Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your article is dated April 2011, but is very apt to this discussion in that it does mention the national debate about school food and also the one size fits all meals. Too many people just don't see that their baby fat little 4 year olds have become a bit more fat as 7 year olds and won't be so fat eating the proportions that the USDA rules call for. I am sure that the food value won't drop much, if any, but the amount of what is served will drop and kids will be ravenous by the end of the day.
I think that many of our posters needed to read this link before they went off but don't think may have done so. The link I refer to is:
This woman taught junior high science a number of years ad then became a mother. She can see things that most mothers here can't or won't. My wife who has studied a bit of nutrition all along with her 39 years of teaching what I call Home Ec. doesn't want to agree with what this woman says but won't read the link either. It takes too much time.
The conditions in the Chicago schools in 2011 are discussed in your article but I am trying to get across that the rules have changed since the debate it talks about has ended and the USDA has put out its new rules. There will be more coming from them, I am sure. I hope all these people can keep their kids fed under these new rules but fear they won't. At least those who can barely keep their kids fed and clothed will see their kids fall behind from lack of energy in the afternoon.
But no where in any of the USDA program documents does it state that children are NOT allowed to bring their own lunch. The USDA is only regulating what the schools can serve as part of their school lunch.
I like how your argument has changed though. At first you were saying that everyone will be forced to eat these school lunches and won't have any energy because of the lack of food. Now...you're arguing that the people that only can afford the school lunches will suffer.
I've also read numerous local papers that say that schools are still allowed to serve non-USDA food items, they just can't be "rung up" as a school lunch and will be charged ala carte. Snacks are still sold throughout the day in high schools as well.
I don't know about the schools in you "New" state, but I do know that in the local high school that my wife taught for 39 years in all snacks were gone over two years and even the only drinks allowed were fruit juice and bottled water. I bet those bottles of water were much better than from the refrigerated fountains all over the place.
Do you fail to see that many people, in the other states of the US, just can't afford to feed their kids more than the school lunches and the amounts of food in those things just won't cut it any more. As one of the mothers I linked said, the food is nutritional but just not enough for her kids who go directly to sports practices when school is out. Look at the pictures of her kids and tell me that those lunches are going to help them grow, let alone be ready for sports practices after school.
Try this link for some more technical discussion of what this will do to our kids in the end.
And...I'm sorry to play the age card here...but going solely off your posts on this board...you are at youngest 77 years old. Have you been to a school this year? Have you seen any of these new "rules" first hand? Or are you getting all your information from those articles you posted?
I'm a conservative just like you...and I've agreed with you in plenty of other threads on these boards...but I just can't let this one go.
Age calculation: you said you taught for 28 years and stopped in 1986. Basing that on the fact that you retired in 86 (And the youngest you could have been at that time would have been 51 - starting teaching at 23) you would be 77 now. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I read the things you are talking about but my wife, who had been in that school for 39 years till she finally got a bellyful one year ago and retired, talked to one of the cooks about the rules they have had slammed on them just Wednesday.
Your math is very correct but I had to slip in 3 years in the Army of the US between graduation from college and teaching. Also, I had one year after the Army to get a MS degree. I started teaching at 25 and stopped at 53. That would make me three months short of 80 since I am 79 now.
Now remember, my wife talked with one of the cooks and got those rules stacked on her. They all agree with what these mothers are talking about. I am just glad my boys are long out of school because neither of them could subsist long on what the portions today are.
My wife keeps saying "There is nothing you can do about this. You can't fight the federal government". I believe that I can if I can get this message out to enough people. At least I can try. Wait till you see my next "fight city hall" thread.
Your article is dated April 2011, but is very apt to this discussion in that it does mention the national debate about school food and also the one size fits all meals. Too many people just don't see that their baby fat little 4 year olds have become a bit more fat as 7 year olds and won't be so fat eating the proportions that the USDA rules call for. I am sure that the food value won't drop much, if any, but the amount of what is served will drop and kids will be ravenous by the end of the day.
I think that many of our posters needed to read this link before they went off but don't think may have done so. The link I refer to is:
This woman taught junior high science a number of years ad then became a mother. She can see things that most mothers here can't or won't. My wife who has studied a bit of nutrition all along with her 39 years of teaching what I call Home Ec. doesn't want to agree with what this woman says but won't read the link either. It takes too much time.
The conditions in the Chicago schools in 2011 are discussed in your article but I am trying to get across that the rules have changed since the debate it talks about has ended and the USDA has put out its new rules. There will be more coming from them, I am sure. I hope all these people can keep their kids fed under these new rules but fear they won't. At least those who can barely keep their kids fed and clothed will see their kids fall behind from lack of energy in the afternoon.
A classic case of a "one size fits all" mentality. I agree with the article, and would go further to say that parents are the best judge of what their child's nutritional needs may be. They may not be the best informed, but they know their children. To some extent children also know what their body needs. It is called "cravings." Cravings for a particular food item is usually your body telling you that it needs that food. I still get cravings for a nice salad when I do not get enough vegetables, or cravings for a nice porterhouse when I do not get enough protein.
I also have no problem with the USDA making dietary recommendations. What I have a problem with are the fascist schools that say "the USDA way or the highway." Like in North Carolina.
A classic case of a "one size fits all" mentality. I agree with the article, and would go further to say that parents are the best judge of what their child's nutritional needs may be. They may not be the best informed, but they know their children. To some extent children also know what their body needs. It is called "cravings." Cravings for a particular food item is usually your body telling you that it needs that food. I still get cravings for a nice salad when I do not get enough vegetables, or cravings for a nice porterhouse when I do not get enough protein.
I also have no problem with the USDA making dietary recommendations. What I have a problem with are the fascist schools that say "the USDA way or the highway." Like in North Carolina.
This is not just one isolated school imposing its dietary will against parents and children, but the entire State.
I don't agree about the "fascist schools" being in existence. It is the state that makes the rules for the schools and they do what they do to keep the flow of federal money coming. Now lets put the "fascist" word where it belongs and that would be the USDA which is a part of the Obama administration. I tried to keep politics out of this discussion but think it may be time to let things go. States either raise taxes, do what the feds tell them to do or just close their schools. How else was the NCLB rule forced on schools where they have to spend time teaching to tests not to what local people might like to see.
As far as the menus are concerned, i have no argument with them, as do all those mothers I linked. We all want to see kids fed properly but just don't think the required portions will allow the kids to function. As that one ND farm kid said to his mother talking about the amount of meat he would get, "That would only be two bites for me." He was the 6'5 205 kid.
For all the other posters here, it is portion that I am against not the food, itself.
A Chicago Public Schools spokeswoman said she could not say how many schools prohibit packed lunches and that decision is left to the judgment of the principals.
"While there is no formal policy, principals use common sense judgment based on their individual school environments," Monique Bond wrote in an email. "In this case, this principal is encouraging the healthier choices and attempting to make an impact that extends beyond the classroom."
This is a Chicago policy, and individual principals make the decisions. This is not a mandate from the federal government. If parents don't like the policy, they can do something about it. Join the PTA. Get involved in your childs school.
Now, have you been to the school this year? You may find that the rules are a bit different this year than even last year.
I have said REPEATEDLY that I have been to the school this year. I have been there several times. I am a member of the PTO, I have volunteered, and I have spoken to the principal. I can and DO pack my sons lunch just about every day. THIS YEAR.
And as for the new guidelines, we knew about them last year. About the middle of the school year we had meetings about the changes. If the cafeteria workers at the school your wife worked in only found out Wednesday, then they aren't being told of new information, or the school doesn't find it important to keep up to date on changes to their program.
Do you remember the little girl who the school took food from because her home supplied lunch didn't qualify under USDA rules last spring? I thought everybody knew about that one from TV alone. I can promise you that if too many people try to go the brown bag route they will find that happening. This year the rules are much different than in the past.
Yes it was a crazy random happenstance and not something that has happened before or sense, hence all the publicity. It was just stupid.
.
Quote:
Many people can afford to feed their own children but I bet you would be surprised at the number of kids who get one cooked meal each day and it is at the school.
IMO meals don't have to be cooked. Sometimes I go days eating food that doesn't have to be cooked in any way. Heat isn't magic.
A well made sandwich with veggies, meat and/or cheese, some fruit, milk if that's your thing or water if it isn't is all any kid needs for lunch. If there are special dietary restrictions or needs then the parent can deal with it. If they are starving because they don't get fed at home then we need to remove them from the home.
I purposely being harsh and painting with a broad brush but I don't think schools should be social service centers and I the whole school lunch program is set up to spend tax dollars and make money for certain industries and not feed starving children anyway. Don't even get me started on text books.
My wife is a teacher and she's seen more kids bring their lunches than ever before. Part of it is probably the new menu and also the increase in lunch prices. She went to a nutrition meeting and the director discussed the new requirements. The director made the decision to go with a six week cycle of menus. They are implementing some the changes that will take affect down the road, now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
