing food from home. Different parents have different ideas about what is appropriate for their kids.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
Yeah, because changing the scenario from a 5 year old to an adult is totally not moving the goalposts.mamapeach910 wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
What would make your boss right?YayFoodYayFood wrote: »carlaunderconstruction wrote: »Wow, I'm so amazed with how many people are defending processed sugar in kids lunches. I work in a private school in China, where the students are fed food prepared by the school. There is no added sugar! When we have special events where the students get sugar there is a drastic change in behaviour. Plus a lot of students almost never have sugar, so they have been physically sick (throwing up) after having something like a small piece of birthday cake, or two small pieces of chocolate. Of course I understand the need to teach kids self regulation, and moderation, but honestly I don't want to teach 25, 5 year old's that ate oreos as part of their lunch. Save the oreos for after school!
And I'm amazed how many people have made the choice to over consume food in their lives and not want to tell everyone else the stuff they eat is junk. Would you like it if you were eating something at lunch that your boss didn't think was the right choice and they took it from you and threw it away?
If my boss is right, then yeah.
You're okay with someone taking something you paid for and throwing it away?
Would you be okay with someone not agreeing with an SUV you might drive and taking it and dropping it off at the junk yard because they don't feel it's good for the environment?
Would you be okay with someone taking the Nkke running sneakers of your feet because they don't agree with their business practices?
Would you be okay with someone taking your diamond ring or earing from you because they might be from Sierra Leon?
Well, in nutrition, there is no doubt in my mind what is right and wrong based on literature and patterns over very long lengths of time. So because of the certainty, I'd be pretty sure if my boss's actions regarding food were right or wrong.
Knowing that, if my boss did what's right and took those oreos out of my hands, I'll be honest and say, thanks you're the man. This is the kind of company I want to work for. One that looks out for my best interests. One that doesn't bury their heads in the sand. One that is brutally forthcoming in it's intentions. That's not only a boss, but something I would expect from a true friend.
With regards to the rest of your examples, I don't have certainty on my side. I don't know enough about cars/SUVs to know if one is an outlier to justify his actions. Same with running shoe manufacturing. And even diamonds that claim to be "clean"... they are hard to trace. Many middle men in that business from my N=1 experience. So I wouldn't be so sure about that either.
So you want to be baby sat? You want someone to take those dastardly oreos away from you so someone else can decide what your best interests are. In moderation, for a child a treat is a treat. If you teach your child a treat is a treat and not an all consuming thing then they grow up to learn what moderation is. They grow up learning what a treat is. No need to bury your head in the sand, we should be educating our children instead of depriving them and vilifying foods.
We have different views on parenting I guess.
Moving goalposts. You were asked about your boss taking something away from you and you said you'd welcome it.
I don't know about you, but I didn't spend all this time becoming an adult just for other people to treat me like a child.
It's ok, we are actually all guilty of moving the goalposts. All the time. But this is status quo. If you point me to an MFP forum thread where goalposts aren't moved or when the same crew that moved the goalposts then blames you for moving the goalposts then it would be kinda weird.
Actually, I think my overall sentiment got lost in trying to answer all these specific examples which got us sidetracked. It all of a sudden became about control and baby sitting and blood diamonds and SUVs. And when it's a free for all, somebody is bound to get disturbed or pissed off. Smart tactic actually.
Lost in all of this stuff... was my overall sentiment. I consider Oreos, and all other junk food to be garbage that I would never eat and would hope my kids don't eat. If this happened to my kid (it wouldn't b/c I would never willfully give them oreos or any junk for that matter), but let's say, somebody else gave them oreos, and the teacher took them away, I would call that teacher and say thank you. And ask them to do it again next time. And the next.
Of course I am in the vast minority here in that most people think oreos are food that can fit into a balanced diet as a treat. That. Is. Fine. I'm not trying to tell you or your kids what to eat, and that wouldn't work anyway. "Lots of people" eat this stuff. But I don't consider anyone in my household to be "lots of people". They get taken care of first, second and third. Like any family. It's not like I don't care about other kids, it's just that I keep a boundary where their family culture is their own business.
So, if I was the teacher I wouldn't have plucked the oreo from the kids hand, because it is a social faux pas. But I see that as a failing on my part. I really do wish I was the kind of person that enforced what is right and took the blame as the @#$hole to the unappreciated benefit of other kids. I admire that.
