So if you send your kid to school in Manitoba with a filling lunch, such as veggies, roast beef, milk, be sure to throw in a slice of Wonder Bread. Otherwise, you'll be sold a stack of 10 Ritz crackers for $5 because you deprived your child of a grain. Gawker Because Ritz are such an exemplar of healthy diet
And if your kid has celiac disease, she may end up in the hospital. The potatoes supply the carbs in that meal. Adding a grain (and Ritz crackers are only tangentially "a grain") is redundant.
What business is it of the schools what a parent packs for their child's lunch? These institutions are our servants, not our masters.
The carots and orange are also going to supply carbs, along with fiber, the other thing you might get from a grain. I'm not a fan of dropping grain from the diet, but it is by no means necessary for every meal. And if you are going to mandate grains for the sake of health, you better be sure it's whole grains, not Ritz, which is packed with processed white flour, corn syrup, and less healthy oils like corn.
A kid whose "lunch" consists of a Coke and a couple of Snickers bars is going to be bouncing off the walls and creating discipline problems. A kid who comes to school with no lunch will be falling asleep at his desk. Some parameters need to be set, but this case is ridiculous.
Sounds like a policy designed to be a fund raiser, not a policy designed to have anything to do with healthy eating. Definitely a very stupid policy that will cost, in this case, a lot more than $10 worth of aggravation and embarrassment to the school and Province.
Then the school sends THOSE KIDS' parents a note that says "your kid is bouncing off the walls" or "your kid is falling asleep." The school cannot simply assume responsibility for ALL children nor bill parents for services they have not requested.
As a matter of efficiency, you set parameters for all of the students in the school, the same as you would a dress code, punctuality, homework, etc.
Good. I only wish I'd been more of "a problem". I got treated like Hannibal Lecter just for breathing and blinking wrong. I should have gotten a green mohawk, and broken shit with a chain. Give those constipated fascist swine something to cry ABOUT. *Looks out at the readers, posters and lurkers alike* Be bad, children, be very bad. Enjoy the passion that youth is all about. Because eventually, you become an accountant, and fucking die. And die, and die, and die, and die. Enjoy it all now.
Perhaps the schools should send people to inspect and approve the children's homes, to make sure the environment is suitable for their education. Or perhaps schools should concentrate on educating children and leave the parenting to their parents.
I appreciate what you're saying Paladin, and we are in agreement about this incident. That said, the schools do have some interest in parenting. When bad parenting creates disruptive students, that's a problem for everyone else. When bad parenting yields unprepared students, those kids end up taking more resources away from the other kids. These are demonstrable problems and some times point to a need for some level of intervention by the school.
Mandating a healthy, balanced lunch is acceptable. That's why I don't understand where the Ritz crackers come in when the rest of the meal was unprocessed whole foods with a good macro-nutrient ratio.
If the kid is disruptive, you take it to the parent. If the kid continues to be disruptive, you suspend him, expel him, send him to a school for discipline cases. The problems that *some* kids *might* have are no justification for school bureaucrats to overrule and regulate the parents of *all* the students. It's complete fucking bullshit that a student "failing" to get some recommended level of this nutrient or that is going to suffer academically or disrupt the educational experience for others.
Like I said, agree with you on this issue. Further, I haven't called for anything remotely resembling your "regulate the parents of *all* students" strawman.
More accurately, he's saying that he doesn't care whether it does, it's nobody's business but that of the abusive parents.
I think people should be forced to pass a test to have kids and pass periodic inspections. The only problem is setting an unbiased and realistic standard. You should be able to prove you understand basic childcare and can support them to at least a minimum standard without relying on the state. As evil as it sounds I've never been a supporter of "you can have kids because you have couple of functional body parts". Of course I'm such a neanderthal that I think people should have to pass a minimal knowledge test to be allowed to vote, no single issue voters or just voting for the guy with the right letter after his name.
Ever notice how often the people who don't have kids see themselves as the authorities on how to raise 'em?
He already thinks Government has the right to force you to buy something, in this case health insurance.
If a kid is suffering from malnutrition, the school should notify the authorities. If the kid is "-1 Bread" from the lunch his parent packed, that's not even closed to the same goddamned thing.
