School forces preschooler to order cafeteria lunch because mom’s isn’t healthy enough

posted at 7:10 pm on February 14, 2012 by Allahpundit

The “nanny state tramples on parental prerogatives over kids’ diets” stories are irresistible blog fodder, arguably even tastier than the legendary “dubious taser use by police” viral vids. Remember last year when a Chicago school flatly forbade kids from bringing in homepacked lunches? A school in North Carolina has a different approach: You can bring the lunch mom packed for you, but if it doesn’t meet the USDA guidelines, you’ll be marched to the cafeteria to eat a “healthy” lunch instead — and mom will be billed for the extra expense.

The punchline? Mom’s lunch actually did meet the guidelines in this case.

The girl’s mother — who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation — said she received a note from the school stating that students who did not bring a “healthy lunch” would be offered the missing portions, which could result in a fee from the cafeteria, in her case $1.25…

“What got me so mad is, number one, don’t tell my kid I’m not packing her lunch box properly,” the girl’s mother told CJ. “I pack her lunchbox according to what she eats. It always consists of a fruit. It never consists of a vegetable. She eats vegetables at home because I have to watch her because she doesn’t really care for vegetables.”

When the girl came home with her lunch untouched, her mother wanted to know what she ate instead. Three chicken nuggets, the girl answered. Everything else on her cafeteria tray went to waste.

“She came home with her whole sandwich I had packed, because she chose to eat the nuggets on the lunch tray, because they put it in front of her,” her mother said. “You’re telling a 4-year-old. ‘oh. you’re lunch isn’t right,’ and she’s thinking there’s something wrong with her food.”

Watch the Fox News clip below to see how the mother’s lunch measured up to the USDA guidelines. Ready for another punchline? When the school forces a “healthy” lunch on a kid, it doesn’t take away the lunch that mom packed. The child could, if he/she is hungry enough, presumably eat both, which is an … interesting strategy for reducing child obesity. And of course, the final punchline: The little girl in this case still didn’t end up eating any vegetables despite having two lunches in front of her, which, of course, is why mom didn’t bother packing any veggies in the first place. So we end up not only with a bunch of wasted food but with a kid who didn’t get the basic nutrition that her mother’s own meal would have provided her. Perfecto.

Said the girl’s grandmother, “This isn’t China, is it?” The Civitas Institute notes that this is a nationwide practice based on federal guidelines, but I’m as surprised to learn that as the “shocked” North Carolina state rep whom they contacted for comment. Question for our readers with kids in public schools: Has your child ever been hassled before over the lunch you’ve packed for them? I assume these guidelines are very loosely enforced, precisely because parents get angry when the state starts micromanaging their kids’ diets.

If we went ahead and banned Happy Meals and pulled potatoes out of school cafeterias and regulated sugar like it’s cocaine or something we might not have these problems, you know. Two clips here, one from Fox and the other via Breitbart TV of a school official in Michigan reminding parents that they do not, in fact, know best.

Update: I replaced the Michigan video with a version from the MRC.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Anyone who would willingly hand over one of their greatest responsibilities to the government really has no room for complaint.

Dante on February 14, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Including in the bedroom.

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 PM

I can see liberals imposing their food standards on private schools down the road. They will start a war against homeschooling too nothing is safe from this insanity. The most shocking thing about this is it’s in North Carolina and not California.

ldbgcoleman on February 14, 2012 at 8:48 PM

You are right that private schools are not going to be immune from Michelle Obama’s food stormtroopers. That Catholic schools will be forced to explain the use of condoms because not every child in the school is Catholic (same reasoning why Catholic organizations have to fund the murder of babies).

But that is the least of it. Evil people like Obama want to destroy home schoolers. They’ve defied the socialist incubators known as public school systems and impressed values on their children that are incongruent with the socialist manifesto being put forth by Obama and his broad-beamed spouse (who is far more evil because she is the driving force behind this administration).

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Your handle suits you.

Dante on February 14, 2012 at 9:13 PM

After my diagnosis of diabetes, the diabetes association literature I was handed at the doctor’s office and pharmacy said I was to eat a 50-55% carbohydrate diet.

They should’ve just handed you a revolver with a single round in it.

Good for you that you took charge of your own health instead of relying on some quack backed with bogus government decrees.

Dack Thrombosis on February 14, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Surely there’s something illegal in this.

jeanie on February 14, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Good grief. I’m glad my kids are grown and not in school anymore. I grew up on twinkies and coca cola and doritos, what a bad mother I must have had. /

scalleywag on February 14, 2012 at 9:18 PM

The Paleo diet is a useful model because we are evolved creatures and did eat a wide variety of “hunter-fisher-gatherer’ type foods for 100s of thousands of years, including cooked meats, which helped us develop our large brains … meeting their energy requirements while maintaining small stomachs and bipedalism for mobility.