But it's not really about oreos either. Its about whether the teacher/school/government has the right to override the patent's choices of food for their kids. You view oreos as unhealthy and not good for your kids, fine no problem.
What happens when the school disapproves of something you are fine with your kids having? Maybe homemade, low sugar black bean brownies or homemade organic fruit leather whatever you consider a healthy treat. Do they have the right to take it away, even though you dream it healthy and are OK with your kids eating it? Do they have the right to determine what is healthy for your child, no matter your opinion on the issue?
Oh no. In that case I'd just take them out of the school. That teacher would then be an idiot. See, to me, it is all about the Oreos.
You're flip flopping in your own argument. It's okay if a teacher of a boss takes something away from a kid or yourself if it's Oreos but if they take something away they think is bad but you don't think so then you're removing your kid from the school all of a sudden. It's okay for the teacher to take away cookies from the kid because you feel they aren't healthy but if you don't think it's unhealthy then they can't? Well many people don't consider Oreos unhealthy but their opinion including the mother in the article doesn't count because you feel it's unhealthy even though they are fine with it, you're suddenly setting the standards for other people based on your beliefs. You all of a sudden have the right to tell people they are wrong simply based on your beliefs. Your stance makes no sense.
You never answered my question, I eat ice cream every night, am I unhealthy?
Oh sorry. Been busy today didn't see all posts.
1). Regarding ice cream, depends what it's made of. If it's conventional ice cream, I wouldn't touch it. So if you're eating it every night, yeah, From my standpoint, I wouldn't want to be you. I think that's unhealthy. You asked. But you don't care about my opinion anyways, which is fine. I'm just answering your question which you have asked twice. Even if it's organic and ingredients carefully selected, I would moderate carefully. Again, only because u asked.
2). I'm not actually flip flopping. I've ways been against the Oreo in the argument. For me and my kids. Not for the mother in question. So yeah, sounds harsh, but if the teachers actions are in line with my beliefs, he gets my support. If not, he doesn't. I'm not taking a stance on teachers taking things away from kids. That's not the issue for me. I just care about the food choices. And if they are in line with mine. My agenda in the conversation was that all I care about is the endpoint of what my kids eat. I don't care how that endpoint is achieved.
So if you think my ice cream is unhealthy and you wouldn't want to be me then how do you explain how I was obese but am now lean and very healthy according to all of my physicals? All health markers improved drastically and I'm much stronger due to my training as well? How do you look at all that and determine I'm unhealthy?
Have you ever been overweight or obese?
You whole stance on what the teacher can take from your kids is based on what you feel is good and bad food so what makes your opinion on what is good for your kids better than the opinion of what another parent feels is fine for their kids?
To me, health is a much broader definition: absence of disease and disease predisposition.
Um. You do realize you cannot control your genes, right?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
Yeah, because changing the scenario from a 5 year old to an adult is totally not moving the goalposts.mamapeach910 wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
What would make your boss right?YayFoodYayFood wrote: »carlaunderconstruction wrote: »Wow, I'm so amazed with how many people are defending processed sugar in kids lunches. I work in a private school in China, where the students are fed food prepared by the school. There is no added sugar! When we have special events where the students get sugar there is a drastic change in behaviour. Plus a lot of students almost never have sugar, so they have been physically sick (throwing up) after having something like a small piece of birthday cake, or two small pieces of chocolate. Of course I understand the need to teach kids self regulation, and moderation, but honestly I don't want to teach 25, 5 year old's that ate oreos as part of their lunch. Save the oreos for after school!
And I'm amazed how many people have made the choice to over consume food in their lives and not want to tell everyone else the stuff they eat is junk. Would you like it if you were eating something at lunch that your boss didn't think was the right choice and they took it from you and threw it away?
If my boss is right, then yeah.
You're okay with someone taking something you paid for and throwing it away?
Would you be okay with someone not agreeing with an SUV you might drive and taking it and dropping it off at the junk yard because they don't feel it's good for the environment?
Would you be okay with someone taking the Nkke running sneakers of your feet because they don't agree with their business practices?
Would you be okay with someone taking your diamond ring or earing from you because they might be from Sierra Leon?
Well, in nutrition, there is no doubt in my mind what is right and wrong based on literature and patterns over very long lengths of time. So because of the certainty, I'd be pretty sure if my boss's actions regarding food were right or wrong.
