Mother shamed for sending her child to school with oreos

Options
2456715

Replies

  • JenAndSome
    JenAndSome Posts: 1,893 Member
    Options
    jaqcan wrote: »
    JenAndSome wrote: »
    I send a treat in my kids' lunches every day. Usually chocolate chip cookies, a pudding cup or Hershey's kisses (because mommy kisses!). I send a sandwich, chips, and cottage cheese or yogurt, too. I would be ticked if they weren't able to eat their treat.

    And peanut butter isn't "healthy" but they should have bread if they are going to have a potato? How does that even make sense?

    With peanut butter, they may have a "peanut free" classroom due to allergies in the class. The entire note is phrased poorly.

    Then they should say "Do to potential allergy issues our school is a peanut-free zone." Not "peanut butter is not a healthy snack."
  • rorysmommy
    rorysmommy Posts: 7 Member
    Options
    When I send lunch with my child, I send sandwhich, chips, fruit, maybe string cheese and some sort of "treat" whether it is a small piece of candy (fun size snickers), a few Oreo's, a couple cookies, something. I would be livid if the school acted this way towards me. I'm the mom, let me make the decisions for my child. Something that is slowly being taken away from partents in the US.
  • kgeyser
    kgeyser Posts: 22,505 Member
    Options
    SuggaD wrote: »
    didn't sound like there were any vegetables or fruit and no no for the oreos.

    Another article (it has one of those annoying automatic video/audio clips): http://abcnews.go.com/Health/mom-lunch-shamed-school-packing-oreos-daughter/story?id=30674158

    "Leeza Pearson was out of fruit and vegetables one day last week, so she tucked a pack of Oreos in her daughter Natalee's lunch and sent her off to school at the Children's Academy in Aurora, Colorado."
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    Options
    My son's school promotes healthy eating, and in fact has a rule that parents are not to send chips, candy or pop in lunches. I have a choice - abide by the rule, or find another school. It really doesn't bother me. In fact, I've sent him with a small Halloween candy before and it came back home because the teacher didn't allow him to eat it. At first I was taken aback, sure. But I'm actually pleased that they are abiding by the rules they set out. I knew the guidelines when I enrolled him.

    What I do have a problem with is my friend, who is a teacher in the public system, having to keep her mouth shut when one of her students comes to school every single day with a can of coke and a chocolate bar for his lunch. Not only is this grade 1 student bouncing off the walls (and the teacher has to deal with his behaviour), but his teeth are rotting out. She is not permitted to speak to the parents about this. So not only is the child being harmed, but the whole class is suffering because of it. That may be digging a bit too deep, but I would be really annoyed if my child's education was suffering because they was another kid in the class demanding too much of the teacher's time to bring him down off his sugar high every day. And before people comment on sugar, I am not demonizing it, but I know how my child behaves when he's had too much sugar, and I wouldn't wish that upon anyone.

    I know my opinion will be unpopular here, but I really don't see the issue. In fact, let's look at the bigger picture for a moment. While a child is at school, they are bound by the school's rules. When they are out of school bounds, it's no longer a school issue. I don't think it's a lot to expect.
  • Whittedo
    Whittedo Posts: 352 Member
    Options
    BFDeal wrote: »
    Shamed is everyone's new favorite buzzword. It's part of the new American mentality that when anything happens that's even mildly upsetting it means you're a victim. Regardless of whether the school is right/wrong here are the choices: follow the schools guidelines, attempt to engage in a dialogue with the school to change the guidelines, or switch schools.

    She couldn't have been too "shamed" if she was willing to call the TV Station and get two minutes of fame.

  • BigLifter10
    BigLifter10 Posts: 1,152 Member
    Options
    DirrtyH wrote: »
    Ugh. Seriously, this makes me question whether I even want to have kids. If this happened to me, I would flip my shiz, and probably pull my kid from the school, to be honest. This nanny state crap has gone way too far.


    I knew I liked you! :D
  • lisafrancis888
    lisafrancis888 Posts: 119 Member
    Options
    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.


  • melimomTARDIS
    melimomTARDIS Posts: 1,941 Member
    Options
    my kids school has a similar policy. He has taste/texture issues, so he doesnt have much "healthy" options he can eat. I informed the school of the issue before the year started, and have had no issues with the staff over what I pack.

    Today's packed lunch-
    Peanut butter sandwich on white bread
    Strawberry fruit leather
    Strawberry nutragrain bar
    6 oz Orange Juice
    1 oreo cookie

  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    Options
    I'm ambivalent about this topic. While I think it's nice to have a treat and that parents should not be berated for allowing their child to have a treat, and that a child having a treat is fun to watch because they get so super excited about deliciouses; I honestly would not provide that kind of treat to my child because I knew it was unhealthy. So, other people can do what they want with their kids and I won't judge, but I wouldn't give my kids something I knew wasn't "food", strictly speaking.
    P.S I really don't want to have kids so my opinion almost seriously doesn't even matter. Kind of.

    How are Oreos not "food"?
  • emdeesea
    emdeesea Posts: 1,823 Member
    Options
    This is a private school. Maybe it's part of their rules? If she doesn't like them, maybe send the child to a public school?
  • SuggaD
    SuggaD Posts: 1,369 Member
    Options
    3bambi3 wrote: »
    SuggaD wrote: »
    didn't sound like there were any vegetables or fruit and no no for the oreos.

    So what? Maybe the child gets her fruit and vegetables for snacks, breakfast and dinner. And, in the context of an overall healthy diet, oreos aren't a "no no."


    To each their own. As I said, I'm being judgy. I personally don't consider it a healthy lunch for a toddler. I've always made my kid's lunch past nursery school and would not put cookies in there for lunch. That is not to say she doesn't have treats, but lunch is usually a veggie sandwich or salad with plenty of protein (she's a vegetarian), veggie sides (carrots sticks or something), a piece of fruit, water, and a container of yogurt.
  • melimomTARDIS
    melimomTARDIS Posts: 1,941 Member
    Options
    ok, but some kids are skinny, and barely eat the lunch they are packed/provided. Giving them milk/juice/ a cookie can be helpful for those kids. (like my kid)
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    Options
    emdeesea wrote: »
    This is a private school. Maybe it's part of their rules? If she doesn't like them, maybe send the child to a public school?
    Your brand of common sense is not welcome here. Be gone with you.
    :wink:
  • JenAndSome
    JenAndSome Posts: 1,893 Member
    Options
    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

    Well, if that's how you feel then don't give your child(ren) those kind of treats every day. If you want your child(ren) to have only water, by all means, only give them water. Unless there was a rule in place regarding which foods were not allowed to be packed in lunches which the parent saw and signed off on prior to sending the cookies, the school had no right to not give the cookies to the girl.

  • kgeyser
    kgeyser Posts: 22,505 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    emdeesea wrote: »
    This is a private school. Maybe it's part of their rules? If she doesn't like them, maybe send the child to a public school?

    It may be a private school, but some of the students appear to be enrolled in the public school system? The article I linked said the public school system provides funds for some children to attend the preschool, which leads me to believe that the kids are enrolled in public school, but attend this school due to overflow/location/etc. I know when I was living in NC that the Head Start program was public, but was also held at private locations in addition to the public schools to keep up with the demand.

    ETA: "Pearson says Natalee attends the private Children's Academy as a public school student under the state's preschool option program."

    http://www.wjla.com/articles/2015/04/colorado-mom-chastised-by-school-for-packing-oreo-cookies-in-daughter-s-lunch-113596.html
  • emdeesea
    emdeesea Posts: 1,823 Member
    Options
    kgeyser wrote: »
    emdeesea wrote: »
    This is a private school. Maybe it's part of their rules? If she doesn't like them, maybe send the child to a public school?

    It may be a private school, but some of the students appear to be enrolled in the public school system? The article I linked said the public school system provides funds for some children to attend the preschool, which leads me to believe that the kids are enrolled in public school, but attend this school due to overflow/location/etc. I know when I was living in NC that the Head Start program was public, but was also held at private locations in addition to the public schools to keep up with the demand.

    I wondered because I couldn't find anything regarding that fact. I went directly to the Academy web site because I was curious but don't see anything regarding their lunchtime rules. I don't know. I always wonder if people just get their panties in a twist because they don't like rules being applied to them or their kids.

  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    Options
    Darn it, I just wrote a good post and accidentally deleted it :neutral:

    I am surprised by the vitriol this is causing. On one hand society is rightfully concerned about the childhood obesity epidemic, yet people are freaking out over a school enforcing its rules on healthy meals at the school (whatever their definition of healthy is, we all agree there are many definitions).

    Whether or not the child has veggies and water at other meals is not the school's concern. The teachers are not about to poll the parents on what they are feeding kids outside of school hours to ensure they're getting a balanced diet. They have enacted rules that they see as protecting the student body as a whole. The expectation that teachers consider each student's diet individually is ridiculous. Presumably, the parents were made aware of the rule at the beginning of the school year. If they need a reminder every once in a while, oh well. Move on.

    Schools have food rules to protect kids with allergies and parents seem to have no issue abiding by those rules. Sure I grumble that I can't send my child with peanut butter, which is one of his three food groups, but I completely understand the rationale. If I don't like the rules I can find another school or home-school.
  • kgeyser
    kgeyser Posts: 22,505 Member
    Options
    emdeesea wrote: »
    kgeyser wrote: »
    emdeesea wrote: »
    This is a private school. Maybe it's part of their rules? If she doesn't like them, maybe send the child to a public school?

    It may be a private school, but some of the students appear to be enrolled in the public school system? The article I linked said the public school system provides funds for some children to attend the preschool, which leads me to believe that the kids are enrolled in public school, but attend this school due to overflow/location/etc. I know when I was living in NC that the Head Start program was public, but was also held at private locations in addition to the public schools to keep up with the demand.

    I wondered because I couldn't find anything regarding that fact. I went directly to the Academy web site because I was curious but don't see anything regarding their lunchtime rules. I don't know. I always wonder if people just get their panties in a twist because they don't like rules being applied to them or their kids.

    I edited, apparently she is a public school student but attends the private school as part of the state's preschool option program. I've seen quotes from the public school system about the matter, so I think they may be the ones implementing the policy, not the school itself.
  • joejccva71
    joejccva71 Posts: 2,985 Member
    edited April 2015
    Options
    I'm not buying the whole "it's a private school so their rules" type of argument. If a private school has rules then parents should be notified about them ahead of time before they enroll their kids. I seriously doubt this private school had made the parent aware of the "no oreos" policy ahead of time.

    I see absolutely nothing wrong with a sandwich, a piece of cheese, and a pack of oreo cookies. It's not like all the parent gave her child was candy for lunch.

    Let the kids live and be kids and enjoy being kids. You know what's "unhealthy"? Giving a kid nothing but a box of celery sticks for lunch while their peers have more balanced things to eat.
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    Options
    @3bambi3 It's the ingredients. Check 'em out sometime. You'd be surprised what is in it that are chemicals, additives, dyes, whatever. I'm talking about the things your body can't use or doesn't easily break down. To clarify, just because you can eat it, does not make it food. I hope this cleared up what I meant by that. There is a book you can check out that can explain this in depth! "If It's Not Food...Don't Eat It!" Check it out!

    http://www.amazon.com/its-Food-Dont-Eating-Health/dp/097656680X

    Not a chance. The woman who wrote that book seems to have zero qualifications to be giving out nutritional advice. She is a "certified nutritional consultant" whatever that means. And her previous career was as a chiropractic assistant.

    And yes, I know what's in oreos. Fat, carbs, and a little bit of protein. Along with fiber, sugar, calcium and potassium. Please, tell me which chemicals in oreos your body "can't use" and what happens to these chemicals when you eat them. Also, fiber isn't easily broken down by the body, does that mean it isn't "food" and we shouldn't eat it?