School Food Police Targets Cheetos

[badger6]

I'm sure you know this but, the government owns the schools.  The school cafeteria is a government operated and funded storefront, with children ages 6-17 as their customers...  What they sell is quite literally their business.

Furthermore, the article says that there is a "ban" on hot cheetos, not just the school selling them. There is a difference between not selling a product and confiscating lunches that parents send to school.

We don’t allow candy, and we don’t allow Hot Cheetos. We don’t encourage other chips, but if we see Hot Cheetos, we confiscate them – sometimes after the child has already eaten most of them.

[Brian Fein]

^^ I agree, that's crap.  I don't think schools should be able to regulate what kids bring to school.

However, I'm guessing this is some measure to prevent kids from selling cheetos to their classmates at school.  And why only Hot Cheetos?

[badger6]

^^ I agree, that's crap.  I don't think schools should be able to regulate what kids bring to school.

However, I'm guessing this is some measure to prevent kids from selling cheetos to their classmates at school.  And why only Hot Cheetos?

Regardless of if you agree with me, I think you see what I'm saying as far as government involvement. I read where a school told a girl her turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice wasn't good enough and proceeded to give her chicken nuggets. And on top of that, they threatened her mother that next time there would be a $1.25 fee. This stuff is totally ridiculous.

[Phishfan]

^^^ Did you read enough of that article to get to the section where they admitted the teacher made a mistake?

[badger6]

^^^ Did you read enough of that article to get to the section where they admitted the teacher made a mistake?

Which article ? About the cheetos or the one I cited ?

[Phishfan]

I believe I saw the same article you cited, where a teacher took the girl's lunch. The school has a policy that all lunches contain certain amounts of servings covering meats, fruits/vegetables, etc. whether they come from home or are served by the school. One teacher made that decision either out of bad judgement or by missing something the girl had in her lunch that covered the requirements. The school acknowledged it was a mistake in the article I read.

[badger6]

I believe I saw the same article you cited, where a teacher took the girl's lunch. The school has a policy that all lunches contain certain amounts of servings covering meats, fruits/vegetables, etc. whether they come from home or are served by the school. One teacher made that decision either out of bad judgement or by missing something the girl had in her lunch that covered the requirements. The school acknowledged it was a mistake in the article I read.

I read it a while ago but a quick google search shows a second complaint from the same school. I hadn't even heard about this one. Regardless, telling a small child that there is something wrong with her mothers packed lunch or it is not good enough, when in fact there is nothing wrong with it, is totally messed up. Government intervening into personal lives is not the answer.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/exclusive-2nd-n-c-mother-says-daughters-school-lunch-replaced-for-not-being-healthy-enough/

[Brian Fein]

Its absolutely and utterly unacceptable to tell me what I can and can't put in my kid's lunchbox.  If I want to give my kid 8 snack packs and chessey poofs for lunch, I should be able to do that.

[badger6]

Its absolutely and utterly unacceptable to tell me what I can and can't put in my kid's lunchbox.  If I want to give my kid 8 snack packs and chessey poofs for lunch, I should be able to do that.

Then we mostly agree after all. See it wasn't that difficult 

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Its absolutely and utterly unacceptable to tell me what I can and can't put in my kid's lunchbox.  If I want to give my kid 8 snack packs and chessey poofs for lunch, I should be able to do that.

I would say that if you give your kid 8 snack packs and cheesey poofs for lunch you are skating very close to committing the crime of neglecting your children.  

[Cathal]

^^^ I was about to say you're endangering your child.

[badger6]

^^^ I was about to say you're endangering your child.

If that's the case then letting your child play football, basketball, or soccer is endangering your child. Life involves risk !!!

[Brian Fein]

I'm endangering my child by giving him/her a treat on a Friday after they got a good grade on a test?  I'm not talking about every day...

[Cathal]

Sigh, I hate it when people take it to silly extremes. We all know that there are parents that feed their kids crap and when they're 8 years old they weigh way too much and are at serious risk of health issues. That's when Child Protective Services step in and take the child away from the parent being negligent. I assume we can all agree that it's better that way so the child is safe and we have government step in at that point in time, right?

[Brian Fein]

I used hyperbole to accentuate the point.  That is, the parents should be the sole contributor to determining what goes in my kid's lunchbox.  If I tell my kid they're not allowed to have soda, I don't think its OK for the school to ONLY sell soda.  Conversely, if I want to pack my kid a bag of Cheetos in their lunch, I don't think the school should have the right to confiscate it.

Fundamentally, they are opposing situations.  Clearly, someone who says their kid can't have soda wouldn't, at the same time, pack Cheetos in the lunch box.  But both should be accommodated.