This brings up an interesting thought.

A hypothesis for why human brain sizes are somewhat larger and IQ scores significantly higher nearer the poles than the equator has focused on the selective pressures of surviving and reproducing in cold, harsh environments, and the need for intelligence to do same.

However, since hunting, preparing, cooking, and eating energy-dense food provided a positive feedback loop allowing hominids to increase brain size while reducing relative stomach size, is it possible that one reason for the brain size/IQ discrepancy has to do with the fact peoples nearer the poles eat less vegetation and more animal nutrition than do peoples at the warm, lush equators?

I haven’t heard that mechanism proposed before, but it seems a reasonable hypothesis.

In north American native populations, the Eskimos test the highest for IQ (and the Dutch test higher than the Spaniards, by way of another example). I wonder if the energy density of diet, and not simply the harsh northern environment, could be a reason for this.

Anthropology, evolution, and so forth are fascinating generally.

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:18 PM

When will the feds start checking lunches for home schooled kids?

GaltBlvnAtty on February 14, 2012 at 9:18 PM

The problem here is that government agencies have almost limitless power. Congress passes a statute that says something like “Ensure healthy school lunches” and the agency can interpret that in whatever fascist way they want to. We need to dismantle every unconstitutional federal agency. That would be all of them.

updog on February 14, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Hey!

Surprisingly Michelle Obama’s mythological construct of a food desert has not made it to this discussion.

For those of you unaware of this concept as espoused by her highness Michelle, the idea is that inner-city moms are devistated that they can not feed their kids a salad and healthy food. The problem being that there are no groceries in the “deserts” of urban America (AKA the ghetto). The mom would have to take three busses, two trains, a trip on the space shuttle and intercontinental travel to get a single leaf of lettuce.

The reality is that you could put a grocery store on one corner of an urban area. A taco stand, a hamburger outlet, and a fried chicken joint on the third and that child still wouldn’t get a salad. Food deserts have nothing to do with availability of healthy alternatives to tacos, hamburgers, and fried chicken. And,BTW, any grocery store will probably be unprofitable in these areas due to shoplifting and employee theft.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Just wait until real hard times hit this country.The knock at your door the food police tell you the food you have put back is no longer yours .It must be shared with the people who did not prepare for this crises.Think i am crazy?You damn well better have a stash of the three G,s God,Guns and Grub stored in a secure place and be prepared to defend it.

logman1 on February 14, 2012 at 9:28 PM

I can’t believe a school would choose Chicken Nuggets over a good sandwich which a mother prepared for her child.

Would have to know more about the sandwich to know which was better, but certainly no one who serves breaded, mechanically-separated and subsequently mashed-together deep-fried chicken parts has any business imposing their dietary philosophy.

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:29 PM

I can’t believe a school would choose Chicken Nuggets over a good sandwich which a mother prepared for her child. Unbelievable.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 9:22 PM

I agree completely.

That being said, I wish there were more voters in WA like you instead of all the fictional ones in King County.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 9:22 PM

There’s a reason chicken nuggets and fries are on every kids’ menu at restaurants: kids love them and they’ll eat them. You can do everything in your power to avoid those foods, but it will be to no avail. When chicken nuggets and/or fries placates a toddler at a restaurant, you will embrace it.

It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING with parents unable or unwilling to give their kids a proper diet.

Dante on February 14, 2012 at 9:31 PM

My youngest has been harassed because of what he was packed for lunch by staff. He is now home schooled.
It is a very strange feeling to know that the school is inspecting what is in your child’s lunch.
I feel for this family but this will not change or go away. It will get worse.

ORconservative on February 14, 2012 at 9:31 PM

When will the feds start checking lunches for home schooled kids?

GaltBlvnAtty on February 14, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Days after the bastard in charge gets re-elected to four more years. You think Obama is bad now? Just wait until you see the Obama who is term limited.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:33 PM

And North American natives, including native Alaskans, also are prone to be easily addicted to drugs and alcohol. Not sure that I want to follow them.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 9:27 PM

It isn’t prescriptive. It’s scientific curiosity.

Anyway, I — who am part native — believe there is a genetic basis why native peoples often have more alcoholism around the world … simply that we (to the degree I’m also native) weren’t exposed to it as long as other peoples, and so are less adapted to it. To me this seems like a reasonable hypothesis, no matter who it offends.

Same reason goes for why natives average much higher diabetes rates when introduced to non-traditional diets than do the general population.

All of which goes back to eating nearer to how our ancestors ate is better.

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Buy more guns and ammo…. it’s coming…..

ultracon on February 14, 2012 at 9:37 PM

While discussing this today, Rush got a call from a parent who said that even though his child doesn’t want milk for lunch, the school requires that he include a container with several ounces in the child’s lunch brought from home but since the child doesn’t drink it, they then have to pour it down the drain. The school officials apparently don’t much care what the price of a gallon of milk is.

