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.
I think most of you are setting a bad example for your kids.
For the ones that said arrest the teacher for theft. Fine. When a kid brings chips and a candy bar for lunch, arrest the parents for neglect.
Why are some of you eating lunch at the school? That wasn't necessary for generations. You are turning your kids into weenies.
When your kid is in school the school is in charge, not you.
What in the hell? Are you serious?
It's called being involved.
When my child is in school, he is still my responsibility.
Me eating lunch with him at school is not a necessity, but then neither is his Wii U, or his Summer Soccer Development Club. They are things he likes. Should he be deprived from things he likes just because it might turn him into a weenie? Having lunch with dad is an occasional treat and a pleasant surprise, much the same as if my wife pops up outside my office to go out to lunch with me.
I communicate with his teacher(s) throughout the year to monitor him beyond what's on a quarterly piece of paper. I guess this is also too much? Heck, why even go to parent/teacher meetings? He's the school's responsibility during school hours, right? Why should I care what he does in school? If he gets into a fight? Let the school handle it and only the school, right?
Last edited by Arcenal813; 06-11-2015 at 01:11 PM..
For the ones that said arrest the teacher for theft. Fine. When a kid brings chips and a candy bar for lunch, arrest the parents for neglect.
Then we better extend that into homes as well. I assume you want government workers making surprise inspections at people's homes to make sure kids aren't getting neglected, correct? I'm assuming you are not saying neglect at home is ok?
Please tell me the inspectors will also make sure you keep a log of your children's tv time and exercise regiment that must be submitted each week.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkalot
Why are some of you eating lunch at the school?
Because I'm a good parent who likes to see what is actually occurring at school. BTW, I eat with my child while I do my Watch D.O.G. volunteer work at the school.
Unlike others, I don't expect the school to be my substitute as a parent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkalot
That wasn't necessary for generations. You are turning your kids into weenies.
And how many generations were they monitoring the nutrition of what kids brought from home?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkalot
When your kid is in school the school is in charge, not you.
That's the excuse of every parent who forfeits their responsibility of raising their kids to schools has to say.
But it is not just a slimjim and a cookie that is responsible. Our entire rushed yet sedimentary lifestyles contribute as much or more than our love of fast food and junk food. On top of that you have people so afraid to let kids go out and play that video games and TV are the number 1 sporting activity.
I dont think disallowing occasional treats in the school is going to make an impact.
Agreed if they want to help with childhood obesity than go back to PE every day, stop cutting back on recesses, and stop taking recess away from kids who get in minor trouble. In other words teach kids how to actually exercise so that they can have a lifetime of better health.
The OP article shows the splendid intellects of the food cops:
What's considered to be healthy and unhealthy changes yearly - one year sugar and carbs are unhealthy, then you need to avoid cholesterol and go jogging, the next few years fat of any kind is unhealthy and jogging is too damaging to knees and backs, then sugar again, then fats are good but protein needs to be limited, then we must be wary of fats and sugar and too much protein ......
So I doubt a Peperami sausage or a Scotch egg is a terrible snack, maybe even cake is a harmless dessert every now and then. But I do have to admit I think most of the meal should be simple natural foods that aren't processed much except for salt, spices, and cooking.
Here's an example that's probably not very good, but which I ate recently: beef, barley, and fresh carrot stew or hearty soup, instead of instant mashed potatoes, carrots from a can, and canned beef chunks in a gravy made of cornstarch, MSG, salt, sugar, and about 10 different chemicals.
Or handmade pizza with a shell of mixed white and whole wheat flour, a simple sauce of tomato paste, and some real cheese - instead of some kind of factory-assembled pizza topped with cheese food product, and containing a list of chemicals, sugars, and hydrogenated fats longer than Freddie Gray's rap sheet.
You want to talk about processed foods, that is exactly what kids get in their school lunches. My wife is actually a cook at the schools, and that is one of the reasons we insist that our son takes his own lunches to school with him.
You want to talk about processed foods, that is exactly what kids get in their school lunches. My wife is actually a cook at the schools, and that is one of the reasons we insist that our son takes his own lunches to school with him.
I'm in the schools and there's some days I couldn't tell you what type of meat they are serving.
All I get from school cafeterias these days is a cup of Iced Tea that they make ONLY for the teachers.
Why are some of you eating lunch at the school? That wasn't necessary for generations. You are turning your kids into weenies.
For generations, kids walked home for lunch where Mom had a sandwich waiting. How is that any different?
When they were younger, I ate lunch with my kids on the one afternoon each month that I volunteered for the elementary school library. It was always great fun, and it wasn't unusual for other kids to clamor to sit at our table.
My husband works right down the street from the middle school and high school. He takes Which Wich to our youngest once a month and eats with him in the cafeteria. He takes one of the high schoolers out for lunch every couple of weeks. Why? Because life is busy, and it's a great opportunity for him to spend time with them and show an interest in their school experience.
All three kids also frequently show up at his workplace after school to do homework in one of the empty cubes and get a window into his day. I don't think this in any way hobbles their emotional growth. They're all perfectly well-adjusted and very capable of exercising independence.
Actually, this all raises a question: are you equally critical of both father and mother who eat lunch with junior at school on occasion, or does Dad get a pass? Because I sense a huge double-standard brewing here. Dad is a super-hero because he's involved, while Mom is a disdained helicopter parent.
Last edited by randomparent; 06-11-2015 at 03:36 PM..
Do skinny people get waivers ? You assume too much here.
Every other week was considered a treat IMHO.
It was done in moderation.
Not like I fed my son McDonald's every night for dinner here.
And it only lasted til he went to middle school.
I'm not assuming anything. They are just restricting toxic crap from their school, the same way schools used to let teachers and 18 year old high schoolers go outside and smoke, and now we know better and you can't even be anywhere on school property and smoke, even in your car. No kid is going to suffer if they have to wait till they get home to get a cookie. I know you probably see this comparison as silly, but IMO it's really not.
Schools have always restricted certain things from school they deemed harmful to children, what's changing is the definition of what's harmless and what's not. You and your kids may be fine, but the obesity rate among kids has skyrocketed, there are now children getting Type II Diabetes and high blood pressure, which was almost unheard of 20 or 30 years ago.
You might not think that's a big deal, but it poses a great risk for us in the future in terms of economics. Apparently too many parents don't know enough about nutrition, as evidenced by these rising rates. I guarantee you there are kids in schools showing up daily with Pop Tarts for lunch and cookies for after the Pop Tarts and juice to drink with the Pop Tarts, and many of the parents have no idea that's not only unhealthy, but actually toxic in the long term. So schools step in, and they make rules. No, skinny kids don't get a pass. You can be skinny and still get diabetes. Like I said, I'm not sure this is the most effective way to tackle the issue, but I can see why they are trying this tack.
I'm not assuming anything. They are just restricting toxic crap from their school, the same way schools used to let teachers and 18 year old high schoolers go outside and smoke, and now we know better and you can't even be anywhere on school property and smoke, even in your car. No kid is going to suffer if they have to wait till they get home to get a cookie. I know you probably see this comparison as silly, but IMO it's really not.
Schools have always restricted certain things from school they deemed harmful to children, what's changing is the definition of what's harmless and what's not. You and your kids may be fine, but the obesity rate among kids has skyrocketed, there are now children getting type II Diabetes and having high blood pressure. You might not think that's a big deal, but it poses a great risk for us in the future in terms of economics. Apparently too many parents don't know enough about nutrition, as evidenced by these rising rates. I guarantee you there are kids in schools showing up daily with Pop Tarts for lunch and cookies for after the Pop Tarts and juice to drink with the Pop Tarts, and many of the parents have no idea that's not only unhealthy, but actually toxic in the long term. So schools step in, and they make rules. No, skinny kids don't get a pass. You can be skinny and still get diabetes.
You have a lot of fear of almost everything.
The key word I said was MODERATION.
My son is in college now.
Neither he nor I have diabetes from our "pigging" out on McDonalds years ago.
So give it a rest about saving the world. Not everyone is obese and not everyone gets diabetes.
Go after the fat people, not all the people.
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.