Knowing that, if my boss did what's right and took those oreos out of my hands, I'll be honest and say, thanks you're the man. This is the kind of company I want to work for. One that looks out for my best interests. One that doesn't bury their heads in the sand. One that is brutally forthcoming in it's intentions. That's not only a boss, but something I would expect from a true friend.
With regards to the rest of your examples, I don't have certainty on my side. I don't know enough about cars/SUVs to know if one is an outlier to justify his actions. Same with running shoe manufacturing. And even diamonds that claim to be "clean"... they are hard to trace. Many middle men in that business from my N=1 experience. So I wouldn't be so sure about that either.
So you want to be baby sat? You want someone to take those dastardly oreos away from you so someone else can decide what your best interests are. In moderation, for a child a treat is a treat. If you teach your child a treat is a treat and not an all consuming thing then they grow up to learn what moderation is. They grow up learning what a treat is. No need to bury your head in the sand, we should be educating our children instead of depriving them and vilifying foods.
We have different views on parenting I guess.
Moving goalposts. You were asked about your boss taking something away from you and you said you'd welcome it.
I don't know about you, but I didn't spend all this time becoming an adult just for other people to treat me like a child.
It's ok, we are actually all guilty of moving the goalposts. All the time. But this is status quo. If you point me to an MFP forum thread where goalposts aren't moved or when the same crew that moved the goalposts then blames you for moving the goalposts then it would be kinda weird.
Actually, I think my overall sentiment got lost in trying to answer all these specific examples which got us sidetracked. It all of a sudden became about control and baby sitting and blood diamonds and SUVs. And when it's a free for all, somebody is bound to get disturbed or pissed off. Smart tactic actually.
Lost in all of this stuff... was my overall sentiment. I consider Oreos, and all other junk food to be garbage that I would never eat and would hope my kids don't eat. If this happened to my kid (it wouldn't b/c I would never willfully give them oreos or any junk for that matter), but let's say, somebody else gave them oreos, and the teacher took them away, I would call that teacher and say thank you. And ask them to do it again next time. And the next.
Of course I am in the vast minority here in that most people think oreos are food that can fit into a balanced diet as a treat. That. Is. Fine. I'm not trying to tell you or your kids what to eat, and that wouldn't work anyway. "Lots of people" eat this stuff. But I don't consider anyone in my household to be "lots of people". They get taken care of first, second and third. Like any family. It's not like I don't care about other kids, it's just that I keep a boundary where their family culture is their own business.
So, if I was the teacher I wouldn't have plucked the oreo from the kids hand, because it is a social faux pas. But I see that as a failing on my part. I really do wish I was the kind of person that enforced what is right and took the blame as the @#$hole to the unappreciated benefit of other kids. I admire that.
But it's not really about oreos either. Its about whether the teacher/school/government has the right to override the patent's choices of food for their kids. You view oreos as unhealthy and not good for your kids, fine no problem.
What happens when the school disapproves of something you are fine with your kids having? Maybe homemade, low sugar black bean brownies or homemade organic fruit leather whatever you consider a healthy treat. Do they have the right to take it away, even though you dream it healthy and are OK with your kids eating it? Do they have the right to determine what is healthy for your child, no matter your opinion on the issue?
Oh no. In that case I'd just take them out of the school. That teacher would then be an idiot. See, to me, it is all about the Oreos.
You're flip flopping in your own argument. It's okay if a teacher of a boss takes something away from a kid or yourself if it's Oreos but if they take something away they think is bad but you don't think so then you're removing your kid from the school all of a sudden. It's okay for the teacher to take away cookies from the kid because you feel they aren't healthy but if you don't think it's unhealthy then they can't? Well many people don't consider Oreos unhealthy but their opinion including the mother in the article doesn't count because you feel it's unhealthy even though they are fine with it, you're suddenly setting the standards for other people based on your beliefs. You all of a sudden have the right to tell people they are wrong simply based on your beliefs. Your stance makes no sense.
You never answered my question, I eat ice cream every night, am I unhealthy?
Oh sorry. Been busy today didn't see all posts.
1). Regarding ice cream, depends what it's made of. If it's conventional ice cream, I wouldn't touch it. So if you're eating it every night, yeah, From my standpoint, I wouldn't want to be you. I think that's unhealthy. You asked. But you don't care about my opinion anyways, which is fine. I'm just answering your question which you have asked twice. Even if it's organic and ingredients carefully selected, I would moderate carefully. Again, only because u asked.