I’m seeing a couple of patterns in all this and I don’t know what’s worse–the food that’s being wasted for dumba$$ reasons at taxpayer expense or the absolute hysteria, derangement and preposterousness of the rules and these nut-job school officials. Hey, don’t they work for us?

I hope all the dopey libtards this is happening to are starting to wake up.

BTW, about the food pyramids for kids now, well, has anybody told these demented experts that pyramids are built to protect the dead? Though in their case it’s the braindead.

stukinIL4now on February 14, 2012 at 9:39 PM

No, the reason kids will only eat one thing because that is what they are given day after day after day instead of eating at home around the family dining table with variety.

Damn right. Perfect example: French kids.

Seriously, American culture does some things well, and eating healthfully and appropriately isn’t one of them.

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:46 PM

This control has been a long time in the making.

This piece was written a year and a half ago about this move toward this food nonsense and “nudging” Americans toward the “correct” decisions:

http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2010/10/gaze-into-crystal-ball-glimpse-into.html

manateespirit on February 14, 2012 at 9:47 PM

It sounds like the LAUSD nazis. LAUSD was wasting millions on a lunch menu that kids would not eat.

/scratch head.

jbh45 on February 14, 2012 at 9:48 PM

My beautiful state has been devastated by the Californians that started to invade us in the 1980s. It has just continually gotten worse.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 9:43 PM

So true. I remember the hippie migration. At one point there was a water dispute in Oregan and the upshot was just give them the water or more Californians would migrate north.

From my understanding of your politics, whatever the SeaTac part of the state wants becomes law.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:49 PM

No, the reason kids will only eat one thing because that is what they are given day after day after day instead of eating at home around the family dining table with variety. Kids will eat a variety of food if it is given to them on a consistent basis. A child’s taste for food changes every 7 years. But if all you give them is whatever is the easiest for you . . . you will get children who are very limited in their food. We need to use fast food places less and eat around the family dining table more. Stats show that.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Spoken by someone who doesn’t have any kids.

Dante on February 14, 2012 at 9:54 PM

this whole thing about controlling kids’ school lunches is VERY irritating to me. i was always a picky eater, i almost never ate school lunch. i always brought my own lunch, from kindergarten through high school!! bringing my own lunch gave me more freedom of what to eat (and i didn’t have to wait in any line!)

i can’t stand the freaking schools trying to control what kids eat. THIS IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE CHILDHOOD OBESITY PROBLEM. kids can eat junk at home!!

things that solve childhood obesity:
-parents making their kid eat more fruits, vegetables, etc
-parents and schools making their kid do some exercise.
-kids being aware and educated and making healthy decisions on their own, as they start to grow older. they can make healthy decisions based on teachers and parents educating them.

i encourage schools to EDUCATE kids about food, but not FORCE them to not eat stuff from home. i also encourage schools to educate about physical activity, and have recess and PE classes of course! but at recess, make sure you have things like swings and monkey bars and stuff. i know some schools are getting rid of those things because they are “too dangerous.” and some schools get kids in trouble for playing tag because that “sexually harasses” kids. oh well… sigh.

obesity is definitely a problem… but not one i’ve ever had. i brought my own lunch every day!! yet i was never obese at all. i did PE and recess and i didn’t eat excessively.

Sachiko on February 14, 2012 at 9:55 PM

School forces her to eat something from cafeteria? OK, they can pay for it. Don’t expect to be reimbursed for it.

Huge conflict of interest develops when they can make you buy their food for no legal legitimate reason.

RichardG on February 14, 2012 at 9:56 PM

At what point does this become a campaign commercial?

The federal government is now controlling womens’ bodies.

Setting standards for what goes on in your bedroom yet people are OK with that?

What the hell ever happened to the liberal phrase it’s my body!!! and the government has no right to legislate what goes on in the bedroom?….Meaning the government should have no say in the matter.

F15Mech on February 14, 2012 at 9:58 PM

F15Mech on February 14, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Sorry wrong thread

F15Mech on February 14, 2012 at 9:59 PM

The girl’s grandmother, who sometimes helps pack her lunch, told Carolina Journal that she is a petite, picky 4-year-old who eats white whole wheat bread and is not big on vegetables.

In other words … she’s a typical four-year old.

However did people live through the days when kids actually went home for lunch. I am surprised whole generations of Americans didn’t starve to death or develop scurvy or what have you because Heaven knows that public school lunches are the standard bearers for good nutrition. My mom would have been frog marched into the work camps I guess because I ate Tastykakes and Diet Pepsi for lunch everyday when I was in junior high and high school — if I bothered to eat at all.

This is just another entry in the annals of Why We Should Shut Down Government Schools.

NoLeftTurn on February 14, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Get off of my lawn!

