Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

PapaG

Banned User
BANNED
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
32,870
Likes
291
Points
0
A turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, potato chips, and apple juice don't meet US standards, but processed chicken nuggets do?

God Bless Ammmurrrrrrica!

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=8762

RAEFORD — A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.

The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs — including in-home day care centers — to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home.

When home-packed lunches do not include all of the required items, child care providers must supplement them with the missing ones.

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.

“I don't feel that I should pay for a cafeteria lunch when I provide lunch for her from home,” the mother wrote in a complaint to her state representative, Republican G.L. Pridgen of Robeson County.

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.

“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.”

While the mother and grandmother thought the potato chips and lack of vegetable were what disqualified the lunch, a spokeswoman for the Division of Child Development said that should not have been a problem.

“With a turkey sandwich, that covers your protein, your grain, and if it had cheese on it, that’s the dairy,” said Jani Kozlowski, the fiscal and statutory policy manager for the division. “It sounds like the lunch itself would’ve met all of the standard.” The lunch has to include a fruit or vegetable, but not both, she said.

There are no clear restrictions about what additional items — like potato chips — can be included in preschoolers’ lunch boxes.

“If a parent sends their child with a Coke and a Twinkie, the child care provider is going to need to provide a balanced lunch for the child,” Kozlowski said.

Ultimately, the child care provider can’t take the Coke and Twinkie away from the child, but Kozlowski said she “would think the Pre-K provider would talk with the parent about that not being a healthy choice for their child.”

It is unclear whether the school was allowed to charge for the cafeteria lunches they gave to every preschooler in the class that day.

The state regulation reads:

“Sites must provide breakfast and/or snacks and lunch meeting USDA requirements during the regular school day. The partial/full cost of meals may be charged when families do not qualify for free/reduced price meals.

“When children bring their own food for meals and snacks to the center, if the food does not meet the specified nutritional requirements, the center must provide additional food necessary to meet those requirements.”

Still, Kozlowski said, the parents shouldn’t have been charged.

“The school may have interpreted [the rule] to mean they felt like the lunch wasn’t meeting the nutritional requirements and so they wanted the child to have the school lunch and then charged the parent,” she said. “It sounds like maybe a technical assistance need for that school.”

The school principal, Jackie Samuels, said he didn’t “know anything about” parents being charged for the meals that day. “I know they eat in the cafeteria. Whether they pay or not, they eat in the cafeteria.”

Pridgen’s office is looking into the issue.

Sara Burrows is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.
 
A turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, potato chips, and apple juice don't meet US standards, but processed chicken nuggets do?

God Bless Ammmurrrrrrica!

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=8762

God, I love the USA. Most retarded story ever. If that happened to my child, I would walk into the school/daycare, and pull my child out so freaking fast. One, to declare the child's actual meal is not nutritious enough..... I'd get it if it were soda and a twinkie... I really would. But that meal was decent. It's hard to get young kids to eat a balanced meal when they don't have adults watching over them, but that meal was not bad.

But it's a slap in the face for parents to be told how to parent, in this case. The government is going to step in and tell me how to parent, and then I get charged for it? "Help" is forced upon me, and I have to pay for it? And it's worse than what it replaced? WTF is wrong with this system?
 
Nothing wrong with the system.

Simply one state "agent" was hired to fill a position she totally lacked the intelligence/skills to handle. I guarantee she was hired through the affirmative action process.
 
Nothing wrong with the system.

Simply one state "agent" was hired to fill a position she totally lacked the intelligence/skills to handle. I guarantee she was hired through the affirmative action process.

Well, then.... I'd say there IS something wrong with the system. And it sounds like you agree.
 
Well, then.... I'd say there IS something wrong with the system. And it sounds like you agree.

The racist/sexist hiring system nearly all state and federal agencies are forced to use, yes.

Not something that reflects on the elementary school, or the USDA guidelines though.
 
The racist/sexist hiring system nearly all state and federal agencies are forced to use, yes.

Not something that reflects on the elementary school, or the USDA guidelines though.

Personally, that system sounds pretty damn flawed, though. Affirmative action is one thing. But to let someone so incompetent into that system? Plus, it pissed me off that we're spending money on these types of programs. So you can tell me I'm not feeding my child properly? Simply stooopid.
 
Personally, that system sounds pretty damn flawed, though. Affirmative action is one thing. But to let someone so incompetent into that system? Plus, it pissed me off that we're spending money on these types of programs. So you can tell me I'm not feeding my child properly? Simply stooopid.

Not only to tell you that you're feeding your child incorrectly, but to then also replace a turkey and cheese on white wheat sandwich with three processed chicken nuggets. On top of it, you get charged for the chicken nuggets!
 
I'd be pissed off if some school employee went thru my kids lunch and determined what I gave them wasnt good enough. I'm the parent!!
 
The mandate for the schools to provide food for students if they deem meals brought to be insufficient--bad policy (blame congress)
The determination by the agent of the lunch not meeting the requirements--poor interpretation of bad policy (blame the agent)
The provision of chicken nuggets as a replacement item--poor execution of bad policy (blame the lunch lady)
The "note" about the lunch-swap sent to the parent/grandparent--poor communication of bad policy (blame the administrators)

The fact that this story will probably bring about a modification/clarification of this rule, as well as increased awareness by parents thereof--good result from poor interpretation/execution/communication of bad policy.
 
Not only to tell you that you're feeding your child incorrectly, but to then also replace a turkey and cheese on white wheat sandwich with three processed chicken nuggets. On top of it, you get charged for the chicken nuggets!

The article does say she was given other food, but chose not to eat it (semantics, I know). I ask the school, "What's healthier?" Who knows the child better - the parent or the food Nazi? Even if the school offers healthier foods than I offer my children, I know what my child will and won't eat (especially when I'm not present to "encourage" her proper eating), so that just annoys me further.

So, you make my child eat your food, and charge me for it. My child ate less food (studies show that improper diet, or not eating enough, has a big impact on a child's ability to focus and learn), and I'd say the chicken nuggets are likely the least healthy food item listed in that article. Thanks for course-correcting, government!! Now go f*** yourself!
 
The mandate for the schools to provide food for students if they deem meals brought to be insufficient--bad policy (blame congress)
The determination by the agent of the lunch not meeting the requirements--poor interpretation of bad policy (blame the agent)
The provision of chicken nuggets as a replacement item--poor execution of bad policy (blame the lunch lady)
The "note" about the lunch-swap sent to the parent/grandparent--poor communication of bad policy (blame the administrators)

The fact that this story will probably bring about a modification/clarification of this rule, as well as increased awareness by parents thereof--good result from poor interpretation/execution/communication of bad policy.

Way to break it down, play-by-play. You forgot the part where the child should have told the agent not to "f*** with my meal!!"
 
Way to break it down, play-by-play. You forgot the part where the child should have told the agent not to "f*** with my meal!!"

LOL! Repped for the mental image of a 4-year-old profanely telling off a gub'mint employee. Sounds like it would make for an awesome Youtube video.
 
Anyone else find it ironic that the food offered was a chicken nugget? I realize it's likely healthier due to it coming from one of the school's food sources, but after that whole story came out about the 17-year old girl who ate nothing but Chicken McNuggets, and how she almost died last week..... I've seen a lot written about Chicken McNuggets and chicken nuggets, how they're prepared, what's in them, etc.... And they still don't (generally) seem all that great to me.
 
LOL! Repped for the mental image of a 4-year-old profanely telling off a gub'mint employee. Sounds like it would make for an awesome Youtube video.

I get the image of that close-up of the little boy, at the soccer game, flipping the bird.

I repped you as well for breaking it all down. I should have just added my F-off to the end of your breakdown. Would have made a perfect "Priceless" addition, like the Visa or Mastercard commercials.
 
Anyone else find it ironic that the food offered was a chicken nugget? I realize it's likely healthier due to it coming from one of the school's food sources, but after that whole story came out about the 17-year old girl who ate nothing but Chicken McNuggets, and how she almost died last week..... I've seen a lot written about Chicken McNuggets and chicken nuggets, how they're prepared, what's in them, etc.... And they still don't (generally) seem all that great to me.

I remember seeing an episode of "Jamie Oliver's food revolution" where he had a bunch of elementary school kids watch him remove all the good parts from a chicken, then grind up everything else (feet, ligaments, etc) and form them into nuggets, and the kids--despite seeing what nasty stuff was used--still said they'd rather have the nuggets than the good chicken meat.

Edit: Found the video:

[video=youtube;S9B7im8aQjo]

This is why you don't allow a 4-year-old to choose what he/she is going to eat for lunch.
 
Last edited:
LOL! Repped for the mental image of a 4-year-old profanely telling off a gub'mint employee. Sounds like it would make for an awesome Youtube video.

LEAVE MY FUCKING LUNCH ALONE!

007soccer-kid-flipping-the-bird.jpg
 
Nothing wrong with the system.

Simply one state "agent" was hired to fill a position she totally lacked the intelligence/skills to handle. I guarantee she was hired through the affirmative action process.

And most likely promoted to program director.

God Bless Ammmurrrrrrica!
 
And most likely promoted to program director.

God Bless Ammmurrrrrrica!

With Maris promoted to some job where he can put his own magical spin on anything, like the any good spokesperson or publicist can do. Welcome to the "Maris Spin Zone!!"
 
Although it's a stupid law, isn't the subject heading a little misleading?

The law (or rule?) says they must supplement, not replace. The little kid, not necessarily able to make decisions for themselves (which is one of the reasons for the law/rule) did not eat her own lunch.

Whats pathetic is how the person who was in charge of this issue, seemed to confuse supplement with 'replace'. Or didn't take the responsibility to see that the student/child ate their home lunch.

I understand this if this was a case of a poor family who barely have enough money to provide all the necessary parts for a 'healthy' lunch. This doesn't appear to be the case.

Also, what do they do with students who have parents who, based on religious beliefs or allergies, can't provide certain foods to consume? Or have some kind of disability that makes it so solid foods can't be consumed?

If there continues to be a law like this, it should be for SCHOOL supplied food, not home supplied food. And if it's a case of a student not getting enough FOOD (not "correct" portions of food), just provide free or greatly reduced lunches then.

Oh wait, they already do that.

stupid law/rule.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top