2). I'm not actually flip flopping. I've ways been against the Oreo in the argument. For me and my kids. Not for the mother in question. So yeah, sounds harsh, but if the teachers actions are in line with my beliefs, he gets my support. If not, he doesn't. I'm not taking a stance on teachers taking things away from kids. That's not the issue for me. I just care about the food choices. And if they are in line with mine. My agenda in the conversation was that all I care about is the endpoint of what my kids eat. I don't care how that endpoint is achieved.
So if you think my ice cream is unhealthy and you wouldn't want to be me then how do you explain how I was obese but am now lean and very healthy according to all of my physicals? All health markers improved drastically and I'm much stronger due to my training as well? How do you look at all that and determine I'm unhealthy?
Have you ever been overweight or obese?
You whole stance on what the teacher can take from your kids is based on what you feel is good and bad food so what makes your opinion on what is good for your kids better than the opinion of what another parent feels is fine for their kids?
To me, health is a much broader definition: absence of disease and disease predisposition.
Um. You do realize you cannot control your genes, right?
That's not as true as people once believed.
Epigenetics matters.
0 -
There's no guarantee of much of anything in life but that does not mean you do not put in the effort. You can teach your child right and wrong, teach your child not to steal or hurt other people. But there is no guarantee that they will grow up to be a saint but again you made an effort to provide the base your child needs to be an adult.0 -
softblondechick wrote: »Both of my kids like Oreo cookies and if that is what they wanted in their lunch bag I'd have no problem at all with that.
The "Brown Bag School Lunch Police" will call you out. I don't know, they might send CPS to your house, your cupboards might be full of junk, processed food.
Your children are obviously in danger of obesity, and nutritional deficits. You might be sent to a "re education" camp, to learn how to prepare a correct and proper lunch, with celery sticks and raw carrots.
Well, no worries there. Both of my kids have told by the school nurse that they need to gain weight. I cook nutritious meals and we very rarely eat out. Both of them are always on the go, so unless they change by the time they go to college, I doubt they'll have to worry about being obese. Also, I would welcome the "lunch police" to come and look in my cupboards. They won't find too much processed food there.... Except for my Quest protein bars, lol.
0 -
Of all the things to gripe about when it comes to the American school system, this is what school administrators gripe about?0
-
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
Yeah, because changing the scenario from a 5 year old to an adult is totally not moving the goalposts.mamapeach910 wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »YayFoodYayFood wrote: »
What would make your boss right?YayFoodYayFood wrote: »carlaunderconstruction wrote: »Wow, I'm so amazed with how many people are defending processed sugar in kids lunches. I work in a private school in China, where the students are fed food prepared by the school. There is no added sugar! When we have special events where the students get sugar there is a drastic change in behaviour. Plus a lot of students almost never have sugar, so they have been physically sick (throwing up) after having something like a small piece of birthday cake, or two small pieces of chocolate. Of course I understand the need to teach kids self regulation, and moderation, but honestly I don't want to teach 25, 5 year old's that ate oreos as part of their lunch. Save the oreos for after school!
And I'm amazed how many people have made the choice to over consume food in their lives and not want to tell everyone else the stuff they eat is junk. Would you like it if you were eating something at lunch that your boss didn't think was the right choice and they took it from you and threw it away?
If my boss is right, then yeah.
You're okay with someone taking something you paid for and throwing it away?
Would you be okay with someone not agreeing with an SUV you might drive and taking it and dropping it off at the junk yard because they don't feel it's good for the environment?
Would you be okay with someone taking the Nkke running sneakers of your feet because they don't agree with their business practices?
Would you be okay with someone taking your diamond ring or earing from you because they might be from Sierra Leon?
Well, in nutrition, there is no doubt in my mind what is right and wrong based on literature and patterns over very long lengths of time. So because of the certainty, I'd be pretty sure if my boss's actions regarding food were right or wrong.
Knowing that, if my boss did what's right and took those oreos out of my hands, I'll be honest and say, thanks you're the man. This is the kind of company I want to work for. One that looks out for my best interests. One that doesn't bury their heads in the sand. One that is brutally forthcoming in it's intentions. That's not only a boss, but something I would expect from a true friend.
