A school has banned children from eating sweets

A primary school has banned children from eating sweets and chocolate
in an attempt to improve dental health, teachers said today.

Instead pupils at Marton Grove Primary School in Middlesbrough can
bring fruit and other healthy food to school.

The sweet ban is part of a project to improve pupils' dental hygiene
after figures showed students are four times more likely than the
national average to have decayed or filled teeth.
Pupils who attend the school's nursery and breakfast club have
introduced supervised teeth brushing sessions. There will also be
nurses on hand to advise on tooth brushing technique.
Children will be screened at the end of the one-year pilot to see if
oral hygiene has improved.
Throughout the scheme, there will also be information events for
children, parents and staff.
Deputy head Helen Owen said:
http://newsdental.blogspot.com/2007/...om-eating.html

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat sweets?

I had a run in with my childs teacher last yr about this very thing.
She had banned eating sugar (lollies) choc etc for all her children in her
class.
In my family I dont let the kids have lollies at home.
So I provide a small lolly they can eat after lunch, that way, I know what
they are intaking and not buying rubbish at the canteen, and then can
monitor it easier at home.
It worked great until she confiscated them and sent me home a rude letter.
I sent a letter back explaining if I give my child a lolly to eat in the
playground at lunch, she had better respect me as a mother and not take it
from him, or I would come down once a week and make sure he ate lunch then
has his one l snack per week.
He hasnt had a trouble since.
I think its totally up to the parent what the child is eating. I think
teachers take FAR to much responsibility in bringing up OUR children.
Fiona
"AleS" wrote in message
ups.com...
A primary school has banned children from eating sweets and chocolate
in an attempt to improve dental health, teachers said today.

Instead pupils at Marton Grove Primary School in Middlesbrough can
bring fruit and other healthy food to school.

The sweet ban is part of a project to improve pupils' dental hygiene
after figures showed students are four times more likely than the
national average to have decayed or filled teeth.
Pupils who attend the school's nursery and breakfast club have
introduced supervised teeth brushing sessions. There will also be
nurses on hand to advise on tooth brushing technique.
Children will be screened at the end of the one-year pilot to see if
oral hygiene has improved.
Throughout the scheme, there will also be information events for
children, parents and staff.
Deputy head Helen Owen said:
http://newsdental.blogspot.com/2007/...om-eating.html

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat sweets?

In u,
Grahame typed:
I had a run in with my childs teacher last yr about this very thing.
She had banned eating sugar (lollies) choc etc for all her children
in her class.

Sounds fair.

In my family I dont let the kids have lollies at home.

Sounds fair.

So I provide a small lolly they can eat after lunch, that way, I know
what they are intaking and not buying rubbish at the canteen, and
then can monitor it easier at home.

So you don't let them eat lollies at home, but you send them to school with
one???

It worked great until she confiscated them

Sounds fair.

and sent me home a rude
letter. I sent a letter back explaining if I give my child a lolly to eat
in the playground at lunch, she had better respect me as a
mother and not take it from him,

Who is resposible for discipline in the school, you or the teacher? Should
each child have individual rule sets provided by their parents? What a great
idea, eh!

or I would come down once a week and
make sure he ate lunch then has his one l snack per week.
He hasnt had a trouble since.
I think its totally up to the parent what the child is eating. I think
teachers take FAR to much responsibility in bringing up OUR children.

You know what; you GIVE the teacher that responsibility by sending them to
school. If you don't like the school rules, then remove the child from the
school & take responsibility for their education yourself.

Fiona
"AleS" wrote in message
ups.com...
A primary school has banned children from eating sweets and chocolate
in an attempt to improve dental health, teachers said today.

Instead pupils at Marton Grove Primary School in Middlesbrough can
bring fruit and other healthy food to school.

The sweet ban is part of a project to improve pupils' dental hygiene
after figures showed students are four times more likely than the
national average to have decayed or filled teeth.
Pupils who attend the school's nursery and breakfast club have
introduced supervised teeth brushing sessions. There will also be
nurses on hand to advise on tooth brushing technique.
Children will be screened at the end of the one-year pilot to see if
oral hygiene has improved.
Throughout the scheme, there will also be information events for
children, parents and staff.
Deputy head Helen Owen said:
http://newsdental.blogspot.com/2007/...om-eating.html

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat
sweets?



--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees
the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

Dicipline is controlling a badly behaved child. Not allowing a child to eat
a lolly at lunch time once a week that is provided by the parent is NOT
decipline its stupidity.

It would be dicipline If I didnt give my child the lolly and the teacher
knew my wishes. They would be inforcing MY dicipline, not theirs.
If my child misbehaved in class or spoke rudely etc, I would expect the
teacher to dicipline. But if I put something in their lunch box, then I
would expect the teacher to make sure my wishes are respected. As I would
respect them keeping order at school.

"Bully" wrote in message
...
In u,
Grahame typed:
I had a run in with my childs teacher last yr about this very thing.
She had banned eating sugar (lollies) choc etc for all her children
in her class.

Sounds fair.

In my family I dont let the kids have lollies at home.

Sounds fair.

So I provide a small lolly they can eat after lunch, that way, I know
what they are intaking and not buying rubbish at the canteen, and
then can monitor it easier at home.

So you don't let them eat lollies at home, but you send them to school
with one???

It worked great until she confiscated them

Sounds fair.

and sent me home a rude
letter. I sent a letter back explaining if I give my child a lolly to
eat in the playground at lunch, she had better respect me as a
mother and not take it from him,

Who is resposible for discipline in the school, you or the teacher? Should
each child have individual rule sets provided by their parents? What a
great idea, eh!

or I would come down once a week and
make sure he ate lunch then has his one l snack per week.
He hasnt had a trouble since.
I think its totally up to the parent what the child is eating. I think
teachers take FAR to much responsibility in bringing up OUR children.

You know what; you GIVE the teacher that responsibility by sending them to
school. If you don't like the school rules, then remove the child from the
school & take responsibility for their education yourself.

Fiona
"AleS" wrote in message
ups.com...
A primary school has banned children from eating sweets and chocolate
in an attempt to improve dental health, teachers said today.

Instead pupils at Marton Grove Primary School in Middlesbrough can
bring fruit and other healthy food to school.

The sweet ban is part of a project to improve pupils' dental hygiene
after figures showed students are four times more likely than the
national average to have decayed or filled teeth.
Pupils who attend the school's nursery and breakfast club have
introduced supervised teeth brushing sessions. There will also be
nurses on hand to advise on tooth brushing technique.
Children will be screened at the end of the one-year pilot to see if
oral hygiene has improved.
Throughout the scheme, there will also be information events for
children, parents and staff.
Deputy head Helen Owen said:
http://newsdental.blogspot.com/2007/...om-eating.html

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat
sweets?



--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees
the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

In u,
Grahame typed:
Dicipline is controlling a badly behaved child. Not allowing a child
to eat a lolly at lunch time once a week that is provided by the
parent is NOT decipline its stupidity.

So you want the School Rules suspending for YOUR child, right?


It would be dicipline If I didnt give my child the lolly and the
teacher knew my wishes. They would be inforcing MY dicipline, not
theirs.

What?

If my child misbehaved in class or spoke rudely etc, I would expect
the teacher to dicipline. But if I put something in their lunch box,
then I would expect the teacher to make sure my wishes are respected.

Great. The secondary school were my wife works has a problem with kids
smoking. If a parent allows one of the kids to take cigarettes to school
with them and smoke them during break time, is that ok too?

As I would respect them keeping order at school.

"Bully" wrote in message
...
In u,
Grahame typed:
I had a run in with my childs teacher last yr about this very thing.
She had banned eating sugar (lollies) choc etc for all her children
in her class.

Sounds fair.

In my family I dont let the kids have lollies at home.

Sounds fair.

So I provide a small lolly they can eat after lunch, that way, I
know what they are intaking and not buying rubbish at the canteen,
and then can monitor it easier at home.

So you don't let them eat lollies at home, but you send them to
school with one???

It worked great until she confiscated them

Sounds fair.

and sent me home a rude
letter. I sent a letter back explaining if I give my child a lolly
to eat in the playground at lunch, she had better respect me as a
mother and not take it from him,

Who is resposible for discipline in the school, you or the teacher?
Should each child have individual rule sets provided by their
parents? What a great idea, eh!

or I would come down once a week and
make sure he ate lunch then has his one l snack per week.
He hasnt had a trouble since.
I think its totally up to the parent what the child is eating. I
think teachers take FAR to much responsibility in bringing up OUR
children.

You know what; you GIVE the teacher that responsibility by sending
them to school. If you don't like the school rules, then remove the
child from the school & take responsibility for their education
yourself.
Fiona
"AleS" wrote in message
ups.com...
A primary school has banned children from eating sweets and
chocolate in an attempt to improve dental health, teachers said
today. Instead pupils at Marton Grove Primary School in Middlesbrough
can
bring fruit and other healthy food to school.

The sweet ban is part of a project to improve pupils' dental
hygiene after figures showed students are four times more likely
than the national average to have decayed or filled teeth.
Pupils who attend the school's nursery and breakfast club have
introduced supervised teeth brushing sessions. There will also be
nurses on hand to advise on tooth brushing technique.
Children will be screened at the end of the one-year pilot to see
if oral hygiene has improved.
Throughout the scheme, there will also be information events for
children, parents and staff.
Deputy head Helen Owen said:
http://newsdental.blogspot.com/2007/...om-eating.html

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat
sweets?



--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist
sees the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill



--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees
the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

In news typed:
On 17 Jan 2007 20:52:39 -0800, in misc.kids "AleS"
wrote:

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat
sweets?


It think they should put more emphasis on brushing and flossing.

"Pupils who attend the school's nursery and breakfast club have introduced
supervised teeth brushing sessions" !!!

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees
the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 08:54:05 -0000, "Bully"
wrote:

In u,
Grahame typed:
Dicipline is controlling a badly behaved child. Not allowing a child
to eat a lolly at lunch time once a week that is provided by the
parent is NOT decipline its stupidity.

So you want the School Rules suspending for YOUR child, right?


It would be dicipline If I didnt give my child the lolly and the
teacher knew my wishes. They would be inforcing MY dicipline, not
theirs.

What?

I would suggest that 'pardon' is a more mannerly form of interrogative
if you have not heard, or have misunderstood, what the OP has said.


If my child misbehaved in class or spoke rudely etc, I would expect
the teacher to dicipline. But if I put something in their lunch box,
then I would expect the teacher to make sure my wishes are respected.

Great. The secondary school were my wife works has a problem with kids
smoking.

There is no smoke without fire and these "kids" should be immediately
doused with water and drip dried.

If a parent allows one of the kids to take cigarettes to school
with them and smoke them during break time, is that ok too?

It is certainly preferable to the little *******s lighting up during
class time.

"AleS" wrote:

A primary school has banned children from eating sweets and chocolate
in an attempt to improve dental health, teachers said today.

Instead pupils at Marton Grove Primary School in Middlesbrough can
bring fruit and other healthy food to school.

The sweet ban is part of a project to improve pupils' dental hygiene
after figures showed students are four times more likely than the
national average to have decayed or filled teeth.
snip

What do you think are they right? Do have children rights to eat sweets?

A child has no RIGHT to eat sweets.

I'm not sure what the breakfast club is (in the US it would most
likely be lower income students who get subsidized meals), nor can I
really tell where Middlesbrough is. I infer that it is in the UK
because they call them 'sweets' which is not normally what they would
be called in the US.

It sounds like this is a study that is being done and presumably is
being monitored and also I would hope that the parents would have been
contacted in advance and their consent obtained. If that has been
done, then I don't see the problem.

Grahame wrote:
Dicipline is controlling a badly behaved child. Not allowing a child to eat
a lolly at lunch time once a week that is provided by the parent is NOT
decipline its stupidity.

Actually, discipline is a whole lot more than punishing a bad child. I
found this in encarta:

Definition:

1. training to ensure proper behavior: the practice or methods of
teaching and enforcing acceptable patterns of behavior
2. order and control: a controlled orderly state, especially in a class
of schoolchildren
3. calm controlled behavior: the ability to behave in a controlled and
calm way even in a difficult or stressful situation
4. conscious control over lifestyle: mental self-control used in
directing or changing behavior, learning something, or training for
something
5. education activity or subject: a subject or field of activity, e.g.
an academic subject
6. punishment: punishment designed to teach somebody obedience
7. christianity church rules: the system of rules used in a religious
denomination or order

So, the teacher sees that a) candy is bad for kids, b) makes it more
difficult to maintain good discipline, and bans the eating of candy in
school. Allowing one kid a "treat" (and remember, that candy is NOT
good for you, though arguably one lolly isn't going to *harm*) is going
to make it difficult to maintain an orderly situation. Many kids do
not behave well, when they have sugar. Do you think your "right" to
send a piece of candy superceeds the right of the other kids and the
teacher to provide a good education environment?

Also, it's just not possible for a school to match every parents'
wishes and discipline ideas. It would be mayhem.

One further thing - if the school bans candy, why would your child
easily be able to get it at canteen? Wouldn't it be banned there, too?
Or is this a store not related to the school? And if so, why would
having a lolly in the lunch prevent them from purchasing it at the
canteen?

I also echo the other poster - If you don't allow candy at home, why in
the world are you sending it in the lunch?

Cathy Weeks

That reminds me of this. Perri Klass is a famous pediatrician/novelist.
I'm a bit surprised that, as recently as 1999, she doesn't mention the
awful obesity rates in children, but then the mother in question is
clearly an arrogant control freak anyway.

Lenona.


http://www.jamesbeard.org/awards/200...ne_health.html

2000 James Beard Foundation Journalism Award Winner
Magazine Writing on Diet, Nutrition, and Health
Gourmet, November 1999

The Lunch Box as Battlefield

By Perri Klass


Once, in my older son's day-care class, a little boy traded away his
winter coat (in Massachusetts, in midwinter, with snow on the ground)
for an Oreo cookie. He was being raised in a white-sugar-free zone, so
he monitored the contents of the other three-year-olds' lunch boxes
with an attention bordering on obsession. He made his successful trade,
and, of course, immediately ate the Oreo. At the end of the day, when
the situation was discovered, the other child refused to return the
coat. ("We traded, he wanted to trade, and he already ate my cookie!")
And, needless to say, the white-sugar-free mother had nothing in her
bag that would pass as legal tender with any self-respecting child.
Eventually, after some intense parental pressure, the coat was
repatriated. ("I promise we'll go to the store right away, darling, and
get a whole bag of Oreos if you'll only tell us where you hid his
coat!")

So the day-care center, prodded by Mrs. No-White-Sugar, came up with an
idea: "Unhealthy" foods should be banned from all lunch boxes, thus
removing temptation from those children being raised along
nutritionally correct guidelines. No more cookies, no candy, no cake,
and, heaven forbid, non of those packaged things like potato chips.

I think things have eased up a little over the past few years. My
younger son, who's four, now attends a day-care center that actually
allows "unhealthy" foods (or, as we call them, treats), though there is
a rule, my son tells me righteously, that you have to eat your
"healthy" food first. I don't have a problem with that; it is
essentially the same rule we have at home, after all, and it can easily
be gotten around by any child with a reasonable salting of sense and
slyness.

Still, Halloween can be a problem. I knew a set of parents who waited
until their little girl was asleep on Halloween night and then went
through her trick-or-treat bag and substituted carob candies and
granola bars for everything good - and guest what? She noticed! She
complained about it to her friends, and these public-spirited parents
suggested that the rest of us might want to practice a similar policy
of substitution so all the kids could have healthy stuff together.

I have a message for you all: Stay out of my child's lunch box; stay
away from his plate! You are, of course, free to take the
whole-grains-and-lentils route, or to raise your children to think that
anything highly spiced is strange and icky and likely to lead to
immoral behavior. It may turn out to be an extremely clever strategy,
for which you'll pat yourselves on the back someday when you realize
you've created adolescents who can act out full-scale rebellions merely
by scarfing down Mounds bars. But you can't remove temptation from your
child's path by legislating what mine can eat.

It's a misguided idea anyway. The food choices that children will grow
up to make have to be choices - if there is a food you don't want
your child to eat, she has to be able to watch someone else eating it
without going into a frenzy. She may, if a food allergy is involved,
even have to be able to say, "No, thank you" to certain things.

But this is not really about nutrition. As with so much else along that
fine line between child-rearing and child-interfering, we are really
talking about manners. Yes, of course we have to teach our children
about food, about the rich and varied experiences of eating, and, yes,
about balance and health and sense, as well as about sensation and
sensibility. But there are other important lessons to be learned over
the lunch boxes, lessons about eating as a social activity and meals as
high spots in the day (not to mention the true value of an Oreo). And
as far as I'm concerned, one primary lesson for kids and parents alike
is this: It's rude to comment on what someone else is eating.