Gettycorn on February 14, 2012 at 10:03 PM

The fact that civil war has not erupted yet is what amazes me the most.

bgibbs1000 on February 14, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Educator Jason Neapolitan said “the system worked”

Seems legit.

BL@KBIRD on February 14, 2012 at 10:05 PM

What’s next – the kid wipes from back to front, so we’re taking her into protective custody? Not using the “proper” toothpaste? Clothes bought at that wicked store, Wal-Mart? Just cause you “teach”, cough, “my” kid doesn’t mean you OWN “my” kid, or have authority over “me” as a parent. So step off.

The simple solution to this – Mom says “No, my kid will eat the lunch I packed. No, I will not pay the bill. The word is…NO. Same it wit me now. Sound it off – N…O. Don’t like that? Send the 5-0 and handcuff my ass. Cause the answer is NO.”

Line-steppers need checked. What, is there no other more pressing issue they have to “enforce” than to criticize a lunch that is already compliant? And we gave our health care decisions to these dipshiats?!

Join the new movement- use the word “NO”. It’s a lost art – try it, you’ll love it.

Saltyron on February 14, 2012 at 10:06 PM

School lunch menus are dictated by what’s best for the large companies that produce frozen pizzas and other items that should never end up in school cafeterias.

bayam on February 14, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Done with the moral outrage?

May I point out that the child in this story was given a healthy lunch from home?

The real outrage here is not what is on the school lunch menu but the fact that they have brought in TSA-like screeners to the school cafeteria. I can only imagine what kind of harassment the girl would have been subjected to if that had been a PEANUT butter sandwich (think hazmat suits and orange cones around the screening area).

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 8:15 PM

Kids contracting diabetes isn’t about moral outrage. The power of special interests over what kids eat is offensive.

bayam on February 14, 2012 at 10:09 PM

One reason why I have my good days, and my ‘not so good’ days …
ARRGGGGHHH.
November cannot come soon enough !! ABO !!

pambi on February 14, 2012 at 10:13 PM

things that solve childhood obesity:
-parents making their kid eat virtually no processed sugars, very little grains, more less fruits, more vegetables, more full fat dairy and meats, etc

;-)

Random on February 14, 2012 at 10:23 PM

I’ve been struggling with an eating disorder since high school. ED’s are notoriously hard to get rid of when you’re surround by nutrition nazis and food police.
I don’t want other innocent kids-girls are especially vulnerable-to get sucked in.
Got it?
good.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 14, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Have to agree with this as I knew many girls who developed eating disorders because authority figures in their lives (usually their mothers, not the schools because we still had a little bit of personal freedom left back then) instilled in them very extreme views about food. While it’s true obesity seems to me more the problem today, I think this kind of fascist policing about everything a kid puts in his or her mouth can just as easily lead to overeating as it can to starving, or binging and purging.

NoLeftTurn on February 14, 2012 at 10:34 PM

The power of special interests that I don’t agree with over what kids eat is offensive. Food police special interests however are fabulous.

bayam

FIFY.

xblade on February 14, 2012 at 10:35 PM

I fear for America. I ate whatever the heck I wanted at school every day for years, my fruit consisted of a fruit rollup, my drink was usually coca cola. If someone tried to check my bagged lunch I’d have tried to tackle them.. I came out just fine, better than fine in fact. Ahh, the 80s and 90s, the good old days.

saus on February 14, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Wal-Mart can take care of Moochie’s ‘food deserts’ easily, but that sends the proggies to the fainting couch. No worries.

slickwillie2001 on February 14, 2012 at 10:38 PM

Is it Land of the Free! Home of the brave?

KOOLAID2 on February 14, 2012 at 10:50 PM

Spoken by someone who doesn’t have any kids.

Dante on February 14, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Litters?

KOOLAID2 on February 14, 2012 at 10:53 PM

You know, this idea of someone forcing the kid to eat something from the cafeteria – or even just OFFERING it to the kid – how do they know the kid can eat that thing?

Some kids are lactose-intolerant. Some have allergies. It seems to me that besides being outrageous, replacing the parent’s provided lunch with something else could be dangerous.

Alana on February 14, 2012 at 11:04 PM

The idiot school official from Michigan appears to miss the fact that all the “parents who don’t know” were likely educated in PUBLIC SCHOOL. So if they “don’t know”, who’s fault is it??? lol

Murf76 on February 14, 2012 at 11:06 PM

A school in North Carolina has a different approach: You can bring the lunch mom packed for you, but if it doesn’t meet the USDA guidelines, you’ll be marched to the cafeteria to eat a “healthy” lunch instead — and mom will be billed for the extra expense.

Reason # ______ to home school. This is the soft boot of tyranny stepping on your face.

chemman on February 14, 2012 at 11:07 PM

He is also brain damaged because of poor nutrition.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 10:09 PM

While you are entitled to any opinion you like I’ll need to see a whole lot more proof than your comment.

chemman on February 14, 2012 at 11:13 PM

Sachiko on February 14, 2012 at 9:55 PM

The barn door was opened over a decade ago. The high school I taught (Chemistry) and coached (long distance runners) at decided to ban sodas. In their infinite wisdom they left sports drinks in the vending machine. When I pointed out that most of the students weren’t athletes and were buying a drink that had more sugar per once than soda’s they shrugged their shoulders and said it was better for them. I teed all the administrators off by suggesting they join my cross country team so I could teach them some sports nutrition and biochemistry.

chemman on February 14, 2012 at 11:19 PM

I live in NC, I wonder what county this was in. I wouldn’t doubt it was in Liberal Orange county (Chapel Hill/Carboro) area. This is why I homeschool. Waiting for the day when government officials come and knock on my door to check my pantry. This is why I’m voting for Santorum. If you think Obama and his liberal hacks aren’t trying to figure out a way to out law homeschool you are not paying attention. It’s coming. Meanwhile I’m teaching my kids all the Bible I can because I fear that the days are coming when in the name of “tolerance” the Bible will be out lawed…

mcplumbercuda on February 14, 2012 at 11:23 PM

My kid can’t drink cow’s milk because it gives him horrendous excema. I had to get a doctor’s note so the school would stop giving him milk at lunch. They said if I didn’t have the note he couldn’t have anything else to drink. I got the note but it pissed me off.

Our school have banned all homemade cupcakes for birthdays, all candy on every holiday, and anything that isn’t “store bought wrapped in a package” because the peanut allergies are the new school terrorists.

CambellBrown on February 14, 2012 at 11:32 PM

If the government succeeds in making us all eat the same things, and making us all accept the same medical treatment, then we are doomed to ALL DIE ON THE SAME DAY…OF THE SAME THING!!!

Don’t these leftist totalitarian idiots know anything about diversity???? …and how it helps preserve the species???

and they’ll never understand this post, because leftists lack the irony gene!

landlines on February 14, 2012 at 11:49 PM

NoLeftTurn on February 14, 2012 at 10:34 PM

My paternal grandmother was the bane of my existence. She was upset that her grand-daughter wasn’t built like her ‘perfect’ daughter(my aunt).

annoyinglittletwerp on February 14, 2012 at 11:50 PM

Fascism starts with the young, mmm, mmm, mmm.

Who’s up for sending our over stock of liberals to the south pacific where they’re sure to prosper of their own accord, spread out on thousands of islands with built up impenetrable reefs too far to swim waves to high for craft to escape.

There’s always Argentina, they know how to handle communists.

Speakup on February 15, 2012 at 12:00 AM

School forces preschooler to order cafeteria lunch because mom’s isn’t healthy enough

Mom’s lunch may not have been healthy enough, but it certainly tasted better than what was served in school.

It always consists of a fruit.

There’s the problem. Eat more chicken.

When the girl came home with her lunch untouched, her mother wanted to know what she ate instead. Three chicken nuggets, the girl answered. Everything else on her cafeteria tray went to waste.

The chicken nuggets probably tasted just like paper. Hard to top that mouth watering delicacy. That explains why everything else went to waste.

rukiddingme on February 15, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Spoken by someone who is the food industry and knows what is good or bad for our children. You want to take the easy route and use fast food for the majority of your meals . . . go ahead and take the consequences. There is no substitute for sitting around the family dining table and eating a well balanced meal (at least in the evening) the majority of the time. “I don’t have the time” doesn’t cut it.

I know someone who “didn’t have time” to give her son balanced meals. As an adult, all he will eat is hot dogs and boxed mac and cheese. He is also brain damaged because of poor nutrition.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 10:09 PM

So I was right: you don’t have children.

Dante on February 15, 2012 at 12:32 AM

So I was right: you don’t have children.

Dante on February 15, 2012 at 12:32 AM

I have two kids and agree 100% percent with Voter. My guess you are the new generation of push over parents looking for easy alternatives to discipline.

You probably eat out for 70% of your meals, let you kids play DS at the table, love restaurants with televisions and will still drink your beverage with a straw even past the age of 30.

I know you are going to get defensive about it, but I am sick of parents with no sack when it comes to handling their kids so the rest of us have to suffer. One of the many reasons this country is doomed.

And yes, when the rare times either of my kids decided to make eating out a miserable experience, we either left immediately or got the food to go. Then there was hell to pay when we got home.

Finally tell your chicken nugget foodies to live a little. My son was enjoying raw oysters at the age of 5 and will try anything.

ClassicCon on February 15, 2012 at 1:10 AM

Wonder if they would have done the same thing had the kid brought an MRE for lunch?

Hmmm…that would be a sticky wicket.

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 15, 2012 at 3:15 AM

Don’t know if this’ll help, but…

Forty or so years ago, when I was attending a public high school in Ohio, the district built a new school in a rural area outside of town. There were no restaurants or stores within walking distance, and the school administration decided that no one would be permitted to leave the campus at lunch time, even (actually, especially, I think) in a car. That meant that we either had to brown-bag it or eat in the school’s cafeteria.

Brown-bagging simply wasn’t a good option for me; Mom had a crazy work schedule and so did I. But eating in the school’s cafeteria wasn’t any better. The food offered was SO bad that it literally caused me pain in the form of automatic indigestion and cramps. It was, I swear to God, the worst food I ever ate. The “hamburgers” contained no meat whatsoever; one of my buddies who worked part-time in the cafeteria after hours told me that one of the main ingredients of the “hamburgers” was bran flakes. The “fries” were limp grease-laden slithery things. The “Johnny Marzetti” was an acidic belly bomb. There were no greens, no fruits, and few veggies available.

The solution that worked for me: I went to our family doctor, provided him with a copy of the school’s cafeteria menu, and described to him the horrific food and its effects on my digestive tract. Without hesitation, the doctor wrote a detailed note to the school stating that for medical reasons, I should be completely excused from the campus at lunchtime in order to obtain something decent to eat.

Problem solved… in 1972.

Humphrey on February 15, 2012 at 3:35 AM

He is also brain damaged because of poor nutrition.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Methinks you drama queen too much.

John the Libertarian on February 15, 2012 at 3:36 AM

God bless my wonderful parents! 9 children and we all always had bag lunches. I didn’t have the cool lunchbox/thermos, but never had to eat that school cafeteria slop.

tbear44 on February 15, 2012 at 4:06 AM

“This isn’t China, is it?”

Heh. My youngest kid goes to school in China and eats what he wants for lunch.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2012 at 4:37 AM

I think we’re being duped.

Wouldn’t be surprised if this was a trial balloon of some sort. Send a kids lunch back home because it doesn’t meet the guidelines, … when in fact it does. Then later apologize because it meets the guidelines. Then the story is about how the kids lunch met the guidelines all along… and the premise is set for forcing kinds to eat school lunches if their bag lunches don’t meet some sort of state set guidelines.

Sorta like the Obama abortion mandate. Make the mandate then make a compromise, but the truth is, their is no authority to do either.

JellyToast on February 15, 2012 at 6:23 AM

In north American native populations, the Eskimos test the highest for IQ (and the Dutch test higher than the Spaniards, by way of another example). I wonder if the energy density of diet, and not simply the harsh northern environment, could be a reason for this.

Anthropology, evolution, and so forth are fascinating generally.

Random on February 14, 2012 at 9:18 PM

And North American natives, including native Alaskans, also are prone to be easily addicted to drugs and alcohol. Not sure that I want to follow them.

Voter from WA State on February 14, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Did you take into consideration that our NATIVE AMERICANS used to be nomadic and followed their food sources? They now have to live in areas that have little to no natural resources and as a general rule, limited to when and where they can hunt/fish.

bseeker6969 on February 15, 2012 at 6:33 AM

Does anyone have the details on the Early Learning Centers
that are popping up in cities across the country? It appears
that the government might be increasing its government work
force by starting educational programs for those below the
age of kindergarten.

Amjean on February 15, 2012 at 6:50 AM

My youngest has been harassed because of what he was packed for lunch by staff. He is now home schooled.
It is a very strange feeling to know that the school is inspecting what is in your child’s lunch.
I feel for this family but this will not change or go away. It will get worse.

ORconservative on February 14, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Good for you. I would do the same thing. How can they say what a young kid will even eat. Sometimes the kids don’t want to eat a totally balanced diet. It’s creepy what they are doing.

wi farmgirl on February 15, 2012 at 6:57 AM

I’m astonished to learn that there are state agents inspecting kids’ lunch boxes. Why are parents tolerating this?

As for this girl, her turkey and cheese sandwich was nutritionally inferior to breaded and deep-fried lumps of processed pressed chicken pieces? They forced the parent to pay for the school lunch so that the girl could ignore the vegetable it included? Lunacy.

AZCoyote on February 15, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Stories like this make me think back to when the smoking ban’s were all the rage and the government was stepping in and taking away private property owners rights under the guise of “the greater good”. I can remember telling people that it wasn’t about smoking, but the government being able to set a precedence on being able to trample an individual’s rights for “the greater good”. I also remember being told by people how I was making a mountain out of a mole hill, over-reacting, and that would ‘never’ happen.

It reminds me of the famous Martin Niemöller, while the government has been eroding the personal rights of individuals for “the greater good”.

DonCherry on February 15, 2012 at 8:02 AM

These stories and what I hear about my fiances younger brother having to suffer from teachers in public school has us seriously considering home schooling if we have children. If not, it appears to be a full time job dealing with these idiots and then dealing with their retaliation on the child while they have them in their torture chambers, I mean schools.

aikidoka on February 15, 2012 at 8:07 AM

ClassicCon on February 15, 2012 at 1:10 AM

Wow. Nothing like setting up straw men based on erroneous assumptions, but I guess you feel the need to feel superior so you craft falsehoods.

Dante on February 15, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Fascist control freaks.

Malachi45 on February 15, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Did you take into consideration that our NATIVE AMERICANS used to be nomadic and followed their food sources?

bseeker6969 on February 15, 2012 at 6:33 AM

Nomadic isn’t accurate (although the Plains indians were).

Dante on February 15, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Nothing will change until there is blood. We only have 2 choices. Vote democrat and accelerate over the cliff, or vote republican and go over the cliff a little slower.

Bevan on February 15, 2012 at 8:28 AM

Aaack. That woman in the second video, what is that on top of her head?

Should parentsMichigan school officials be able to select their child’s schoolown hairstyles?

They may want what’s best for their hair, but they may not know what is best for their hair.

bitsy on February 15, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Actually this isn’t entirely new. A co-worker of mine was telling me their school district does the same thing, except is kind enough to bill the parents for the forced school lunches in Knox county in Ohio.

DonCherry on February 15, 2012 at 8:33 AM

Haven’t seen this story reported anywhere else online other than Fox & Drudge.It needs to get out there.

mooseygoosey on February 15, 2012 at 8:38 AM

You people voted for this basic infringement of your rights by electing ZERO.

TX-96 on February 15, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Are 4 year olds under the protection of illegal search ans siezure? Is the youngster at risk of being siezed by the state for whistle blowing mom?

seven on February 15, 2012 at 9:03 AM

What blows me away is what was actually IN this child’s lunch. From what I understand, a turkey and cheese sandwich and a banana. For a four year old, I’m sure eating a whole banana equals TWO servings of fruit.

That’s a perfectly acceptable lunch.

Government, get out of our lives!!!

Grace_is_sufficient on February 15, 2012 at 9:27 AM

obama is turning America into a 3rd world country run by a Dictator. He is doing this with the help of RINO republicans in both houses. republicans do nothing but talk the talk and don’t have the spine to bring charges against obama and holder. This country will be in a Civil War if obama is reelected…………

vietvet68 on February 15, 2012 at 9:31 AM

May not know what’s best for their kids? So says the walking human train wreck known as Debbie Squires? Hey Deb, how bout you get a little exercise, get off the cigs, stop drinking, get a little sleep, lose 135 lbs., show you can have a stable long term relationship with another human being, AND THEN maybe come back and start talking to the rest of us about all of your little life lessons. In the interim, feel free to get bent you insufferable loser.

There. I feel better.

Abiss on February 15, 2012 at 9:35 AM

The logical ends to all this attitude from government officials, that somehow parents do not know what’s best for their children (and they do), are: 1) reproductive controls, where government will tell us (or certain part of the population) or somehow coerce us to have no or one child (much like China and what Nazi Germany did); 2) children will be deemed the property of the government and will be taken away from us.

oddjob on February 15, 2012 at 9:48 AM

A few more-or-less random comments on the lunch theme.

1) My mother was a really lousy cook, so growing up I thought our school cafeteria food was great. It was cheap fare — soy bean meal a lot of the time, with names like “mock chicken” or “mock turkey leg.” The cafeteria had really cheapo cheese pizza, too. I thought it was all great and would rave about it at the lunch table, much to the amusement of my friends.

2) Most parents struggle to manage their kids’ eating habits, so I try not to be too judgmental of others. In our case, we did a few things wrong (too narrow a rotation of meals, facilitating our daughter’s pickiness), but we also did a few things right (we never started her on things like sweet juice or sugary peanut butter, so she’s long been content with organic peanut butter and drinking milk and water). A lot of parents will insist “my kid will only drink apple juice, not milk” — but the key there is if you don’t introduce the sugary stuff, they won’t crave it.

3) My daughter was content to eat her sandwich crusts until she saw in kindergarten other kids refusing to eat them. We’ve not given in to that — slavish social imitation is not what determines how the child should eat. . .

Chuckles3 on February 15, 2012 at 9:51 AM

On a related topic: I live in CA and last spring my daughter went on an overnight campout with her school class. We were told that she would have to have a doctor’s permission slip to bring…get this…sunscreen.

I’ve noticed in CA the schools are requiring a doctor’s permission for more and more stuff. WTH? Are doctors now enlisted as the enforcers of the nanny state?

Galadriel on February 15, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Our school have banned all homemade cupcakes for birthdays, all candy on every holiday, and anything that isn’t “store bought wrapped in a package” because the peanut allergies are the new school terrorists.

CambellBrown on February 14, 2012 at 11:32 PM

When my kids went to school they couldn’t take homemade treats to class for fear of hepatitis. But I disagree about calling nut allergic kids terrorists. What if you had to ensure each bite you took was safe or you might die? You certainly understand allergies because of your son’s eczema and know what milk does to him. What if it were life threatening? Would you think of him as a terrorist? A child died last fall from eating peanut butter at school. A woman here in AZ died at Christmas time from ingesting nuts.

Peanut/tree nut allergies have increased 20% over the past decade. Allergic people can carry epi-pens where ever they go, but it is not guaranteed to save their lives. Only through due diligence and avoidance of nuts can they be safe.

GrannySunni on February 15, 2012 at 9:56 AM

The bottom line is, we are surrounded by armchair totalitarians. I find myself in a strange place, basically at war with people (like my aunt who loves Obama’s contraception policy) whom I will have in my home for dinner sometimes.

We are surrounded by people who don’t understand freedom, don’t believe in freedom, and actually want to personally take our own freedoms. What they don’t understand is, their freedoms are going away too. Unfortunately, they don’t seem to care as long as they get some psychological satisfaction from exerting power and enforcing their lifestyle choices on others.

Galadriel on February 15, 2012 at 10:05 AM

We are surrounded by people who don’t understand freedom, don’t believe in freedom, and actually want to personally take our own freedoms. What they don’t understand is, their freedoms are going away too. Unfortunately, they don’t seem to care as long as they get some psychological satisfaction from exerting power and enforcing their lifestyle choices on others.

Galadriel on February 15, 2012 at 10:05 AM

There is much in this. My wife is a D and I often argue with her on this basis.

Typical case in point is our county’s ban on smoking in restaurants. My wife and I are both militant non-smokers, and we loathe being in the presence of smoking and its after-effects.

But that’s where we part company. I maintain that smokers have a right to go out to eat just like anybody else, and I see myself as having a common stake in defending their freedom to do so, even though I don’t want to be near it. She just doesn’t see it that way — it’s bad and it’s a menace, so we need to legislate it away.

We have similar arguments over unhealthy foods and chemicals. She cheers when government outlaws this or that “unnecessary” unhealthy food additive. My vantage point is that I value the freedom of deciding what I want to eat.

I often say to her, “Suppose some day the government decided that ice cream is too unhealthy to eat” (she loves ice cream). She waffles on this — I really think she’d submit to having it made illegal, if the government’s health case were strong enough.

It’s just a fundamentally different vantage point as to whether we should live in a free society, or one in which we are “protected from ourselves.”

It’s also a fundamentally different attitude about the wisdom of government officials. I tend to see human knowledge as constantly evolving, so we’re better off allowing for different approaches to things so that our inevitable mistakes in judgment can constantly be corrected through experimentation. I shudder to think of the various things government would have banned “for our good” in the past, based on flawed understanding of the time.

Chuckles3 on February 15, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Actually if I decided to give my kid a school lunch consisting of 6 chocolate bars, a jelly roll and a bag of popcorn washed down with purple Kool Ade-it’s none of the government’s f’ing business. Come to think about it, such a meal might be healthier than a government subsidized cafeteria lunch consisting of leftovers dating back to the First Gulf War.

MaiDee on February 15, 2012 at 11:03 AM

For those of you unaware of this concept as espoused by her highness Michelle, the idea is that inner-city moms are devistated that they can not feed their kids a salad and healthy food. The problem being that there are no groceries in the “deserts” of urban America (AKA the ghetto). The mom would have to take three busses, two trains, a trip on the space shuttle and intercontinental travel to get a single leaf of lettuce.

Well, perhaps Michelle will go into the ghetto grocery business when she is back in private life. At least she would be doing something useful.

UnrepentantCurmudgeon on February 15, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Spoken by someone who doesn’t have any kids.

Dante on February 14, 2012 at 9:54 PM

So your assertion is that all parents have the same successes and failures and 100% identical experiences with child rearing? Anoyone who disagrees with you obviously cannot have possibly reproduced or managed to raise a child differently?

A bit naive, or egotistical.

My hypothetical child (becuase they obviously can’t really exist if they go against your experiences) has food allergies that result in ADHD-type reactions. For her own sake, we educate her on what foods are “good” for her and which are not.

In your reality, she refuses to eat any of it, we slump our shoulders in defeat and go have McDonalds nuggest instead.

In my odd fantasy world, she has learned what foods are ok for her, and eats accordingly. Sure somedays she longs for dairy. Somedays she pouts for candy, but as her loving parents we say no and give her healthy alternatives.

Beyond just eating, in my made-up world, children tend to rise to your level of expectations, if you are firm and consistent with those expectations.

Now tell me I’m not a real parent so you can feel better about your choices.

WhaleBellied on February 15, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4