School Lunches

[crazyme5kids]

I think it is great that schools are instituting a healthier menu. My son will eat and try everything. My daughter is beyond fussy . She is 11 an just tried rice at a friends house the other day. So if she is required to take healthy choices, good. I'm hoping that eventually she will try other foods if they are one her tray 30 or 40 times.

[ccgirl]

Originally Posted by java

We had the uber "healthy" lunch plan last month and it didn't sell well.

For example- Fish taco. My kids love a fish taco- fresh fish fresh guacamole tomato salsa- mmmm served in a soft wheat tortilla.

School version of the "healthy" fish taco- Whole wheat oven fried taco shell- frozen fish sticks black beans and some low fat cheese-

So while I am sure the intention is good the execution has been weak. This month they are switching to a happy medium plan. With fresh fruit- GREAT! Fresh Veggies! GREAT! Whole grain breads - Great! Now if the main course would be less processed my kids would give it a go!

Ewww! Not only that, frozen fish sticks are not usually healthy. I love when they say healthy lunch then give full fat dressing for the salad or veggies. Ummm...kind of contradictory.

Originally Posted by mjantz

The problem is that the schools can only do so much. They can serve broccoli & brown rice until the cows come home but if dinner is a rotation of KFC, pizza & burgers you're going to meet with a lot of resistance.

You are absolutely right.

Originally Posted by Mkrop

And I think some people will take their tuition money elsewhere if it is a private school. That would not fly around here.

I have one picky son, and one that is a little more adventurous. I know what they like, I make it as healthy as humanly possible and then I "force" more healthy options at home when I can control whether they eat it or not. I can put grapes in their lunch, I have no way to know if they actually eat it or not.

I was thinking the same exact thing.

[tiggger1]

some days my daughter also comes home starved. The other day they had breakfast for lunch. they had 2 french toast sticks ( about the size of a 1/2 piece of bread, a suggested serving on the box is 4-6 sticks) a sausage link, milk, a hard banana and green beans... she only ate the sausage because she was stuff hungry after eating the french toast sticks and the banana... she didnt eat the green beans because she they were cold and slimy.... lunch cost me $2.50....I have ended up packing her extra snacks to take to lunch on the days she buys because she is still starving....

[SaraJayne]

Originally Posted by tiggger1

some days my daughter also comes home starved. The other day they had breakfast for lunch. they had 2 french toast sticks ( about the size of a 1/2 piece of bread, a suggested serving on the box is 4-6 sticks) a sausage link, milk, a hard banana and green beans... she only ate the sausage because she was stuff hungry after eating the french toast sticks and the banana... she didnt eat the green beans because she they were cold and slimy.... lunch cost me $2.50....I have ended up packing her extra snacks to take to lunch on the days she buys because she is still starving....

Green beans with french toast sticks?

[ccgirl]

Originally Posted by SaraJayne

Green beans with french toast sticks?

I was thinking the same thing. Ew!

[Pigeon]

Originally Posted by SaraJayne

Green beans with french toast sticks?

I was asking my kids about the new lunch program and they reported very odd combinations, too, so the green beans and french toast doesn't surprise me.

They also told me that they are forced to take many items they won't eat because it's a required part of the full lunch, and that they all just chuck the stuff out. The cafeteria people have had to have several additional dumpsters brought into the room to hold the increased volume of trash. We had back to school night this week, and it was pretty noticible when you walked through how many more trash containers they have.

I've always offered to pack them a lunch. Up till now, they've declined, but we're going to revisit the issue. They both stay late for activities. One of my kids gets dizzy and is prone to fainting from low blood sugar, so I'm going to at least try to get her to pack a snack if we can find room in her already bulging bookbag.

[newt2]

I really don't see the issue here. If someone wants their kid to have crap food for lunch, they're free to pack it for them.

All the change is doing is making sure that the school, and by extension the government, aren't purveyors of junk food, obesity and diabetes. I'm sorry, but that's a good thing by any measure.

If your children won't eat that stuff, you have two options. You can pack them a lunch full of what they will eat or you can tell them "tough doodoo, if you don't like it you can starve". If you do the latter, they'll eventually eat the food.

They're just kids. We're the leaders, not them. They eat what we provide or they don't eat at all. They're not the boss and they don't get to live on chicken nuggets and hot dogs just because they're tasty. IMO, parents who give into that are not doing their job.

Personally, I think the main outrage over this is the same as all the other fake outrage over the last four years. It has more to do with whose idea this was than the idea itself. Petty and sad, but that's what I've come to expect and I'm usually not disappointed.

[tiggger1]

Originally Posted by SaraJayne

Green beans with french toast sticks?

yup, they are required to serve a veggie and a fruit, and the kids need to take it... the other breakfast day they had pancakes,a slice of ham, orange slices and a salad ( which is half lettuce, half kidney beans, and a few shredded carrots..)!

[Coconut36]

Originally Posted by tiggger1

yup, they are required to serve a veggie and a fruit, and the kids need to take it... the other breakfast day they had pancakes,a slice of ham, orange slices and a salad ( which is half lettuce, half kidney beans, and a few shredded carrots..)!

Is there really a good veggie to go with breakfast? I had to go look at the menu but last "breakfast for lunch" meal at my kids school it was baby carrots and apple slices with the meal.

[SaraJayne]

Originally Posted by Pigeon

I was asking my kids about the new lunch program and they reported very odd combinations, too, so the green beans and french toast doesn't surprise me.

They also told me that they are forced to take many items they won't eat because it's a required part of the full lunch, and that they all just chuck the stuff out. The cafeteria people have had to have several additional dumpsters brought into the room to hold the increased volume of trash. We had back to school night this week, and it was pretty noticible when you walked through how many more trash containers they have.

I've always offered to pack them a lunch. Up till now, they've declined, but we're going to revisit the issue. They both stay late for activities. One of my kids gets dizzy and is prone to fainting from low blood sugar, so I'm going to at least try to get her to pack a snack if we can find room in her already bulging bookbag.

Yup, my DD has said she HAS TO take food, even when she says she won't eat it. It all goes in the garbage. So now we're packing her lunch, so I know she's getting food.

DS came home yesterday complaining about lunch again. So we will be possibly sending a lunch with him, too. He has never (in 11 years of school) packed a lunch, that is how bad it is.

But it sure is a way for companies to make lots of $$ off the government, by providing "healthy" food to schools. DH is in the food business and I will sometimes read his trade magazines. The latest one has an article about the new lunches and how it's a great opportunities for food companies to cash in on the "healthy" craze.

[SaraJayne]

Originally Posted by newt2

I really don't see the issue here. If someone wants their kid to have crap food for lunch, they're free to pack it for them.

All the change is doing is making sure that the school, and by extension the government, aren't purveyors of junk food, obesity and diabetes. I'm sorry, but that's a good thing by any measure.

If your children won't eat that stuff, you have two options. You can pack them a lunch full of what they will eat or you can tell them "tough doodoo, if you don't like it you can starve". If you do the latter, they'll eventually eat the food.

They're just kids. We're the leaders, not them. They eat what we provide or they don't eat at all. They're not the boss and they don't get to live on chicken nuggets and hot dogs just because they're tasty. IMO, parents who give into that are not doing their job.

Personally, I think the main outrage over this is the same as all the other fake outrage over the last four years. It has more to do with whose idea this was than the idea itself. Petty and sad, but that's what I've come to expect and I'm usually not disappointed.

Who proposed the idea has no bearing on how I feel about it. LOL If you knew me, you'd know that was laughable.

I have a problem with the execution, not the idea.

[Pigeon]

Originally Posted by newt2

I really don't see the issue here. If someone wants their kid to have crap food for lunch, they're free to pack it for them.

All the change is doing is making sure that the school, and by extension the government, aren't purveyors of junk food, obesity and diabetes. I'm sorry, but that's a good thing by any measure.

If your children won't eat that stuff, you have two options. You can pack them a lunch full of what they will eat or you can tell them "tough doodoo, if you don't like it you can starve". If you do the latter, they'll eventually eat the food.

They're just kids. We're the leaders, not them. They eat what we provide or they don't eat at all. They're not the boss and they don't get to live on chicken nuggets and hot dogs just because they're tasty. IMO, parents who give into that are not doing their job.

Personally, I think the main outrage over this is the same as all the other fake outrage over the last four years. It has more to do with whose idea this was than the idea itself. Petty and sad, but that's what I've come to expect and I'm usually not disappointed.

I'm entirely a fan of "whose idea this was." Heart and soul, cross my heart, I'm a fan.

I'm not a fan of this. I'm not a fan of the idea that schools can or should solve wider social problems. Schools are stretched as far as they can be stretched to solve educational problems. I do think most educational problems can be attributed to wider social issues, but no way are schools equipped or funded to take those things on.

I'm also not a fan of the idea that the government can change people's eating habits by fiat. So, while I don't drink soda, I think restricting people's right to buy soda in whatever volume is nonsensical. There are lots of things that goverment can and should do that will encourage people to develop healthier habits without being coercive.

We're a month into the school year and the volume of trash is showing no signs of abating, so I'm not buying the idea that the way to get kids to eat overcooked, wrinkled green beans with their french toast is to just keep serving them.

[Coconut36]

Originally Posted by Pigeon

I'm entirely a fan of "whose idea this was." Heart and soul, cross my heart, I'm a fan.

I'm not a fan of this. I'm not a fan of the idea that schools can or should solve wider social problems. Schools are stretched as far as they can be stretched to solve educational problems. I do think most educational problems can be attributed to wider social issues, but no way are schools equipped or funded to take those things on.

I'm also not a fan of the idea that the government can change people's eating habits by fiat. So, while I don't drink soda, I think restricting people's right to buy soda in whatever volume is nonsensical. There are lots of things that goverment can and should do that will encourage people to develop healthier habits without being coercive.

We're a month into the school year and the volume of trash is showing no signs of abating, so I'm not buying the idea that the way to get kids to eat overcooked, wrinkled green beans with their french toast is to just keep serving them.

To me this is twofold..I don't find healthier food options for kids on par with stupid restrictions like soda size for grown adults.

In this instance I think we as a nation should have our eyes open and be aware at the severe obesity problem in kids today. I think that the schools..as a state/gov't entity have the responsibility to make sure they are not contributing factors to this problem and frankly I think they are obligated and should be required to be sure what they sell is healthy and well balanced. That is not so much the Gov't trying to change eating habits to me in this instance because frankly it never should have been OK to sell crap (back in my heat lamp hamburger lunch room days you also could stock up on chips, cookies and Little Debbie snack cakes at each lunch) so they should be sure schools are not doing so anymore. This does have the possible impact of introducing children to food they would never seen in their home and opening their minds and palates to new things. Adults (be they parents or the school as the "adult" entity) need to guide kids and set limits on them in regards to what is and is not appropriate for meals. There is just no reason for fried fatty foods and sweets in meals. There is no harm or damage in making sure the fresh fruits and veggies in the miles are increased and that calorie (and fat, sugar and sodium content) is kept within a reasonable limit and they should always have had a responsibility to do this. Kids who are already eating poorly don't need to be coming to school and consuming 800 calories for lunch (elementary) either.

The soda thing is entirely differently and utterly over the line because we are talking about taking choices away from grown adults who have the right to make whatever decision they want regarding their soda consumption. I am not a fan of that at all and think it crosses a big line.

[SaraJayne]

Originally Posted by Coconut36

To me this is twofold..I don't find healthier food options for kids on par with stupid restrictions like soda size.

In this instance I think we as a nation should have our eyes open and be aware at the severe obesity problem in kids today. I think that the schools..as a state/gov't entity have the responsibility to make sure they are not contributing factors to this problem and frankly I think they are obligated and should be required to be sure what they sell is healthy and well balanced. That is not so much the Gov't trying to change eating habits to me in this instance because frankly it never should have been OK to sell crap (back in my heat lamp hamburger lunch room days you also could stock up on chips, cookies and Little Debbie snack cakes at each lunch) and right so they should be sure schools are not doing so anymore. This does have the possible impact of introducing children to food they would never seen in their home and opening their minds and palates to new things. Adults (be they parents or the school as the "adult" entity) need to guide kids and set limits on them in regards to what is and is not appropriate for lunch.

The soda thing is entirely differently and utterly over the line because we are talking about taking choices away from grown adults who have the right to make whatever decision they want regarding their soda consumption. I am not a fan of that at all and think it crosses a big line.

Goodness, here's a brilliant idea ~ bring back recess and PE for the kids!

Thankfully, our school still has common sense and has both.

[newt2]

Originally Posted by Pigeon

I'm entirely a fan of "whose idea this was." Heart and soul, cross my heart, I'm a fan.

I'm not a fan of this. I'm not a fan of the idea that schools can or should solve wider social problems. Schools are stretched as far as they can be stretched to solve educational problems. I do think most educational problems can be attributed to wider social issues, but no way are schools equipped or funded to take those things on.

I'm also not a fan of the idea that the government can change people's eating habits by fiat. So, while I don't drink soda, I think restricting people's right to buy soda in whatever volume is nonsensical. There are lots of things that goverment can and should do that will encourage people to develop healthier habits without being coercive.

First of all, nobody is asking the schools to solve a social problem, just to not contribute to it. There is a big difference.

Secondly, nobody is saying that people can't buy soda. They're saying that the government should not sell it. If someone wants to give their kid soda, pack it in the lunch themselves.

I see nothing coercive about this. All the schools are doing is saying they won't provide junk food. They're not saying that you can't eat it or serve it to your kids. I am aware that some schools have banned sack lunches or that they don't allow certain items to be sent in them, but that's a seperate issue to what the schools serve and I'm opposed to those kinds of things as I'm sure most people are.

We're a month into the school year and the volume of trash is showing no signs of abating, so I'm not buying the idea that the way to get kids to eat overcooked, wrinkled green beans with their french toast is to just keep serving them.

Clearly some tweaking may be in order, but to declare something a failure after one month doesn't make sense. If there are better ideas on how to improve school lunches they should be brought forth, but giving up isn't a better idea.