With regards to the rest of your examples, I don't have certainty on my side. I don't know enough about cars/SUVs to know if one is an outlier to justify his actions. Same with running shoe manufacturing. And even diamonds that claim to be "clean"... they are hard to trace. Many middle men in that business from my N=1 experience. So I wouldn't be so sure about that either.
So you want to be baby sat? You want someone to take those dastardly oreos away from you so someone else can decide what your best interests are. In moderation, for a child a treat is a treat. If you teach your child a treat is a treat and not an all consuming thing then they grow up to learn what moderation is. They grow up learning what a treat is. No need to bury your head in the sand, we should be educating our children instead of depriving them and vilifying foods.
We have different views on parenting I guess.
Moving goalposts. You were asked about your boss taking something away from you and you said you'd welcome it.
I don't know about you, but I didn't spend all this time becoming an adult just for other people to treat me like a child.
It's ok, we are actually all guilty of moving the goalposts. All the time. But this is status quo. If you point me to an MFP forum thread where goalposts aren't moved or when the same crew that moved the goalposts then blames you for moving the goalposts then it would be kinda weird.
Actually, I think my overall sentiment got lost in trying to answer all these specific examples which got us sidetracked. It all of a sudden became about control and baby sitting and blood diamonds and SUVs. And when it's a free for all, somebody is bound to get disturbed or pissed off. Smart tactic actually.
Lost in all of this stuff... was my overall sentiment. I consider Oreos, and all other junk food to be garbage that I would never eat and would hope my kids don't eat. If this happened to my kid (it wouldn't b/c I would never willfully give them oreos or any junk for that matter), but let's say, somebody else gave them oreos, and the teacher took them away, I would call that teacher and say thank you. And ask them to do it again next time. And the next.
Of course I am in the vast minority here in that most people think oreos are food that can fit into a balanced diet as a treat. That. Is. Fine. I'm not trying to tell you or your kids what to eat, and that wouldn't work anyway. "Lots of people" eat this stuff. But I don't consider anyone in my household to be "lots of people". They get taken care of first, second and third. Like any family. It's not like I don't care about other kids, it's just that I keep a boundary where their family culture is their own business.
So, if I was the teacher I wouldn't have plucked the oreo from the kids hand, because it is a social faux pas. But I see that as a failing on my part. I really do wish I was the kind of person that enforced what is right and took the blame as the @#$hole to the unappreciated benefit of other kids. I admire that.
But it's not really about oreos either. Its about whether the teacher/school/government has the right to override the patent's choices of food for their kids. You view oreos as unhealthy and not good for your kids, fine no problem.
What happens when the school disapproves of something you are fine with your kids having? Maybe homemade, low sugar black bean brownies or homemade organic fruit leather whatever you consider a healthy treat. Do they have the right to take it away, even though you dream it healthy and are OK with your kids eating it? Do they have the right to determine what is healthy for your child, no matter your opinion on the issue?
Oh no. In that case I'd just take them out of the school. That teacher would then be an idiot. See, to me, it is all about the Oreos.
You're flip flopping in your own argument. It's okay if a teacher of a boss takes something away from a kid or yourself if it's Oreos but if they take something away they think is bad but you don't think so then you're removing your kid from the school all of a sudden. It's okay for the teacher to take away cookies from the kid because you feel they aren't healthy but if you don't think it's unhealthy then they can't? Well many people don't consider Oreos unhealthy but their opinion including the mother in the article doesn't count because you feel it's unhealthy even though they are fine with it, you're suddenly setting the standards for other people based on your beliefs. You all of a sudden have the right to tell people they are wrong simply based on your beliefs. Your stance makes no sense.
You never answered my question, I eat ice cream every night, am I unhealthy?
Oh sorry. Been busy today didn't see all posts.
1). Regarding ice cream, depends what it's made of. If it's conventional ice cream, I wouldn't touch it. So if you're eating it every night, yeah, From my standpoint, I wouldn't want to be you. I think that's unhealthy. You asked. But you don't care about my opinion anyways, which is fine. I'm just answering your question which you have asked twice. Even if it's organic and ingredients carefully selected, I would moderate carefully. Again, only because u asked.
2). I'm not actually flip flopping. I've ways been against the Oreo in the argument. For me and my kids. Not for the mother in question. So yeah, sounds harsh, but if the teachers actions are in line with my beliefs, he gets my support. If not, he doesn't. I'm not taking a stance on teachers taking things away from kids. That's not the issue for me. I just care about the food choices. And if they are in line with mine. My agenda in the conversation was that all I care about is the endpoint of what my kids eat. I don't care how that endpoint is achieved.
So if you think my ice cream is unhealthy and you wouldn't want to be me then how do you explain how I was obese but am now lean and very healthy according to all of my physicals? All health markers improved drastically and I'm much stronger due to my training as well? How do you look at all that and determine I'm unhealthy?
Have you ever been overweight or obese?
You whole stance on what the teacher can take from your kids is based on what you feel is good and bad food so what makes your opinion on what is good for your kids better than the opinion of what another parent feels is fine for their kids?
To me, health is a much broader definition: absence of disease and disease predisposition.
Um. You do realize you cannot control your genes, right?
That's not as true as people once believed.
Epigenetics matters.
I should know better than to play this game with you.
In context to what I was replying to, I meant that the genes you're born with. You cannot control that. The poster seems to be implying that you are unhealthy if you have genetic predispositions, which you don't really have control of and, if we do, we don't know how to do it yet.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
lisafrancis888 wrote: »Whilst no one should shame a parent we should as a society start to see the growing problem of children's health.
For me an Oreo or cake or chocolate bar should be a treat for a child not an everyday normal part of lunch.
If all schools agreed to the same there should be no issues. Children will do what the grown ups tell them to. If the teacher says no sweet things and all the parents abide by it children will eat the sandwich or whatever they are given.
I actually wish only water was drunk at school not fruit juices.
We have to get tougher for the sake of our children.
As a parent we should not run out of a piece of fruit or a carrot.
The parents who put Oreos etc into their children's lunch packs are making it hard for every other parent to try and make healthy lunches as children will always complain they haven't got it. That's why I wish schools would ban sugary foods completely.
So the fact that you haven't been able to teach your kid to not complain about what other kids have is every other parents' problem?
Hint: It's not.
0 -
entropypsycho wrote: »lisafrancis888 wrote: »Whilst no one should shame a parent we should as a society start to see the growing problem of children's health.
For me an Oreo or cake or chocolate bar should be a treat for a child not an everyday normal part of lunch.
If all schools agreed to the same there should be no issues. Children will do what the grown ups tell them to. If the teacher says no sweet things and all the parents abide by it children will eat the sandwich or whatever they are given.
I actually wish only water was drunk at school not fruit juices.
We have to get tougher for the sake of our children.
As a parent we should not run out of a piece of fruit or a carrot.
The parents who put Oreos etc into their children's lunch packs are making it hard for every other parent to try and make healthy lunches as children will always complain they haven't got it. That's why I wish schools would ban sugary foods completely.
Seriously good points. They should be treats, not every day part of a meal
Hmmm then maybe instead of having a small portion of m&ms everyday, since it is a treat and all, while still staying within my calorie range should not be allowed either. I mean, we should ban everything and not learn to enjoy things in moderation. Fear Sugar PEOPLE!!! It will kill you !
>places m&ms in mouth<Similar Canadian story; day care fined parent $10. The potato was deemed another "vegetable" to the child was also given Ritz crackers to supplement.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/mother-fined-10-for-packing-unbalanced-lunch-for-children-1.1551163
And this makes me want to (when I have kids) quit my job to be a stay at home mom and home school my kids.
That is a PARENT'S job, nit a teacher. A teacher teaches about math, reading, writing, spelling, etc.beachhouse758 wrote: »The mother knew the school had certain nutritional guideliness.
She chose not to comply.
Her failure to adhere to the schools rules was brought to her attention via a NOTE.
Where exactly is the traumatizing shaming?
She was aware of the rules and she chose not to follow them. And she is appalled and ashamed because her actions had a consequence.
She chose to put her child in a school that has guideliness. If she objects to the school's guideliness and requirements; maybe she should consider another school.
How are teachers supposed to teach kids about actions and consequences when parents feel that rules don't apply to them?
If you want to give your kids Oreos, fine.
If you want to pack them a lunch with Oreos, make sure the school doesn't have rules against them.
If you are really attached to the Oreos and your "freedom of food" is very important to you, then do not send your kid to a school that put limits and guideliness.
And last, iif it's brought to your attention that you broke a rule, take SOME personal responsibility!!!! For effs sake!!!
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions