A school has banned children from eating sweets

wrote:
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.

Hmmm.... I'm one of the health-nuts in my town, and quite frankly, I
agree with both stances. I'd LOVE people to stay away from my
daughter's lunchbox/plate, but I can't get people to quit shoving candy
and other junk at her. At a recent parade, the people on the floats
weren't just tossing a piece of candy or two, but handfulls - the kids
were taking home BAGS of candy similar to what my daughter got on
Halloween. I let my daughter gorge DURING the parade, and then gave
away her leftovers (which were substantial) to some kid with so much
candy that he barely noticed the addition. Because my daughter has
unusual hair - red and very curly, people offer her candy all the time.


Currently she's in pre-school, and the parents have to provide snacks
for the whole class. In a two week period, the snacks sent included
marshmellows, Licorice, and bags of frosted cookies. The teacher said
it was occasional, but in a 2-week period, that accounted for 50% of
the snacks sent. I don't have a problem with my kid having these sorts
of things as an occasional *treat*. But everyone provides my kid with
treats, then they aren't treats anymore - rather they are staples.

At my stepson's elementary school, the teachers used candy as bribes
and rewards. Talk about a totally conter-productive attitude! Lets
give him candy (which is bad for him), glorifying it's importance. I'm
THRILLED that I'm reading about more and more schools that are banning
vending machines, or at least requiring healthy items be in the vending
machines.

I would WELCOME a healthy-food rule at my schools, in order to keep
other parents' food choices off my child's plate. Or perhaps a
no-trading policy? I guess I do understand in theory why other parents
get annoyed at being dictated to (and I certainly wouldn't like being
dictated to, myself). But I guess I just don't get why they have to
send candy, cookies and chips. Why can't they save those for an
after-school snack? And if a parent says they have to send those
things to prevent Junior for going hungry, I'd say they have a pretty
serious eating problem on their hands.

I don't guess there's a good answer here...
Cathy Weeks

"AleS" skrev i en meddelelse
ups.com...


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


Looooooool. Only in th US....


--
/\ preben nielsen
\/\

"Grahame" skrev i en meddelelse
u...

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 should go back and say THANKS instead.


--
/\ preben nielsen
\/\

Throughout my kids education both at pre-school in America and Israel,
Kindergarten and 1st grade in Israel, you are not allowed to pack candy
for school. First it is not healthy for kids to have it on a regular
basis (especially when kids eat only the junk food and don't touch the
healthy food) and secondly if one child has it the other children want
it and feel bad. There are plenty of choices for other snacks, fresh
fruit, dried fruit, cereal like cheerios in a bag, yoghurts,
sandwiches, chopped up veggies, string cheese, hard boiled eggs,
muffins e.t.c The schools teach healthy living including exercise, good
nutrition, even how to properly brush teeth. My kids have occasional
candy/junk food at home but I'm glad they don't have it at school where
it could end up being a daily occurance.
Helen


Cathy Weeks wrote:
wrote:
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.

Hmmm.... I'm one of the health-nuts in my town, and quite frankly, I
agree with both stances. I'd LOVE people to stay away from my
daughter's lunchbox/plate, but I can't get people to quit shoving candy
and other junk at her. At a recent parade, the people on the floats
weren't just tossing a piece of candy or two, but handfulls - the kids
were taking home BAGS of candy similar to what my daughter got on
Halloween. I let my daughter gorge DURING the parade, and then gave
away her leftovers (which were substantial) to some kid with so much
candy that he barely noticed the addition. Because my daughter has
unusual hair - red and very curly, people offer her candy all the time.


Currently she's in pre-school, and the parents have to provide snacks
for the whole class. In a two week period, the snacks sent included
marshmellows, Licorice, and bags of frosted cookies. The teacher said
it was occasional, but in a 2-week period, that accounted for 50% of
the snacks sent. I don't have a problem with my kid having these sorts
of things as an occasional *treat*. But everyone provides my kid with
treats, then they aren't treats anymore - rather they are staples.

At my stepson's elementary school, the teachers used candy as bribes
and rewards. Talk about a totally conter-productive attitude! Lets
give him candy (which is bad for him), glorifying it's importance. I'm
THRILLED that I'm reading about more and more schools that are banning
vending machines, or at least requiring healthy items be in the vending
machines.

I would WELCOME a healthy-food rule at my schools, in order to keep
other parents' food choices off my child's plate. Or perhaps a
no-trading policy? I guess I do understand in theory why other parents
get annoyed at being dictated to (and I certainly wouldn't like being
dictated to, myself). But I guess I just don't get why they have to
send candy, cookies and chips. Why can't they save those for an
after-school snack? And if a parent says they have to send those
things to prevent Junior for going hungry, I'd say they have a pretty
serious eating problem on their hands.

I don't guess there's a good answer here...
Cathy Weeks

Rosalie B. wrote:

I'm not sure what the breakfast club is

A "breakfast club" is a place where kids are looked after before
school, they can play and they are given breakfast. Many are run by
private companies and are used by working parents and the parents pay;
in some deprived areas the local authority might fund a scheme,
especially if they think a lot of children aren't getting fed before
school.

My son goes to an "after-school care club" (similar deal but after
school!), and the club is a "sweet-free zone" though the school itself
allows sweets.

nor can I really tell where Middlesbrough is.

Middlesbrough is in the north-east of England. AFAIK it has quite a lot
of deprived areas and diet and dental health are poor.

It sounds like this is a study that is being done and presumably is
being monitored

Well, they do say "Children will be screened at the end of the one-year
pilot to see if oral hygiene has improved". I doubt they can afford to
do much more monitoring than that.

I would hope that the parents would have been contacted in advance and their consent
obtained.

I expect the parents have been informed and the school governors (who
include parent representatives) would have to agree, and I hope that
parents have been consulted, but it's unlikely that they'd have tried
to get the explicit consent of every parent in the school.

All the best,

Cailleach (living in Scotland where school meals are reasonably good
but general diet is poor)

Rosalie B. wrote:
"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.

I had a look on the Internet and I couldn't find any more details about
this particular story - I did find the school's webpage where it had
pictures of the "fruit tuck shop" (a "tuck shop" is a small scale shop
selling sweets or snacks within a school or similar organisation).
http://www.millenniumschools.co.uk/p...tml?1140603824

Once I found the right terms to search on (Tees Community Dental "Oral
Health Promotion"), I found a lot more about dental health in
Middlesbrough - which is in the north east of England. It seems that
the area has a particularly poor record of dental health, with a very
high percentage of 5yo children with tooth decay.

It seems that this scheme is part of a general program to improve the
health of children's teeth in the area.

(Posting from misc.kids)
--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three

"Bob" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:46:18 +1100, "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.

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.

This is a good case of one right conflicting with another right.
Something has to give.

In this case, I am with the teacher. You are interfering with the
teacher's attempt to teach good nutrition. In other words, you are
sending a confusing message to the other kids. If you allow your kid
one lolly, surely you can give it to them at home.

But the goal of good nutrition should be to fit the junk in without making
it some mysterious thing. A Lollypop a week isnt a big deal.. though maybe
having them in the car after visiting the bank would be better. They should
know how a piece of chocolate cake can fit into a balanced diet but a whole
chocolate cake can not.

Tori

"Tori M" wrote in message
et...
But the goal of good nutrition should be to fit the junk in without making
it some mysterious thing. A Lollypop a week isnt a big deal.. though
maybe having them in the car after visiting the bank would be better.
They should know how a piece of chocolate cake can fit into a balanced
diet but a whole chocolate cake can not.

Having had experience as the teacher of both pre-school and elementary age
children,
I think that perhaps the objection to the child eating the lollipop at
school is less an issue of nutrition than one of safety....if you think
about it, lollipops can be a rather dangerous thing when given to a child,
especially if he/she is in a large group of other rambunctious
children...you know, sticks and all. I never let my children have a
lollipop unless I am supervising and they are sitting down. This might be
the biggest objection to it being in the school cafeteria or classroom.

In u,
Grahame typed:

[...]

Here's something you should be concerned about :
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/21...exual-assaults !

--
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

Tracey wrote:

Having had experience as the teacher of both pre-school and elementary age
children,
I think that perhaps the objection to the child eating the lollipop at
school is less an issue of nutrition than one of safety....if you think
about it, lollipops can be a rather dangerous thing when given to a child,
especially if he/she is in a large group of other rambunctious
children...you know, sticks and all.

I doubt it. I suspect the teacher would take away a mini-chocolate
bar, if that was sent instead.

Cathy Weeks