Mother shamed for sending her child to school with oreos
Replies
-
auntstephie321 wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »I think the very basic issue is why are the schools dictating what a child can and can not bring for lunch? These kids are not government property.
I'm not a fan of dispensing birth control to a 15 year old girl but I am not going to tell another mother she can't no matter what I approve or disapprove of. It drives me crazy to see 12 year old girls drinking lattes at Starbucks. Do I have the right to take said beverage out of their hand? Schools have become more and more the substitute parents. Even worse they are dictating how parents will feed their children. "Oh, your son does not like bread?" "Too bad. The rules clearly state you can't just bring cheese slices and apples. It must be a sandwich." "Oh, you don't like you child to drink milk or juice?" "Yeah, well we don't approve of that water you sent." "Two cookies in your daughter's lunch box?!" "Are you crazy? That's not healthy. WE know what is best for that kid!" (notice I don't say 'your kid' because clearly the child belongs to the state...at least they sure act like it)
At some point enough is enough. Even the principal said the teacher was out of line.
Because there are state and federal guidelines in place that must be met. If they are not met, the school loses funding and/or accreditation.
That's the problem! Why is the government making these guidelines? Where do they get the right? They are not the parents. People will gripe for the government to stay out of their beds, off their bodies, on and on. But it is perfectly okay to dictate what a parent can give his/her own children for school lunch? No, absolutely not.
The schools don't have to follow the guidelines if they don't take the government money...but then that translates to higher taxes and most people won't vote for that option. So, it is on the public if they don't want the government involved. I live in a school district with higher taxes and the only government funds they accept are for their nutrition programs because they provide free breakfast, lunches and snacks to kids in need and they even offer free breakfast, lunch, and snacks during the summer to anyone under the age of 18, or anyone with special needs, and they offer these same meals to adults for about $1.50 per meal, I believe. We still have Christmas and Easter breaks in our school district (gasp!) because of the limited involvement with the federal government. Don't want the government involved? Don't choose a government funded school. The woman in this story is taking advantage of a program that is essentially free day care paid for by...the government. If she doesn't want them telling her what to do, she is free to pay for another, non government funded, option.
That is her point, the tax dollars are taken out of the community, funneled through the federal government then Public schools are forced to either comply with their arbitrary guidelines or not receive the tax dollars that were taken from them to begin with.
Its all a power grab for the federal government, it's not about low income government funded programs these are Public schools
"Government money" isn't magical money that appears out of nowhere, its paid in by tax payers. You have to pay taxes then they make you jump through their specially selected hoops to get it back to fund programs in your own community. Does no one else see anything wrong with that?
Not all local tax money is funneled through the federal government. Our local property taxes are much higher than some surrounding areas and our sales taxes are also higher. Most of those dollars are funds allocated to the public schools and other programs that voters have agreed are important enough to spend the money on.
Yes, I think there are a lot of things wrong with how the government and things run in this country, but I also think there are a lot of things wrong with the people in this country. When a person can be given a gift (which is what I would call free day care) and then turn in to a media darling who is a VICTIM of SHAMING because someone dared address the rules they are expected to follow for accepting said gift, then we have a lot of problems as a society. The sense of entitlement and the lack of personal responsibility in this country is appalling. Oh no, someone wrote me a letter because I broke the rules? I'm a victim I say, a VICTIM!
Do you have some evidence that the family in this story doesn't pay any taxes, and is therefore not contributing to the public funds that make programs like this possible? Military families in NC qualified for Head Start programs like this preschool program, and they were certainly employed and paying their taxes.
I wasn't trying to imply that they aren't paying taxes, but it is still a gift that most tax paying families don't receive. If it's not available to everyone who pays taxes, then it's a special benefit that is gifted to those who qualify. It is not a requirement to apply for or attend these programs, so if we invite the government to be this involved in our lives, we give up something in return.
BTW, I am not necessarily against these types of programs because I know many people and children who have benefitted from them.0 -
auntstephie321 wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »I think the very basic issue is why are the schools dictating what a child can and can not bring for lunch? These kids are not government property.
I'm not a fan of dispensing birth control to a 15 year old girl but I am not going to tell another mother she can't no matter what I approve or disapprove of. It drives me crazy to see 12 year old girls drinking lattes at Starbucks. Do I have the right to take said beverage out of their hand? Schools have become more and more the substitute parents. Even worse they are dictating how parents will feed their children. "Oh, your son does not like bread?" "Too bad. The rules clearly state you can't just bring cheese slices and apples. It must be a sandwich." "Oh, you don't like you child to drink milk or juice?" "Yeah, well we don't approve of that water you sent." "Two cookies in your daughter's lunch box?!" "Are you crazy? That's not healthy. WE know what is best for that kid!" (notice I don't say 'your kid' because clearly the child belongs to the state...at least they sure act like it)
At some point enough is enough. Even the principal said the teacher was out of line.
Because there are state and federal guidelines in place that must be met. If they are not met, the school loses funding and/or accreditation.
That's the problem! Why is the government making these guidelines? Where do they get the right? They are not the parents. People will gripe for the government to stay out of their beds, off their bodies, on and on. But it is perfectly okay to dictate what a parent can give his/her own children for school lunch? No, absolutely not.
The schools don't have to follow the guidelines if they don't take the government money...but then that translates to higher taxes and most people won't vote for that option. So, it is on the public if they don't want the government involved. I live in a school district with higher taxes and the only government funds they accept are for their nutrition programs because they provide free breakfast, lunches and snacks to kids in need and they even offer free breakfast, lunch, and snacks during the summer to anyone under the age of 18, or anyone with special needs, and they offer these same meals to adults for about $1.50 per meal, I believe. We still have Christmas and Easter breaks in our school district (gasp!) because of the limited involvement with the federal government. Don't want the government involved? Don't choose a government funded school. The woman in this story is taking advantage of a program that is essentially free day care paid for by...the government. If she doesn't want them telling her what to do, she is free to pay for another, non government funded, option.
That is her point, the tax dollars are taken out of the community, funneled through the federal government then Public schools are forced to either comply with their arbitrary guidelines or not receive the tax dollars that were taken from them to begin with.
Its all a power grab for the federal government, it's not about low income government funded programs these are Public schools
"Government money" isn't magical money that appears out of nowhere, its paid in by tax payers. You have to pay taxes then they make you jump through their specially selected hoops to get it back to fund programs in your own community. Does no one else see anything wrong with that?
Not all local tax money is funneled through the federal government. Our local property taxes are much higher than some surrounding areas and our sales taxes are also higher. Most of those dollars are funds allocated to the public schools and other programs that voters have agreed are important enough to spend the money on.
Yes, I think there are a lot of things wrong with how the government and things run in this country, but I also think there are a lot of things wrong with the people in this country. When a person can be given a gift (which is what I would call free day care) and then turn in to a media darling who is a VICTIM of SHAMING because someone dared address the rules they are expected to follow for accepting said gift, then we have a lot of problems as a society. The sense of entitlement and the lack of personal responsibility in this country is appalling. Oh no, someone wrote me a letter because I broke the rules? I'm a victim I say, a VICTIM!
Do you have some evidence that the family in this story doesn't pay any taxes, and is therefore not contributing to the public funds that make programs like this possible? Military families in NC qualified for Head Start programs like this preschool program, and they were certainly employed and paying their taxes.
I wasn't trying to imply that they aren't paying taxes, but it is still a gift that most tax paying families don't receive. If it's not available to everyone who pays taxes, then it's a special benefit that is gifted to those who qualify. It is not a requirement to apply for or attend these programs, so if we invite the government to be this involved in our lives, we give up something in return.
BTW, I am not necessarily against these types of programs because I know many people and children who have benefitted from them.
I doubt most tax paying families would be willing to give up their income and lifestyle to get to a financial level where they qualify for these programs, either. And just for giggles, here are the "eligibility factors," at least one of which must be present for a child to qualify for the preschool program in CO depending on age (not all tied to income):
- The child is eligible to receive free or reduced-cost meals pursuant to the provisions of the Federal “National School Lunch Act.”
- Homelessness of the child’s family
- An abusive adult residing in the home of the child
- Drug or alcohol abuse in the child’s family
- Either parent of the child was less than eighteen years of age and unmarried at the time of the birth of the child
- The child’s parent or guardian has not successfully completed a high school education or its equivalent
- Frequent relocation by the child’s family to new residences
- Poor social skills of the child
Children are also eligible:
- If they are in need of language development, including but not limited to the ability to speak English
- If they are receiving services from the State Department of Social Services as neglected or dependent children (i.e. foster children).
Based on that list, I'm not going make assumptions about the family in this story. For all I know, they qualify because she took the kid and left an abusive spouse, and is now a single parent with no savings and little income trying to do what's best. I can't fault someone for wanting the best chance for their kid, and the fact that the school system itself seems incredulous over the situation leads me to believe that this is not an instance of someone throwing a tantrum and being ungrateful. But as I said earlier, I'm more bothered by them involving the child than by the discussion between the adults.0 -
auntstephie321 wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »I think the very basic issue is why are the schools dictating what a child can and can not bring for lunch? These kids are not government property.
I'm not a fan of dispensing birth control to a 15 year old girl but I am not going to tell another mother she can't no matter what I approve or disapprove of. It drives me crazy to see 12 year old girls drinking lattes at Starbucks. Do I have the right to take said beverage out of their hand? Schools have become more and more the substitute parents. Even worse they are dictating how parents will feed their children. "Oh, your son does not like bread?" "Too bad. The rules clearly state you can't just bring cheese slices and apples. It must be a sandwich." "Oh, you don't like you child to drink milk or juice?" "Yeah, well we don't approve of that water you sent." "Two cookies in your daughter's lunch box?!" "Are you crazy? That's not healthy. WE know what is best for that kid!" (notice I don't say 'your kid' because clearly the child belongs to the state...at least they sure act like it)
At some point enough is enough. Even the principal said the teacher was out of line.
Because there are state and federal guidelines in place that must be met. If they are not met, the school loses funding and/or accreditation.
That's the problem! Why is the government making these guidelines? Where do they get the right? They are not the parents. People will gripe for the government to stay out of their beds, off their bodies, on and on. But it is perfectly okay to dictate what a parent can give his/her own children for school lunch? No, absolutely not.
The schools don't have to follow the guidelines if they don't take the government money...but then that translates to higher taxes and most people won't vote for that option. So, it is on the public if they don't want the government involved. I live in a school district with higher taxes and the only government funds they accept are for their nutrition programs because they provide free breakfast, lunches and snacks to kids in need and they even offer free breakfast, lunch, and snacks during the summer to anyone under the age of 18, or anyone with special needs, and they offer these same meals to adults for about $1.50 per meal, I believe. We still have Christmas and Easter breaks in our school district (gasp!) because of the limited involvement with the federal government. Don't want the government involved? Don't choose a government funded school. The woman in this story is taking advantage of a program that is essentially free day care paid for by...the government. If she doesn't want them telling her what to do, she is free to pay for another, non government funded, option.
That is her point, the tax dollars are taken out of the community, funneled through the federal government then Public schools are forced to either comply with their arbitrary guidelines or not receive the tax dollars that were taken from them to begin with.
Its all a power grab for the federal government, it's not about low income government funded programs these are Public schools
"Government money" isn't magical money that appears out of nowhere, its paid in by tax payers. You have to pay taxes then they make you jump through their specially selected hoops to get it back to fund programs in your own community. Does no one else see anything wrong with that?
Not all local tax money is funneled through the federal government. Our local property taxes are much higher than some surrounding areas and our sales taxes are also higher. Most of those dollars are funds allocated to the public schools and other programs that voters have agreed are important enough to spend the money on.
Yes, I think there are a lot of things wrong with how the government and things run in this country, but I also think there are a lot of things wrong with the people in this country. When a person can be given a gift (which is what I would call free day care) and then turn in to a media darling who is a VICTIM of SHAMING because someone dared address the rules they are expected to follow for accepting said gift, then we have a lot of problems as a society. The sense of entitlement and the lack of personal responsibility in this country is appalling. Oh no, someone wrote me a letter because I broke the rules? I'm a victim I say, a VICTIM!
Do you have some evidence that the family in this story doesn't pay any taxes, and is therefore not contributing to the public funds that make programs like this possible? Military families in NC qualified for Head Start programs like this preschool program, and they were certainly employed and paying their taxes.
I wasn't trying to imply that they aren't paying taxes, but it is still a gift that most tax paying families don't receive. If it's not available to everyone who pays taxes, then it's a special benefit that is gifted to those who qualify. It is not a requirement to apply for or attend these programs, so if we invite the government to be this involved in our lives, we give up something in return.
BTW, I am not necessarily against these types of programs because I know many people and children who have benefitted from them.
I doubt most tax paying families would be willing to give up their income and lifestyle to get to a financial level where they qualify for these programs, either. And just for giggles, here are the "eligibility factors," at least one of which must be present for a child to qualify for the preschool program in CO depending on age (not all tied to income):
- The child is eligible to receive free or reduced-cost meals pursuant to the provisions of the Federal “National School Lunch Act.”
- Homelessness of the child’s family
- An abusive adult residing in the home of the child
- Drug or alcohol abuse in the child’s family
- Either parent of the child was less than eighteen years of age and unmarried at the time of the birth of the child
- The child’s parent or guardian has not successfully completed a high school education or its equivalent
- Frequent relocation by the child’s family to new residences
- Poor social skills of the child
Children are also eligible:
- If they are in need of language development, including but not limited to the ability to speak English
- If they are receiving services from the State Department of Social Services as neglected or dependent children (i.e. foster children).
Based on that list, I'm not going make assumptions about the family in this story. For all I know, they qualify because she took the kid and left an abusive spouse, and is now a single parent with no savings and little income trying to do what's best. I can't fault someone for wanting the best chance for their kid, and the fact that the school system itself seems incredulous over the situation leads me to believe that this is not an instance of someone throwing a tantrum and being ungrateful. But as I said earlier, I'm more bothered by them involving the child than by the discussion between the adults.
How could they not involve the child? If they let the kid eat the Oreos and they were against the rules, then they would have to do the same for the other kids, no? Telling a kid no, I'm sorry, these are the rules and you have to follow them is not detrimental to their well being. Telling the parent what the rules are in writing (even if the letter is poorly written) is not shaming or ridiculing or victimizing anyone. Yes, from what I've read, it's not school policy to address their nutritional guidelines by sending a letter to the parents, but it doesn't mean that the school doesn't still have guidelines to follow. In one article they quoted the representative as saying just that and in other articles all they've said is it's not school policy. The ones conveniently leaving out the fact that it's not school policy to send a letter home just help to further the victim mentality of the mother. If the mother really wanted the best chance for her kid, she would teach her daughter that sometimes it sucks that we can't do whatever we want because we have to follow the rules because we are not special snowflakes. Too many "grown ups" apparently have not learned that and look at our society now.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
auntstephie321 wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »I think the very basic issue is why are the schools dictating what a child can and can not bring for lunch? These kids are not government property.
I'm not a fan of dispensing birth control to a 15 year old girl but I am not going to tell another mother she can't no matter what I approve or disapprove of. It drives me crazy to see 12 year old girls drinking lattes at Starbucks. Do I have the right to take said beverage out of their hand? Schools have become more and more the substitute parents. Even worse they are dictating how parents will feed their children. "Oh, your son does not like bread?" "Too bad. The rules clearly state you can't just bring cheese slices and apples. It must be a sandwich." "Oh, you don't like you child to drink milk or juice?" "Yeah, well we don't approve of that water you sent." "Two cookies in your daughter's lunch box?!" "Are you crazy? That's not healthy. WE know what is best for that kid!" (notice I don't say 'your kid' because clearly the child belongs to the state...at least they sure act like it)
At some point enough is enough. Even the principal said the teacher was out of line.
Because there are state and federal guidelines in place that must be met. If they are not met, the school loses funding and/or accreditation.
That's the problem! Why is the government making these guidelines? Where do they get the right? They are not the parents. People will gripe for the government to stay out of their beds, off their bodies, on and on. But it is perfectly okay to dictate what a parent can give his/her own children for school lunch? No, absolutely not.
The schools don't have to follow the guidelines if they don't take the government money...but then that translates to higher taxes and most people won't vote for that option. So, it is on the public if they don't want the government involved. I live in a school district with higher taxes and the only government funds they accept are for their nutrition programs because they provide free breakfast, lunches and snacks to kids in need and they even offer free breakfast, lunch, and snacks during the summer to anyone under the age of 18, or anyone with special needs, and they offer these same meals to adults for about $1.50 per meal, I believe. We still have Christmas and Easter breaks in our school district (gasp!) because of the limited involvement with the federal government. Don't want the government involved? Don't choose a government funded school. The woman in this story is taking advantage of a program that is essentially free day care paid for by...the government. If she doesn't want them telling her what to do, she is free to pay for another, non government funded, option.
That is her point, the tax dollars are taken out of the community, funneled through the federal government then Public schools are forced to either comply with their arbitrary guidelines or not receive the tax dollars that were taken from them to begin with.
Its all a power grab for the federal government, it's not about low income government funded programs these are Public schools
"Government money" isn't magical money that appears out of nowhere, its paid in by tax payers. You have to pay taxes then they make you jump through their specially selected hoops to get it back to fund programs in your own community. Does no one else see anything wrong with that?
Not all local tax money is funneled through the federal government. Our local property taxes are much higher than some surrounding areas and our sales taxes are also higher. Most of those dollars are funds allocated to the public schools and other programs that voters have agreed are important enough to spend the money on.
Yes, I think there are a lot of things wrong with how the government and things run in this country, but I also think there are a lot of things wrong with the people in this country. When a person can be given a gift (which is what I would call free day care) and then turn in to a media darling who is a VICTIM of SHAMING because someone dared address the rules they are expected to follow for accepting said gift, then we have a lot of problems as a society. The sense of entitlement and the lack of personal responsibility in this country is appalling. Oh no, someone wrote me a letter because I broke the rules? I'm a victim I say, a VICTIM!
Do you have some evidence that the family in this story doesn't pay any taxes, and is therefore not contributing to the public funds that make programs like this possible? Military families in NC qualified for Head Start programs like this preschool program, and they were certainly employed and paying their taxes.
I wasn't trying to imply that they aren't paying taxes, but it is still a gift that most tax paying families don't receive. If it's not available to everyone who pays taxes, then it's a special benefit that is gifted to those who qualify. It is not a requirement to apply for or attend these programs, so if we invite the government to be this involved in our lives, we give up something in return.
BTW, I am not necessarily against these types of programs because I know many people and children who have benefitted from them.
I doubt most tax paying families would be willing to give up their income and lifestyle to get to a financial level where they qualify for these programs, either. And just for giggles, here are the "eligibility factors," at least one of which must be present for a child to qualify for the preschool program in CO depending on age (not all tied to income):
- The child is eligible to receive free or reduced-cost meals pursuant to the provisions of the Federal “National School Lunch Act.”
- Homelessness of the child’s family
- An abusive adult residing in the home of the child
- Drug or alcohol abuse in the child’s family
- Either parent of the child was less than eighteen years of age and unmarried at the time of the birth of the child
- The child’s parent or guardian has not successfully completed a high school education or its equivalent
- Frequent relocation by the child’s family to new residences
- Poor social skills of the child
Children are also eligible:
- If they are in need of language development, including but not limited to the ability to speak English
- If they are receiving services from the State Department of Social Services as neglected or dependent children (i.e. foster children).
Based on that list, I'm not going make assumptions about the family in this story. For all I know, they qualify because she took the kid and left an abusive spouse, and is now a single parent with no savings and little income trying to do what's best. I can't fault someone for wanting the best chance for their kid, and the fact that the school system itself seems incredulous over the situation leads me to believe that this is not an instance of someone throwing a tantrum and being ungrateful. But as I said earlier, I'm more bothered by them involving the child than by the discussion between the adults.
How could they not involve the child? If they let the kid eat the Oreos and they were against the rules, then they would have to do the same for the other kids, no? Telling a kid no, I'm sorry, these are the rules and you have to follow them is not detrimental to their well being. Telling the parent what the rules are in writing (even if the letter is poorly written) is not shaming or ridiculing or victimizing anyone. Yes, from what I've read, it's not school policy to address their nutritional guidelines by sending a letter to the parents, but it doesn't mean that the school doesn't still have guidelines to follow. In one article they quoted the representative as saying just that and in other articles all they've said is it's not school policy. The ones conveniently leaving out the fact that it's not school policy to send a letter home just help to further the victim mentality of the mother. If the mother really wanted the best chance for her kid, she would teach her daughter that sometimes it sucks that we can't do whatever we want because we have to follow the rules because we are not special snowflakes. Too many "grown ups" apparently have not learned that and look at our society now.
From what I've read in the various articles, parents have sent in items on the "banned" list before with no response from the school, and the school requested the parents send in candy for various parties. It seems odd for this to suddenly be an issue this late in the school year.
The kids aren't going to know the rules about food, and since no one told them the rules, taking the food away just confuses them. You let the kid eat the cookies and discreetly send a note home to the parents, if that is school policy to contact them. If it's not school policy, and this teacher was in violation by sending this note home and taking food away from the kid in front of all the other students - then yes, there is a bit of shaming going on.
I'm personally hoping it was just an honest mistake and not an adult expressing their personal bias as to what the families who are enrolled the program should or should not be doing to raise their kids; it would be very disappointing to see something like that come out as the school system investigates the incident.
There's nothing wrong with expecting people to follow rules, but there is a problem when people are not made aware of the rules, or someone takes it upon themselves to enforce rules in a way that is not in keeping with the policy.0 -
Re: The ones conveniently leaving out the fact that it's not school policy to send a letter home just help to further the victim mentality of the mother. If the mother really wanted the best chance for her kid, she would teach her daughter that sometimes it sucks that we can't do whatever we want because we have to follow the rules because we are not special snowflakes. Too many "grown ups" apparently have not learned that and look at our society now.[/quote]
But none of this is the issue. Dictating what a child can or can't have for lunch brought from home is wrong. Making a policy about what foods we (school/government) think are best is going way over the line. A policy about what you can't eat because another child can't so nobody gets it is even more ridiculous. You must do your homework and pay attention in class is very different from bringing items in for lunch. Rules that you can't share food items are okay because some kids can't have certain foods (peanut allergies). Again, that is different from your child can't consume this, this, or that because we don't approve.
As for a school lunch program, if the parent is not paying for the meal then, no, she can't argue with what's being served. But if mom goes to the store and buys the food then, no the school needs to back off.
I don't think the mom was playing victim. But it does show that this is becoming a problem. It is not even about the cookies. Schools are trying to be parents. They make it very clear they and only they know best. Need funds for a school? Well Uncle Sam is happy to take care...at a cost. You'll need to give up some freedoms. It's the same with doling out birth control to 15 year olds regardless of what a parent thinks. Schools bring up social issues that some parents object to but, oh well, they know best.
0 -
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.0
-
Just in case the point hasn't been made in the previous 8 pages of this thread, let's look at what actually happened:
1. School sent home a note reminding parent of the school's healthy eating philosophy.
2. Parent wasn't "shamed". That's the title of this thread. The parent decided to go public because she's an idiot and wanted her 15 minutes of fame.
End of story.0 -
Just in case the point hasn't been made in the previous 8 pages of this thread, let's look at what actually happened:
1. School sent home a note reminding parent of the school's healthy eating philosophy.
2. Parent wasn't "shamed". That's the title of this thread. The parent decided to go public because she's an idiot and wanted her 15 minutes of fame.
End of story.
3. It turns out there is actually no such policy but people insist the mother is an idiot.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
3. It turns out there is actually no such policy but people insist the mother is an idiot.
The original story linked makes no such statement.
The original story shows an image of what is almost certainly a generic form letter to parents as it not addressed to this specific parent but to "parents".
The presence of a generic letter indicates the facility in question does in fact have a standing policy on the matter. The communication sent home reflects the policy.
Nothing indicates that the letter sent home was done in malice or to single out this specific parent or child. The mom, not the school, took the story public. If there is any "shame" involved she brought it upon herself in her attempt to shame the school for doing what makes sense.
The discussion should be centred around how to encourage healthy eating choices in a communal environment like a classroom. Imagine if there is no policy. One day a kid has Oreo cookies. The next someone else has two donuts. Another day one child might bring a Costco family sized pack of Twizzlers to hand out to their buddies.
Where does it end? Oh the humanity.
Or, the mom could just suck it up and avoid sending cookies as a snack for mealtime at day care.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
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.
0 -
On the face of it, it looks like the school has a policy.
Policies like that are communicated to parents.
Mom decided to ignore policy and is surprised she gets a friendly reminder?
Our kids always went to day care / pre-school with healthy lunches. Tons of variety, well balanced, mostly home cooked from scratch too. One day we included a couple decent quality, small, chocolate Easter eggs in our oldest's lunch.
We got a form letter back with our child at the end of the day.
We were not upset nor surprised. We didn't go to the press.
We knew about the healthy meal time policy and probably figured such a small item would be overlooked. We were wrong and in hindsight it was easy to understand why it's simply far easier for the facility to evenly apply the policy than to make exceptions here and there.
0 -
3. It turns out there is actually no such policy but people insist the mother is an idiot.
The original story linked makes no such statement.
The original story shows an image of what is almost certainly a generic form letter to parents as it not addressed to this specific parent but to "parents".
The presence of a generic letter indicates the facility in question does in fact have a standing policy on the matter. The communication sent home reflects the policy.
Nothing indicates that the letter sent home was done in malice or to single out this specific parent or child. The mom, not the school, took the story public. If there is any "shame" involved she brought it upon herself in her attempt to shame the school for doing what makes sense.
The discussion should be centred around how to encourage healthy eating choices in a communal environment like a classroom. Imagine if there is no policy. One day a kid has Oreo cookies. The next someone else has two donuts. Another day one child might bring a Costco family sized pack of Twizzlers to hand out to their buddies.
Where does it end? Oh the humanity.
Or, the mom could just suck it up and avoid sending cookies as a snack for mealtime at day care.
While the original link doesn't, after 8 pages of discussion, there is serious question as to whether or not this is actually a school policy. There is another link that has the administration saying there is no such policy and other places that states that the school asks parents to send candy for school parties.
It makes a world of difference, in the long run, on whether or not this woman can be deemed an idiot for not following the rules if there were no rules in the first place.
0 -
The existence of a pre-made form letter is fairly strong evidence of a policy already in place. Could it have been the teacher's own pet policy? Maybe.
In the end it doesn't matter that much. If in the name of classroom harmony applying a reasonable policy evenly causes someone to run to the media claiming woe is me, I will remain unimpressed with the crying.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
-1
-
Great image Mr. K. Surprised someone would flag it. Has all humour left the building?You are assuming there is a policy based on a letter that you have no first hand knowledge off. Makes absolutely no sense on your part. Can you show there is actually a policy without assuming?
There seems to be an awful lot of assuming to the contrary in this thread.
If you read back my primary points have nothing to do with this specific case and everything to do with whether such a policy is reasonable. It is, it isn't uncommon, and certainly isn't a story work making the evening news.
0 -
Just to clear this up as much as possible. This is from the USAToday storyQuestions over the note remain. Brenda Dean, the director of Children's Academy, a private preschool program through Aurora Public Schools, said she is investigating the note, adding that it should not have gone out to any parent.
Dean said it is not school policy to tell parents what children can or can't eat for lunch. She plans to speak to the teacher to find out the situation.
I don't find it reasonable that a public school have rules about what I send for my kid to eat. Rules that ban peanuts or other allergens protect allergic kids and are fine. Rules that govern food brought to share with everyone are fine. Banning kids from sharing their food to prevent allergy issues all fine. But I don't need the school attempting to dictate what I can pack based on their idea of what my kid should eat. I would object to such rules and work to change them should they appear.
A private school is a different issue.
ETA story link0 -
auntstephie321 wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »goldfishgoo wrote: »I think the very basic issue is why are the schools dictating what a child can and can not bring for lunch? These kids are not government property.
I'm not a fan of dispensing birth control to a 15 year old girl but I am not going to tell another mother she can't no matter what I approve or disapprove of. It drives me crazy to see 12 year old girls drinking lattes at Starbucks. Do I have the right to take said beverage out of their hand? Schools have become more and more the substitute parents. Even worse they are dictating how parents will feed their children. "Oh, your son does not like bread?" "Too bad. The rules clearly state you can't just bring cheese slices and apples. It must be a sandwich." "Oh, you don't like you child to drink milk or juice?" "Yeah, well we don't approve of that water you sent." "Two cookies in your daughter's lunch box?!" "Are you crazy? That's not healthy. WE know what is best for that kid!" (notice I don't say 'your kid' because clearly the child belongs to the state...at least they sure act like it)
At some point enough is enough. Even the principal said the teacher was out of line.
Because there are state and federal guidelines in place that must be met. If they are not met, the school loses funding and/or accreditation.
That's the problem! Why is the government making these guidelines? Where do they get the right? They are not the parents. People will gripe for the government to stay out of their beds, off their bodies, on and on. But it is perfectly okay to dictate what a parent can give his/her own children for school lunch? No, absolutely not.
The schools don't have to follow the guidelines if they don't take the government money...but then that translates to higher taxes and most people won't vote for that option. So, it is on the public if they don't want the government involved. I live in a school district with higher taxes and the only government funds they accept are for their nutrition programs because they provide free breakfast, lunches and snacks to kids in need and they even offer free breakfast, lunch, and snacks during the summer to anyone under the age of 18, or anyone with special needs, and they offer these same meals to adults for about $1.50 per meal, I believe. We still have Christmas and Easter breaks in our school district (gasp!) because of the limited involvement with the federal government. Don't want the government involved? Don't choose a government funded school. The woman in this story is taking advantage of a program that is essentially free day care paid for by...the government. If she doesn't want them telling her what to do, she is free to pay for another, non government funded, option.
That is her point, the tax dollars are taken out of the community, funneled through the federal government then Public schools are forced to either comply with their arbitrary guidelines or not receive the tax dollars that were taken from them to begin with.
Its all a power grab for the federal government, it's not about low income government funded programs these are Public schools
"Government money" isn't magical money that appears out of nowhere, its paid in by tax payers. You have to pay taxes then they make you jump through their specially selected hoops to get it back to fund programs in your own community. Does no one else see anything wrong with that?
Not all local tax money is funneled through the federal government. Our local property taxes are much higher than some surrounding areas and our sales taxes are also higher. Most of those dollars are funds allocated to the public schools and other programs that voters have agreed are important enough to spend the money on.
Yes, I think there are a lot of things wrong with how the government and things run in this country, but I also think there are a lot of things wrong with the people in this country. When a person can be given a gift (which is what I would call free day care) and then turn in to a media darling who is a VICTIM of SHAMING because someone dared address the rules they are expected to follow for accepting said gift, then we have a lot of problems as a society. The sense of entitlement and the lack of personal responsibility in this country is appalling. Oh no, someone wrote me a letter because I broke the rules? I'm a victim I say, a VICTIM!
Do you have some evidence that the family in this story doesn't pay any taxes, and is therefore not contributing to the public funds that make programs like this possible? Military families in NC qualified for Head Start programs like this preschool program, and they were certainly employed and paying their taxes.
I wasn't trying to imply that they aren't paying taxes, but it is still a gift that most tax paying families don't receive. If it's not available to everyone who pays taxes, then it's a special benefit that is gifted to those who qualify. It is not a requirement to apply for or attend these programs, so if we invite the government to be this involved in our lives, we give up something in return.
BTW, I am not necessarily against these types of programs because I know many people and children who have benefitted from them.
I doubt most tax paying families would be willing to give up their income and lifestyle to get to a financial level where they qualify for these programs, either. And just for giggles, here are the "eligibility factors," at least one of which must be present for a child to qualify for the preschool program in CO depending on age (not all tied to income):
- The child is eligible to receive free or reduced-cost meals pursuant to the provisions of the Federal “National School Lunch Act.”
- Homelessness of the child’s family
- An abusive adult residing in the home of the child
- Drug or alcohol abuse in the child’s family
- Either parent of the child was less than eighteen years of age and unmarried at the time of the birth of the child
- The child’s parent or guardian has not successfully completed a high school education or its equivalent
- Frequent relocation by the child’s family to new residences
- Poor social skills of the child
Children are also eligible:
- If they are in need of language development, including but not limited to the ability to speak English
- If they are receiving services from the State Department of Social Services as neglected or dependent children (i.e. foster children).
Based on that list, I'm not going make assumptions about the family in this story. For all I know, they qualify because she took the kid and left an abusive spouse, and is now a single parent with no savings and little income trying to do what's best. I can't fault someone for wanting the best chance for their kid, and the fact that the schoo. Rthat govern food brought to share with everyone are fine. Banning kids from sharing their food to prevent allergy issues all fine. But I don't need the school attempting to dictate what I can pack based on their idea of what my kid should eat. I would object to such rules and work to change them should they appear.
A private school is a different issue.
ETA story linkJust to clear this up as much as possible. This is from the USAToday storyQuestions over the note remain. Brenda Dean, the director of Children's Academy, a private preschool program through Aurora Public Schools, said she is investigating the note, adding that it should not have gone out to any parent.
Dean said it is not school policy to tell parents what children can or can't eat for lunch. She plans to speak to the teacher to find out the situation.
I don't find it reasonable that a public school have rules about what I send for my kid to eat. Rules that ban peanuts or other allergens protect allergic kids and are fine. Rules that govern food brought to share with everyone are fine. Banning kids from sharing their food to prevent allergy issues all fine. But I don't need the school attempting to dictate what I can pack based on their idea of what my kid should eat. I would object to such rules and work to change them should they appear.
A private school is a different issue.
ETA story link
"The director of the Children’s Academy told KUSA-TV she’s investigating the note, adding that it should not have gone out to any parent. The director said it is not school policy to tell parents what children can or can’t eat for lunch.
Patty Moon, a spokeswoman for the Aurora Public Schools, said the messages sent out by the school are meant to be helpful and are not meant to be lunch shaming.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2054732/mom-is-reportedly-a-victim-of-lunch-shaming-for-sending-oreos-in-daughters-lunch/#Jq8FeMBL76Q5Bmuv.99"
This article indicates that it is policy of the public schools to send these messages home. The first woman quoted is the director of the private school. The little girl goes to that private school as part of the public school program, so she is a student of the public school system.I would object to such rules and work to change them should they appear.
And how would you do that? Would you get involved in the parents association? Petition the school board? Find a different school district? Would you wait to do that 8 months in to the school year or would you be proactive? I have no problem with people fighting to change the rules. I do have a problem with people running to the media and crying SHAMED and VICTIM because they got a simple reminder to follow the rules. Any parent truly interested in the rules and how they affect or effect their child will generally try to gain an understanding of the rules before they agree to them.
It appears from the article I quoted that the public school district does send this form letter home, but even if that wasn't normal and it was just something this one teacher does, how was the letter that this mother received shaming in any way? Did it condemn her as a parent? Did it say she was worthless? No, it said every child needs...It wasn't even addressed to the woman by name! Her daughter wasn't shamed, either. From all of the articles I read, they all simply said that she wasn't allowed to eat her Oreos and was offered an alternative snack (which the mom says is a lie because her daughter was hungry when she came home, but really, how many 4 year olds are going to want to eat an apple when they know that there are Oreos in their bag that they can't eat?) If the teacher who did this does this as a policy with any students who brings inappropriate snacks, she is not singling out this little girl or shaming her. The teacher was simply telling her, sorry, you can't do that. Is the teacher following guidelines? I tend to believe so from what I've read on the Colorado dept of Education website and quotes. Other people believe not.
If that letter to the mom was lunch shaming, then her comments are fat shaming "“She is not overweight by any means..."
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2054732/mom-is-reportedly-a-victim-of-lunch-shaming-for-sending-oreos-in-daughters-lunch/#Jq8FeMBL76Q5Bmuv.99
Doesn't this imply that it would be okay to deny a fat kid Oreos?
This SHAMING ridiculousness is getting out of hand. I saw another article today from a week ago where a dad says his 5 year old daughter was SHAMED for wearing a spaghetti strap dress. It was against the dress code and she was made to put a t-shirt on. How is that shaming? Not one person associated with the school has been quoted as saying she was indecent or too sinful or anything else, yet people are blasting the school. They have a policy. He was given a copy of that policy about 8 months ago when she started school, yet he didn't familiarize himself with it until AFTER she had to put on a t-shirt over her dress and then he ran to the media and got his 15 minutes of fame because his daughter was SHAMED for being asked to follow the rules that he thinks are unfair. Yeah, if you really cared about the rules, you would have read the information provided to you BEFORE she even started school.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I wonder what would have happened if the child had a baggie of homemade cookies?0
-
This content has been removed.
-
You going with Mayweather? Oh, I'll be eating dinaguan.softblondechick wrote: »I wonder what would have happened if the child had a baggie of homemade cookies?
That's it. I'm eating cookies tonight during the fight.
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
0 -
So, im kind of a B*****. That being said, I have had a few rounds with Teachers and Admins in the school systems more than once. Im sure they were glad when my kids finished school, lol. The day ANYONE tells me what I can and can not pack my child for a lunch will be the last day they would ever say it to me. If they want to foot the grocery bill, stop in in the morning and pack that lunch then, and only then will they have a say. Have you seen some of the options they have in the school lunches? GROSS. My Grand daughter will come home so hungry her belly growls because what they served was disgusting, over coked and rubbery, or so slimy greasy it turned her stomach.
I think most parents know whats best for their children, and the schools should leave it at that.0 -
Just to clear this up as much as possible. This is from the USAToday storyQuestions over the note remain. Brenda Dean, the director of Children's Academy, a private preschool program through Aurora Public Schools, said she is investigating the note, adding that it should not have gone out to any parent.
Dean said it is not school policy to tell parents what children can or can't eat for lunch. She plans to speak to the teacher to find out the situation.
I don't find it reasonable that a public school have rules about what I send for my kid to eat. Rules that ban peanuts or other allergens protect allergic kids and are fine. Rules that govern food brought to share with everyone are fine. Banning kids from sharing their food to prevent allergy issues all fine. But I don't need the school attempting to dictate what I can pack based on their idea of what my kid should eat. I would object to such rules and work to change them should they appear.
A private school is a different issue.
ETA story link
"The director of the Children’s Academy told KUSA-TV she’s investigating the note, adding that it should not have gone out to any parent. The director said it is not school policy to tell parents what children can or can’t eat for lunch.
Patty Moon, a spokeswoman for the Aurora Public Schools, said the messages sent out by the school are meant to be helpful and are not meant to be lunch shaming.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2054732/mom-is-reportedly-a-victim-of-lunch-shaming-for-sending-oreos-in-daughters-lunch/#Jq8FeMBL76Q5Bmuv.99"
This article indicates that it is policy of the public schools to send these messages home. The first woman quoted is the director of the private school. The little girl goes to that private school as part of the public school program, so she is a student of the public school system.I would object to such rules and work to change them should they appear.
And how would you do that? Would you get involved in the parents association? Petition the school board? Find a different school district? Would you wait to do that 8 months in to the school year or would you be proactive? I have no problem with people fighting to change the rules. I do have a problem with people running to the media and crying SHAMED and VICTIM because they got a simple reminder to follow the rules. Any parent truly interested in the rules and how they affect or effect their child will generally try to gain an understanding of the rules before they agree to them.
It appears from the article I quoted that the public school district does send this form letter home, but even if that wasn't normal and it was just something this one teacher does, how was the letter that this mother received shaming in any way? Did it condemn her as a parent? Did it say she was worthless? No, it said every child needs...It wasn't even addressed to the woman by name! Her daughter wasn't shamed, either. From all of the articles I read, they all simply said that she wasn't allowed to eat her Oreos and was offered an alternative snack (which the mom says is a lie because her daughter was hungry when she came home, but really, how many 4 year olds are going to want to eat an apple when they know that there are Oreos in their bag that they can't eat?) If the teacher who did this does this as a policy with any students who brings inappropriate snacks, she is not singling out this little girl or shaming her. The teacher was simply telling her, sorry, you can't do that. Is the teacher following guidelines? I tend to believe so from what I've read on the Colorado dept of Education website and quotes. Other people believe not.
If that letter to the mom was lunch shaming, then her comments are fat shaming "“She is not overweight by any means..."
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2054732/mom-is-reportedly-a-victim-of-lunch-shaming-for-sending-oreos-in-daughters-lunch/#Jq8FeMBL76Q5Bmuv.99
Doesn't this imply that it would be okay to deny a fat kid Oreos?
This SHAMING ridiculousness is getting out of hand. I saw another article today from a week ago where a dad says his 5 year old daughter was SHAMED for wearing a spaghetti strap dress. It was against the dress code and she was made to put a t-shirt on. How is that shaming? Not one person associated with the school has been quoted as saying she was indecent or too sinful or anything else, yet people are blasting the school. They have a policy. He was given a copy of that policy about 8 months ago when she started school, yet he didn't familiarize himself with it until AFTER she had to put on a t-shirt over her dress and then he ran to the media and got his 15 minutes of fame because his daughter was SHAMED for being asked to follow the rules that he thinks are unfair. Yeah, if you really cared about the rules, you would have read the information provided to you BEFORE she even started school.
I don't disagree about the whole "shaming" issue. As I've said at least twice in this thread, going to the media was an overreaction in my opinion.
Yes in order to change a rule or policy I would do all the things you suggest in your post. Except probably finding a new school district. Changing districts is not easy. It means finding a new place to live. Our family is solidly middle class and we can't afford that. I'm under the impression, based on the program the kid is in, that this family is most likely not in as good a financial position as my family is right now. Short of moving, there are very few ways to change schools let alone whole districts.
But based on the spotty and inconsistent nature of the reporting on this we have no way of knowing whether this mom has done any of those more reasonable things nor not.
If this is the first time this has been an issue then going to the media is a massive overreaction and silly. If however, this has been an ongoing issue and she's joined the PTA, and lobbied the school board etc then it looks slightly different (though I still agree the shaming is the wrong description of what the note did)
I think the first scenario is more likely, but who really knows.
But none of those considerations invalidate the point I was really trying to make. That it is a usurpation of parental authority and responsibility for the school/government to dictate what parents can send for their own children to eat based solely on what the government determines is healthy.
Eta, I tried to fix the quoting so it was clear who said what, but I'm not sure I was totally successful.0 -
This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions