Are certain foods banned from your child's lunchbox?

Lydia has contacted me to express her anger at being "named and shamed" because of what she put in her child's lunch box. She, horror of horrors, packed her son off to school today with chocolate spread sandwiches and received a telling off from the teacher in return.

"It is our school's policy to encourage healthy eating," said the letter her son brought home. "We would prefer it if your son would bring in a nutritious, healthy sandwich for his lunch."

Lydia is not happy, for two reasons. One is that today is her son's birthday and the chocolate spread was a "special treat." Two is that she considers peanut butter a "healthy nutritious" option, but her son isn't allowed it because of what she calls the "nut obsession" (all nut products are banned at her son's school). And he has told her that he is sick of cheese and tuna!

There is clearly a big problem with packed lunches. Even if you make them healthy, it's hard to make them interesting. But should treats be banned, and should teachers be getting involved with what a parent packs in her child's lunch each day?

The whole issue, bizarrely, is reminiscent of a thread I was reading on mumsnet last week. It was from a mother whose child had his jam sandwiches banned! She wasn't too thrilled either.

So, have we gone healthy eating mad, is this actually sensible advice, or is it, as Lydia grumpily points out "teachers just flexing their muscles and showing us that in school, they're the boss!"

(picture by jsc on flickr.com)

Read School Gate on:

Crisps are back on the menu in schools

Ed Balls warns against take aways near schools

Comments

[Catherine Scarlett]

As teachers, we are told by the government that this is what we should be doing. We have a 'duty' to promote healthy lifestyles through the government's 'Every child matters' paper.
Unfortunately more and more responsibility is dumped on us and taken away from the parents. As a responsible parent myself (like the majority of parents) I find this a ridiculous situation, especially when parents with well nourished children get told off for treating their child ocassionally.
On the flip side, I have a young lady in my maths class who cannot concentrate at all. She has a packet of crisps for breakfast and another packet and a couple of biscuits for lunch.

[Colin]

Would we have teachers stay their hand when they see child abuse? Poor nutrition is negligence, and in many countries, reason enough for the State to interfere with the family unit.

There's no reason why the teacher should turn a blind eye here.

[newjerseygirl]

Once again the government is taking responsibility away from parents and passing it on to teachers who should be allowed to teach, not be forced to monitor what is in a child's packed lunch. Will they be sending teachers around to the kids' houses soon, to make sure they have a nutritious tea, too, and brush their teeth before bed?
Maybe the nanny state should let teachers get on with their jobs.
It is a worry that some kids are living on crisps and biscuits etc, as Ms Scarlett mentions, and in those extreme cases perhaps a word with the parents is in order. But a child having the occasional jam sandwich or cookie in their lunchbox isn't going to turn out like the Michelin man, surely! When I was at school, we had a tuck shop run by the pupils but stocked by the teachers, and all that sold was chocolate, biscuits and the occasional bit of fruit. And as far as I remember, none of us were obese...

[Joyce]

I have two children who have chocolate spread in their lunch every day. This is a concession to the fact that they have wholemeal bread which is better for them than the "healthiest" filling on white bread. Don't try and tell me that sliced processed ham is better for them because it is full of rubbish.
The Government/teachers have no right to say what it healthy or not.

[Dan Schwartz in NJ]

NuLabor Nanny State.

Elections Have Consequences.

[Tara@Sticky Fingers]

My son occassionally takes a packed lunch to school and loves healthy sandwiches and fruit and water. He's more than happy with it.

But the minute more than a couple of children have chocolate or crisps in their lunchboxes every day I get nagged that it's not fair and he's missing out and if the other children are allowed why isn't he.

I don't want him to have that kind of stuff every day. I want him to grow up understanding why he needs to eat healthy food and that he can have treats but only when he's eaten the 'good stuff'.
We as parents have a responsibility to teach our children about good nutrition and for it to be part of their everyday lives.
Our school has a policy of no chocolate in lunchboxes - we parents all know it and if we want to treat them we do it after school. why is that such a problem?
I think the government and schools are right to tell us what is and what isn't healthy - because clearly some parents just don't know!

[Helen]

It is getting increasingly difficult to provide anything acceptable for my son's lunchbox because of a mix of factors. First, the nut thing. So no fruit bars (because they have nuts in as well). Then, no cheese or ham (he doesn't like them). So we're down to chicken or tuna or chicken or tuna. He has school dinners most of the time but on Tuesdays it's pizza or pasta (which he doesn't like because of the cheese), and as we pay on a daily basis, I indulge him and give him a packed lunch. However, the holidays he goes to a childminder 3 days a week and by Friday I've sometimes run out of food and shock horror, will give him a jam sandwich! Bad mother!

Schools have to stop being nannyish. Yes, they should be promoting healthy eating. But jam or chocolate spread sandwiches are not unhealthy in moderation - to say that it is malnutrition is a huge overstatement. You can get fat eating carrots if you eat enough of them! I do understand the additive issue and the fact that a child who has had a healthy lunch will be able to concentrate better than one who has not. But if you have a jam sandwich with say, some grapes and a yogurt, you won't be hyperactive. And my son gets cake or pudding every day he has a school dinner in any event so lets have some common sense. Is the child fat? Do they run around in the playground after lunch? If the answers to these questions are no and yes respectively then leave the child (and parent) alone. Banning foods simply makes them more attractive.

Ultimately the answer would be to make school dinners compulsory - which some private schools do. In Hampshire at least, school dinners are nutritious (despite the puddings, which are very small though) and I think good value.

[Suzy M]

I understand the need to promote healthy lifestyles for children but surely a teacher who spends 5 days a week with a child can make a judgement call on those who generally eat well and have a birthday treat and a child who eats crisps as their main source of nutrition!

[jonquil]

wow--you all are so polite in the u.k.! if a teacher had made that comment to an american parent they would have had the telling-off of a lifetime (with adjectives)! that being said, i could understand if a child who has nothing but junk to eat ends up with a parent-teacher conference, but a one-off treat? get real!

[Benzo]

Will fat teachers get the sack for setting a bad example ?

[Sho]

Teachers are indeed being given too much micro-manage style responsibility - but what is the penalty for not sending a note home with a child who is to all intents and purposes clearly not being abused (apart from a chocolate sandwich for his birthday)? Do they get a written warning? Is there a "three unhealthy lunches allowed - you're out" policy?

I am supposed to do a whole raft of things at work, some of which are timewastingly bonkers. So I don't do them. I do, however, do all the things that I need to do and should do to keep the company going and my customers happy. So far the world hasn't ended.

I have a lot of sympathy for the teachers' position, but to be honest I do know more than one who enjoy being to "boss adults around too".

And what's with the nut thing? One of my daughters goes to school with a girl who has awful, wide-ranging and serious food allergies. She brings what she can eat, and it is no business of anyone else what the others have. If a child is so seriously affected by nuts as not to be able to function in a room where a müsli bar is safely ensconsced in another child's lunch box - why do all the children have to be banned from nut products?

Re-reading that I'm in danger of coming over all Daily-Mail-Stylee and I'm sure if I carry on in that vein the next sentence off this keyboard might just contain the words "mad" "gone" "it's" and "PC". Not necessarily in any legible order since that vein in my neck is throbbing dangerously and my concentration is slipping.

I've often wondered (out loud and in print) if sometimes it's the generally compliant parents and children who have this type of thing thrown at them. Others just don't take a blind bit of notice.

In the end what would teachers/schools prefer? Hungry children who can't concentrate or the odd chocolate spread sandwich to be consumed?

[Hol]

Once again, a sound idea in principle (promoting healthy eating) has been taken to nanny state extremes.

As people have said, a bit of junk food in sensible amounts won't make anybody obese. It's one thing to ask parents to limit junk food (say to one item), another to ask them never to give it at all; the problem is not a child who sometimes has a chocolate biscuit to go with his fruit and ham salad sandwich, it's the kid who regularly has crisps, chocolate and something dripping in mayonnaise.

Besides... policing lunchboxes, however well intended, won't do much to solve the problem. Teachers may be able to police lunchboxes but they won't be able to police what the child gets at home, which will be the bulk of their intake. It merely censures rather than educates the people it's meant to target (parents feeding their kids unhealthy diets), and it'll just cause inconvenience to the rest who were doing quite well enough without being dictated to.

Apart from anything else, as any diet regime will tell you totally banning these things outright is usually one of the fastest ways to make them more desirable. We need to train kids to treat junk food as an occasional 'no big deal' addition to a healthy diet, rather than adding allure by turning it into the forbidden delight. You want a healthy attitude to food as well as to eat healthy food.

When it comes to their own canteens where they are choosing what to provide I think it's quite fair for schools to refuse to serve junk. I don't even think it's unreasonable to try and keep an eye on home packed lunches - promoting healthy eating isn't an unworthy aim. Still, common sense and a little flexibility go a long way.

[Potty Mummy]

I think I'm coming at this from a different angle from a lot of the commenters above. It isn't made clear above whether the sandwich was just chocolate spread, or nutella. I have two sons with nut allergy. If they eat peanuts or tree nuts (for which read any nut worth having) it means an adrenalin shot and a trip to hospital - at the least. Whilst they know that they can't eat nuts in their pure form, (they are aged 3 and 5 years), I'm not sure what they would do if offered a chocolate sandwich with no adult there to check the contents. Consequently, I am completely behind the school on this one.

If, however, it was plain chocolate spread - well, it's the parent's choice I guess.

[Sho]

I'm still not getting why a child shouldn't take a nutella sandwich because another child in the class has a nut allergy.

[Valeriekat]

Wouldn't a sensible (& sensitive) teacher just ignore this ridiculous directive? All it can possibly do is cause bad feeling.

[Sarah]

Our school tried this: they sent a letter home with a list of "allowed" foods.
It made no sense.
Crisps were not allowed on the grounds that they are too salty, but nuts were: including salted peanuts.
Cakes were not allowed but flapjacks were - have you seen the amount of sugar/syrup in the average flapjack recipe?

I stuck to their rules for over a month, with my son complaining that the other kids still got what they wanted. After asking round the other mums, it turns out he was telling the truth: they'd all just ignored the school's missive.

Good on them, frankly.

[Hol]

"I'm still not getting why a child shouldn't take a nutella sandwich because another child in the class has a nut allergy."

Because even being in the room with a product containing nuts can trigger the allergy, they don't actually have to ingest it themselves

[linda coleman]

My daughter takes a packed lunch to schol every day and the headteacher has twice told me that her box is unexceptable as she has a treat every day. most days her box contains 6 small ham sandwiches,4 mini sausages,cheese,banana,grapes,small box of raisons and horror a jam tart or biscuit.i think we are getting to much like big brother is watching.let the kids enjoy what the like as long as its in moderation!

[Wendy]

I think schools should have Fun Fridays where children can bring in whatever they want in their lunch box. It means one day a week is set aside for treats and it keeps everyone happy..

[Sara]

It's things like this that are contributing to eating disorders. The moral of the story is that if yo get exercise and as long as you don't eat lots of 'bad' foods every day, you'll be very healty. We need fats in our diets and it is dangerous to be too healthy and create an uneasy relationship towards food. As somebody overcoming an eating disorder i can't stress enough the importance of balanced diet. And as much as that means not over indulging, it also means allowing yourself 'unhealthy ' foods as well. Who thinks they should deprive a child of a jam sandwich? By giving children overly healthy lunches, we could be doing more harm than good. I say bring on the chocolate biscuits!

[jimmybobbly]

i have a latex allergy. does that mean i have to check if everyone in my class is wearing any rubber?
;o) just not possible.

[Jackie]

Why the obsession with chicken and tuna? What is wrong with salmon, eggs, tahini, hummous and rocket, avocado and prawns, roasted vegetables, mozarella and tomato, list is endless - you can make lunches and sandwiches as exciting as your imaginations. Just giving a child cheese or tuna mayo sandwiches each day, no wonder they dont like to eat healthy food!

[Linda S]

My child's school subscribes to this kind of PC rubbish too. Yet the advice we get is inconsistent - apparently 'Penguin' biscuits are OK (so no problem with hydrogenated veg fat, then) but hummous isn't, because it contains 'nuts' by which they mean sesame seeds. I used to get cross, now I just ignore it. The problem is that we have created a system where a significant proportion of society (not the majority) is a woefully uneducated underclass who wouldn't know a healthy lunch if it hit them in the face, and a government determined to use hard pressed teachers to target everyone with po-faced PC directives about everything. Add to that a greedy and moral-free food/advertising industry and you get this kind of thing. Only the people who don't need the advice take any notice of it, and it drives the rest of us mad.

[aconfusedtakethatfan]

My daughter is 4 (nearly 5) and has chosen to have packed lunches. I'd prefer her to have school meals but she worries she won't finish them in time (she is a slow eater). I try and strike a balance between healthy and treats. I give her pitta, hummus, cucumber, grapes, a kit kat, a smoothie and an apple one day. Marmite sandwich a few crisps (small handful) a biscuit, cucumber, piece of fruit, yogurt. But I do give her a biscuit or chocolate every day and I don't feel guilty about it. She eats a balanced diet. I don't want to give her food issues at 4. She already says, 'I don;t want to eat too much or I will get a fat tummy'. I am not the one giving her this message. I worry she doesn't eat enough as she is slim, since she has started having packed lunches she is eating even less at lunch. I worry she is not getting enough calories each day as she eats such a healthy diet - pasta, jacket potatoes, meat and three veg followed by fruit for pudding etc etc.
The majority of parents want to do the best for their children, a small minority who don't care feed their children on a diet of crisps for breakfast and chips for tea. Banning stuff like chocolate spread is far fetched. I get the nuts thing, we have that at our school too. But I would be fuming if I was sent a letter about my childs nutrition. Everything in moderation...Let them be children and enjoy some of the treats in life too! If they are overweight it's a problem, if not then leave us alone!

[RW]

The real problem is that the PC version of "healthy" isn't based on any kind of factual or scientific information. It's mostly hearsay and urban folklore fostered by irresponsible tabloids and food fad magazines.

If the Nanny State doesn't like what a parent provides his children's lunches, let the Nanny State pay for whatever they think best -- and then watch the children reject it out of hand.

[Meghan]

Crickeys sake a jam sandwhich or candy bar banned from school? Plain ridiculous. I understand the nut allergys problem and such but a teacher interfering with a parents right to give their child a simple candy bar with their lunch is a bit far. I understand if a child's parent is just giving them candy bar and jam sandwichs everday, every week, all the time but honestly a treat every once in a while won't kill a kid. Theres a line between healthy and body image obssessed. Lets teach the kids that, eh? I think that on my priority list.

[Irish Swaringen]

It is none of the teachers business what a child does or does not eat. Why is a teacher walking up and down behind the students and watching them eat? Sounds like a miserable school to me.
I think it simply the teacher talking over what is the parents rights. Parents need a way to take back their rights over their own children.

[david]

Yoghurts are shockingly unhealthy, but "it's milk innit?" A pack of crisps is far better.

[Emma, London]

What about vegetarian children? Peanut butter and houmus are the main protein sources suitable for sandwiches other than marmite (which has apparently been banned in some schools due to the salt in it) and cheese which would not be healthy to have every day. There weren't all these restrictions in place when I was at school a few years back, and as a generation we managed fine.

[Anna]

I live in Denmark, where everyone always takes packed lunches to school, and often to work. And nobody seems to need to eat chocolate spread, jam sandwiches, kit kats or crisps for lunch. Why are you all obsessed with the right to eat and give your children unhealthy stuff? If you don't like the school's policy, change schools and stuff undermining the teacher's authoruty. And stop the whining. I sympathize with the nut problem, though ...

[Anita]

It's good for a teacher advising their students' parents to prepare a healthy lunch, while students can eat what they like once a while! actually, there are many nutritions in chocolate and peanut butter!

[Tern]

Ah yes, Denmark - such a perfect society that alcoholism, suicide and barnyard pornography are national pastimes. Perhaps if you let your kids eat what they wanted at school they wouldn't become so warped as adults? Just a thought.

[Sho]

Only in UK have I heard all the nut stuff and the rest of the claptrap about healthy lunchboxes.

I sometimes get the impression that if it didn't happen, people wouldn't have anything to talk about.
;-)

At our kindergarten we introduced healthy breakfast because one or two children were being sent with nothing. A shopping list was available, with things like "half a loaf of bread" "bunch of grapes" "salami" etc etc. Nutella was one of them. None of the children was/is fat and everyone was happy.

Now they all go to secondary school and take lunches which aren't checked. Everyone is surviving so far and it's absolutely not a topic of dicsussion.

I agree about the hummous and interesting lunches. One of mine takes avocado / cottage cheese. My only worry is that the school doesn't provide a fridge.

(I'd also dispute that yoghurt isn't heatlhy. Mind you, those "fruit" stylee yoghurts that i see in the supermarket don't bear much resemblence to the yoghurt I make, in much the same way that a sliced white loaf is in no way connected to what I understand bread to be)

[massimiliano]

pizza is far better

[Chris MacDonald, Surry Hills Australia]

Is the education system in Britain so good that there is time and energy to spare worryign about sandwich fillings?

The illiterate, ill mannered Brit backpackers we get here suggest perhaps not.

[Luke]

Why are peanut butter and marmite banned? If a child has a nut allergy then surely his parents would have the sense not to give peanut butter to him. those are the only two spreads I like and they're reasonably healthy unlike supermarket's value brands of jam.

[Luke]

Chris MacDonald. You should see the rude and illiterate aussie backpackers in London then. Some of them think the UK is bigger than aus and others are amazed our spring starts in March!

[Anna]

Barnyard pornography? Never seen any, but you seem to know more about it. Ok, you keep the right to feed children with chocolate, sugar, unhealthy fats and artificial colourings, so thet have bad teeth and get fat. I'm off to find the barnyard pornography you promised.

[Chris MacDonald, Surry Hills Australia]

Luke, I am also truly appalled at the calibre of many Australian 'exports', as our education system has problems of its own. The reason for my incredulity is that we tend to focus our public policy efforts on improving reading, writing and arithmetic, and leave sandwich fillings to parents and women's magazines. I am dead impressed that there is sufficent spare capacity in the UK to worry at the minutiae. Is there a green paper on Vegimite?

[Sho]

It would be on Marmite, Chris
;-) (considered as bordering on Child Abuse here in Germany)

I think every country has room for improvement in their education systems. But I think that in general we can all agree that teachers have better things to do than police the contents of sandwich boxes.

I'm sure that a good teacher would already notice the children with the packet-of-crisp-lunch and be on the look-out for them anyway.

And surely the British way (as evidenced by the John Sargent dancing affair) is to stick two fingers up and carry on as before?
:-)

[Bruce Mcaaw]

This is a reflection of the dire state this country is now in. The government have built an army of incompetent interfering busybodies who instead of focusing on doing their job properly want to meddle in every area of peoples lives. Teachers should concentrate on teaching, if they did that the country would be in a far better state. Are also now trained nutritionists as well? Parent's should be free to feed their children as they please yet Gordon Brown now thinks he has the right to monitor what goes into children's lunch boxes through his army of tax payer funded space wasters. Scrap all these wasteful intrusive policies and go back to basics, teachers teach, police catch criminals, banks lend sensibly and the government do as little as possible. The mess we are in as a nation is because the government thinks it can and should do everything.

[john]

This perfectly innocent and put-upon parent should ask the teacher whether the transferred epithet in 'healthy sandwich' really communicates the school's motive intelligently. I predict an embarassed silence. Get lost food police and dumb teachers!

[Victoria]

What the hell is the fuss about? I wasn't allowed chocolate of any sort at school nearly 30 years ago. Schools have rules. They are dealing with lots of children and not just yours. Perhaps parents should start respecting teachers' views (as professionals who look after their children) and school rules a little more and stop using every opportunity to try and buck the system.

Nutella is an Italiana product it is the best healthy chocolate spread you can buy on the market it is use by a famous football team here in italy for breakfast
Once you have tasted NUTELLA you will always go back for more

[Sho]

Victoria, I don't think people are complaining about teachers - more about the compunction teachers now have to check the sandwich boxes.

If you have a picky eater at home - sometimes you can be over the moon if they eat a bowl of cornflakes for dinner. Better a chocolate spread sandwich than nothing. The point is that parents (mostly) know their children best - since they have the care and the feeding of them 7 days a week.

I'm quite fit - I train 4-5 times a week, and I watch my diet carefully. But even so, I'm sometimes guilty of a Nutella on white sandwich for my lunch and appreciate it all the more for its infrequency.

[bellocchild]

25 years ago my son was impossibly fussy. I used to send him to school with home-baked chocolate cupcakes with grated carrot,raisins and dried milk in the mix. This was regarded as exemplary motherhood, not an attempt to feed him on junk food. He eats everything now, and is fit and healthy.

[Dianna]

Perhaps if the Government wasn't saving cash by selling off sports fields then schools would be able to offer better lunch hour activities and then it wouldn't matter so much if the kid’s lunch boxes contained the occasional Nutella butty?

I am a firm believer in the mantra 'all things in moderation'

[Tern]

Hey Anna thanks for your gracious permission to let me carry on doing what the hell I like without the interference the nanny state. I really appreciate it.

I'm also glad you've decided to give the porn a try; maybe this afternoon you can have the 'complete' Denmark experience by lapsing in to depression and then finally ending it all by washing down a load of barbs with a bottle of vodka.

the other day I noticed a sign telling parents that it was not wise to include protein fillings such as ham or tuna due to food having to be stored in hot rooms till lunchtime. they advised fillings such as jam!

[JetMpls]

I pack a couple of sandwich-size Rubbermaid blueice paks with my
husbands lunch every day. They keep
his lunch cold and so far no nasty
notes from his boss.

[Anna]

I eat Nutella straight from the jar ... its lovely AND it is good for you in moderation, skimmed milk, nuts, cocoa.

[L]

Some people with nut allergies get allergic reactions from just the smell of nuts. My sister's flatmate could instantly tell if any of them had been eating nuts. She didn't get a full-blown reaction, needing an epi-pen, just minor symptoms. So I can well understand schools banning any products with nuts in them.

I'd also like the school to be more involved in my daughter's lunch time (she is five). Sometimes she eats hardly anything in order to rush out and play, or talks to her friends for so long she doesn't eat much. Then she gets really grumpy by the end of school and needs something asap once we're home. Not pressure on her, just a gentle reminder to take a few more bites (and not talk so much!).

[LD]

Don't they have dinnerladies any more? I can remember them being like dragons - they checked your lunchbox to see what you were eating and if you'd eaten enough of it to go and play, and they stood next to the bin so you couldn't throw away food you hadn't eaten. While all that was a bit horrid, they also kept an eye on the allergy sufferers, checking that they didn't swap food with anyone else. Although nut allergies are the most common, there are always others; my boyfriend is allergic to chicken and tuna, which is frankly a nightmare. If they were serving chicken hot in the school canteen he couldn't go in because of the "fumes" (his word). Some people are allergic to eggs, coeliacs can't eat gluten, etc. You can't police everyone's lunches based on one person's allergy, surely? I do think it is important that schools know each child and can spot warning signs that all may not be well, but it seems very unfair to disallow a treat in an otherwise healthy lunchbox. My mum used to give me fairy cakes to take into class on my birthday. Are you allowed to do that any more?

[Derek Bevan]

School dinners at £9.40 a week are too expensive,especially if parents have two or three children attending,either give them a living wage (£250 take home)or subsidise the meal.

[gerry]

Some teachers can be ignorant about nutrition. One child was told his pizza lunch was "unhealthy". My pizzas use organic flour and oatmeal, onions, garlic, anchovies, tomatoes, olives and fresh herbs.

[jo]

As a parent I have been made aware of the healthy eating awards attained by my child's school. Children are encouraged to eat fruit at break time and to cut out the sweet treats at lunch. As a teacher I follow the school policy which encourages children to eat healthily.Before this policy was introduced it would not have been uncommon for a child to bring out chocolate biscuits or crisps for lunch. I think that the healthy eating policy is definitely for the better.

[Joe Harris]

What makes me laugh is that peanuts aren't even nuts. For a bunch of "educated" people, teachers (or even school administrators" can be rather thick at times.

What's even worse is that nuts are extremely healthy and nutritious; why on earth would a school try to encourage children not to eat nuts? If, somehow, it's related to allergies to nuts, surely that is the parents' responsibility.

[Rose]

I (and my granny)am allergic to tunafish and other seafood, why was IT not banned when I was in school??

I will tell everyone why, because my mom didn't complain and sue someone. Eventually it will happen and tuna sandwiches will be banned.

Only peanut butter.. which only a tiny miniscule percentage of those with allergies to it will be affected by just smelling it. So MOST kids are being deprived of peanut butter for the one child in the whole city who is benefitted by the ban. Go figure.

Next a milk allergy family, and no cheese sandwiches either.

Then the wheat allergy people will have thier say and no sandwiches PERIOD!

What will that leave for kids lunches? Celery sticks and water...... Never mind, just the celery, the water has too many cancer causing additives... so just the celery, as long as it's organic though..........

Good Lord this is getting out of hand.

[Robert Jones]

My reaction is that the school can bloody well piss-off. I really don't give a damn what their 'policy' is. I am my children's parent, and the responsibility for their diet lies with me, and shall feed then what I want. How DARE the school interfere in this way - what is this, a police state. Get a bloody grip!

[Mike Hanson]

I love marmite

[Emma]

As a teacher who has watched a child turn blue while waiting for the school nurse to arrive and administer a shot of adrenaline, I suggest some of the people making comments here need to try to see both sides of the issue. In this case the child's reaction was to a pasta salad with pesto dressing (pine kernels) on the other side of the room.
On the other hand after 15 years of teaching in a large school (1200 students) we have only had to deal with 3 students who had life-threatening allergies. In these cases we did ask parents to modify what they put into their children's lunchboxes and in all but very few cases they were supportive and obliging. People who value their right to feed their child peanut butter above another child's right to be kept safe really need to have a serious think about how they would feel if it were their child at risk.

[Hol]

I don't know any schools who have instigated nut bans/similar unless they know they have a child on the premises who is severely allergic enough that merely being in the same vicinity will set off a rection. It's not like they're just randomly doing it in case one day in the future they get a child with such strong allergies.

Not all allergies are severe enough to warrant stopping other people eating the food in question - if for example you only have a reaction if you yourself ingest the offending item, then a school wide ban isn't necessary. But when a child could die because they walk into a room where somebody else ate a bag of peanuts in the room five minutes ago, I think it incredibly churlish to object to the school banning nuts.

[Rose]

If one child will be affected by a peanutbutter sandwich in the same room 5 minutes ago then you have THAT ONE child (allow friends who haven't packed peanutbutter to sit with them) eat elsewhere. It is ridiculous to ask the mothers of the other 399 children at the school to avoid packing them.

[Roz-z-Z]

I wouldn't DREAM of giving my son a Nutella sandwich - it is TOTALLY OUT OF THE QUESTION. There are 2 reasons for this:

1. We would have to have Nutella in the house, which I refuse to do on the grounds that I would eat it, straight from the jar, before the rest of the shopping was even unpacked.

2. We live in France: he has things like 'asparagus au gratin' for lunch - there is no 'packed lunch' choice, the only alternative (surprisingly popular) is to have them back home to eat.

As for the nut allergy thing: I've tried to explain it several times - but no-one here has ever heard of it. Nuts - primarily in the form of hazelnuts - are an essential part of the diet: almost as much as the chocolate they invariably nestle in. At age 4 the class went for a walk (it was a nice afternoon, why not?) to pick nuts and blackberries in the wild; at 5 they were dissecting, drawing and sampling a selection of nuts in the classroom. Everyone sends a cake to school for the child's birthday (thereby dispensing with the need for birthday parties: canny, huh?!) and some sort of chocolate-hazelnut brownie with chocolate-and-smarties topping is the norm.

Why is this? Is it because the French don't eat peanut butter? I have heard somewhere that nut allergies are caused by cheap peanuts - these not being native to France, the Frenchies don't tuck into them.

As for packed lunches: I was the first kid to have a packed lunch in the face of fierce opposition at no fewer than 4 schools - I'm darned sure that most packed lunches are healthier than the over-boiled cabbage and battery chickens which most British schools serve up. Schools make money out of their lunches, don't forget: you send your child with a sandwich and you're eating into their profits - it's bound to nark them!

There are OOOOOODLES of yummy fillings for sandwiches to make life interesting: turkey, cranberry jelly and stuffing; cream-chease and crispy bacon; cream-cheese and raisins; BLT; Coronation Chicken; chicken and sweetcorn; pastrami and gherkins - just think of a main meal then stick it inside bread. Ok, perhaps I draw the line at a former boyfriend's choice of cold left-over spagbol, but you get the point. And one of those yummy fillings - for Mummies of iron will and for children having a birthday - must surely be Nutella?

[Hol]

Rose - what you're suggesting wouldn't work.

In secondary schools where it's the kids who have to move between classrooms, the child is still going to have to wander over the rest of the school for lessons (even with the most minmal movement they'll still need to be able to move between science labs, technology workshops etc). There would be no safe rooms for them to learn in if the other 1000 may or may not have eaten nuts today.

Even in primary schools where it's (usually) teachers rather than kids who move between rooms, you'd still have problems. The 30 or so kids in the same class would still have to be banned from having them. All communal areas and corridors would have to be nut free. And let's face it, at primary school the children being that much younger are that much more likely to forget themselves and open up a bag of peanuts or a nutella sandwich somewhere they shouldn't.

It's just not practical and not worth the risk to try and walk that tightrope - one slip and you could have a child choking to death. Not to mention that apart from being safer, it's actually easier to just blanket ban nuts in that situation than to try and police exactly where and when people can have them and make all these extra arrangements around the child to keep them in safe rooms which can't really be kept safe. It's not that hard to exclude nuts from one meal in a day to save a child's life. It's far more ridiculous to try and put in time consuming and awkward arrangements to separate out the child from their peers which aren't even guaranteed to keep them away from nuts.

[Chris B]

"Posted by: Bruce Mcaaw"..HERE HERE cudnt have put it better myself..our kids arent our own any more..nothing is in this country..!!!

[Chris B]

I would like to add ..when my now 23 yr old was very young he lived on peanut butter sandwiches..I was worried he wasnt eating veg etc..his doctor told me that he was gettin all the nutrients he needed..he now is a slim 6ft 23 yr old fit n healthy and working..WHAT harm did peanut butter do him..or wud it do any other children..??
Shame the school meals arent enough to feed a fly..its no wonder so many children prefer to have a packed lunch for school..maybe they should look into what they are feeding our children on our behalf..before they criticise the parents who know their what their child prefers and is happy eating..!!!

[Matt]

>>>In this case the child's reaction was to a pasta salad with pesto dressing (pine kernels) on the other side of the room.<<<

I call lie. Pine nut particles from a salad dressing did NOT travel across a room. It simply didn't happen.

[Gareth]

The stupidity of of these comments amazes me. Some people shouldn't be allowed to reproduce or touch a computer.

[Jane]

As a very slim 11 yr old, I went to grammar school and had to eat all of the compulsory school dinners. Mountains of boiled root vegetables, greasy mince, thick gravy, semolina, sponge pudding, custard etc. The weight piled on. Hope school dinners have improved a lot since then!

[Hol]

Matt - nobody's suggesting they did travel across the room. As people have already said, some allergies are strong enough that even being in the same room as the offending item will cause a reaction

[Annie Evans]

My son's Primary School polices lunchboxes, banning chocolate, cake crisps, etc. My son has school dinners and is regularly given cake, ice cream and flapjack served with custard. I still marvel at the hypocrisy!!

[carrie]

As the mum of 2 anaphylactic children, we are grateful when a location avoids the allergen - mainly because especially with smaller eaters in primary and first schools, the peanut butter doen't stay inside the sandwich!! and both of our children have had quite serious reactions to contact from doorhandles, backs of chairs and computor keyboards that have had contact with sticky fingers. You can avoid what you can see. paper towels/ napkins and everyone washing hands AFTER lunch are always welcome in our house.

[Carlos]

Sorry, not sure I can run a sentence without expletives or string a coherent sentence on this one.

But Lydia, why not tell the teacher to X?*/” followed by *#E”¢ç then tell her to *£”*@ç.

Most comments seem to focus on the “health and safety” view, but my take is that this teacher and school are being overzealous, and very much getting ideas above her/his/its station. The school should concentrate on the “brain” food…

I would also consider some sort of legal action based on the “naming and shaming” part to send the teacher/school a clear message to &%#* off.

Under normal circumstances, almost any food (Nutella included) in moderation can be considered nutritious. Why is it that we crave fatty energy-rich foods? In short, because it is good for us as part of a balanced diet…

Another thought Lydia, contact the makers of Nutella to get their support on this one…

PS: can we have the name of said teacher/school to “name and shame” them for their gross egos, lack of education and simple idiocy?

[Carlos]

Clarification to my earlier comment/rant:

Most comments below seem to focus on the “health and safety” view, which appears not to be why Lydia was “named and shamed”. Rather it was for healthy eating reasons. My take...
(refer to original post for rest of rant)

[Mrs Grumpy]

I see no reason why I or my children should be forced to change our lifestyles just because there is a very small chance that we might encounter someone who is allergic. Sorry, but if you will drop dead if you come within 10 feet of a peanut you shouldn't be leaving your house, because people eat peanuts on the street let alone anywhere else.

[Dragon]

The company that won the local school meals contract showed healthy meals with fresh ingredients. When they got the contract,the fresh food went out. The Piece de Resistance was "Sausage Crown". A square of flaky pastry with a lump of sausage meat on top. All that saturated fat! The fresh veg were abandoned in favour of baked beans, tinned peas, and instant[lumpy] mash. There were sandwiches offered. Cheese spread [fatty and salty] or jam.
I was told off for sending my grandson in with a ham sandwich, banana, yoghurt and a bag of crisps or a chocolate biscuit as a treat if he ate the sandwich, yoghurt and banana. He wouldn't eat the "food" if the bribe wasn't there. He is Aspergers and has set things he will or won't eat. I objected also to someone opening his lunch box and unwrapping the sandwich to see what was in it, while they only offered cheese spread or jam. Once they touched his food, he wouldn't eat it. On one occasion they opened his plastic drink flask, to see what was in it, and failed to reseal it, so at lunchtime his food was floating in a pool of juice so he couldn't eat it. They gave him a jam sandwich, which he didn't eat, and sent me a bill for £1. I sent them a bill for £2 for ruining his lunch. In the end , against a great deal of opposition, he came home for lunch.
Incidentally, we tried some of Jamie Oliver's recipes. He hated them. The only food I found worse were the Lloyd Grossman efforts while I was in hospital. Yeuk!

[jen]

All this 'healthy eating' stuff gets on my nerves. If kids weren't ferried about everywhere, to everything, and every activity, and walked a little more, then they wouldn't be overweight.
Paranoia about walking about on their own doesn't help. I wonder how we all bloody well survived our free-roaming childhoods!!
And yes, I agree, a whole school can't be penalised because of one person's allergies. It's ridiculous.
And the school dinners I pay for are more like £15 a week, and not worth the money. Everyone complains about them. all they are doing is pasta, pizza, baked potatoes, overpriced sandwiches, overpriced 'healthy' afters, and overpriced drinks.

[susan devine]

we also live in france, the food my 14 year old gets at school is wonderful, but he also like most of his friends lives on nutella,he is only allowed 1 large jar a month, and our local indian restaurant does a brill fried indian bread with nutella and sugar, the english wont buy it but the french love it. and the french are all thin????? why

[Jo M]

Wow..so much anger!This seems to have opened a can of worms (don't think these are banned yet).
I see both sides of the 'banned' food debate but the reality is that peanut allergies have a tendancy to produce a more dramatic reaction than many others.For the sake of 6 or so hours and effectively one snack and one meal during that time, can't other parents produce a safe alternative? Let's focus on 'real' food which hasnt been pumped full of crud and vaguely resembles something familiar.

[Ian]

Seems like it's not only the peanuts that are nuts!

[Janet]

What a parent chooses to give their child is their decision and right not anyone elses! When is Big Brother going to leave us alone!

[Heather]

Now, was she actually NAMED, or just shamed? Getting a letter home saying, "Don't send your kid chocolate sandwiches" is one thing; "Naming" would imply that other parents got the letter, too, disclosing what she had done.

Really, this is a case of shaming and not naming. Until she reported it to the Times, of course.

I'd have sent a letter back saying "mind your own business, or show me the school's written policy forbidding certain sandwich fillings".

[DEE CEE]

Make sure the bread is healthy with oats,filbert nuts and/or minced vegetables. Teach them to eat that from youngest age and then put what you like on it. I suggest Orowheat original oatnut bread if buying bread, or make your own if you have gluten or yeast, or wheat intolerance by seaching on web. So many things to put in that children would love to eat, should be given to them at an early age when acceptance is at it's peak.
The good: This food is very low in Cholesterol and Sodium.
NUTELLA:
The bad: This food is very high in Saturated Fat, and a large portion of the calories in this food come from sugars.

47% 49% 4%
Carbs Fats Protein

13-197
moderately inflammatory


ESTIMATED GLYCEMIC LOAD™
Glycemic load is a way of expressing a food or meal's effect on blood-sugar levels. Nutrition Data’s patent-pending Estimated Glycemic Load™ (eGL) is available for every food in the database as well as for custom foods, meals, and recipes in your Pantry.

How to interpret the values: Experts vary on their recommendations for what your total glycemic load should be each day. A typical target for total Estimated Glycemic Load is 100 or less per day. If you have diabetes or metabolic syndrome, you might want to aim a little lower. If you are not overweight and are physically active, a little higher is acceptable.

http://kidshealth.org/parent/nutrition_fit/nutrition/lunch.html

[Mum]

Goodness me I would have a few choice words to say to the school on that it was the poor childs birthday. What is the world coming to when we are no longer allowed a treat at school, come on people when using your brain you need energy, nutella sarni packs energy. my kids go to school with a packet crisps, a small chocolate buscuit, a sandwich of their choice mostly deli meat and cheese and a piece of fruit, the same packed lunches I used to take when I was a kid. As long as its balanced what is the problem with a little salt, fat and sugar. lets not become to stupid towards what kids eat, unless of course they are overweight or have behavorial problems relating to diet.

[Rachel]

This is ridiculous!!
It's up to the parents what their child eats, the school should have no say at all in it!
They went through the pain of child birth, their the childs responsable adult, therefor they should choose what it eats.
Schools are getting much too caught up in themselves lately, one hint of power and they grab it.
Parents should be able to pack whatever they want in their childs lunch.

[The Mother-in-law]

A pupil's lunch should not be touched, merely observed. I would be very grateful if my granddaughter's teacher would tell my son her lunch sandwich is unhealthy. Prepared by her step-brother it is 2 slices of cheap white bread with a slick of cheese spread in the middle, the only part she eats. She has told me she is always hungry in school!

[Fred]

Peanut butter is healthy and nutritious. It has a good fat profile of mono and poly unsaturated fats. I think that the school was right to voice concern, generally, although I think it not prudent to voice it on the students birthday. Sandwhichs can be healthy as mentioned above if they are whole wheat etc. The can also be better if made with a whole wheat wrap.

I believe that having an overweight child is a sign of neglect. This is because the parent is not taking care of the childs health. Nor making sure that the child is getting exercise and/or is eating too much.

[Caroline]

Obviously it was the kid's birthday, which the teacher should have known.

But in normal circumstances, I agree 100% with the teacher. My daughters have a pair of sisters in their classes whose mother is a teacher! at the school and yet lets her daughters have white bread sandwiches with chocolate sprinkles in every day. Plus a packet of crisps.

What kind of a diet is that for growing children, and what kind of example to set to the other children about healthy eating.

If parents don't know how to parent, then any good teacher should put caring for the child and their development first, even if it offends the parent in question.

[Kev]

>>

HOL - Care to explain exactly how you can have an allergic reaction to something without being in contact with even particles of it? I would be extremely skeptical of anyone who says they had an allergic reaction from something over 20ft away - and to be honest, even if they did, stay the **** at home if you're that allergic. Reason dictates that the one person who suffers from this be inconvenienced over the 30 other kids who don't.

[Ian Smith]

Well done the school (and I am cynical about most things schools do eg close when it snows). Whilst at school, pupils should abide by the school's guidelines, including what food they do and do not bring in. My children have been praised for their healthy packed lunches, yet they are under pressure from children of less responsible parentage to turn up with crisps white bread and chocolate.
A child's birthday is not a reason for allowing them to school with cr*p food, that should be kept to the home environment.

[Kristen]

Nutella is a HAZELNUT spread, so why would this be allowed at a school that bans nuts??? Sounds fishy. Get your facts straight.

[David]

Um, there is no mention of Nutella in the article, although everyone seems to be talking about it! It just says chocolate spread. I think the picture is giving the wrong idea.

[Carlos]

David - very true.

Ian Smith - ...and of course you and your family are perfect aren't they! Agreed, some school rules/regs make sense and need to be in place. Others are there because of government nanny-state interference... The original article indicates that the main cause for the naming and shaming was because of "health reasons" - not health and safety (i.e. nuts). We don't know what else the child was eating, however, this was a one-off event (as reported) and the food was not there to be shared with everyone else. So (from my high horse), suggest you get off yours.

Caroline - sorry but you are wrong re the teachers taking over (the gist of your post). When and where do you draw the line? What happens if it is opinion vs. opinion rather than fact? What makes a teacher a better "parent" anyway? One day you may be on the receiving end of such an (ill-informed) approach. Let's see how you feel then. Teachers are there to teach subjects. Let's face it they are struggling enough as it is - don't burden them with more responsibilities that don't belong to them.

[Susan]

No wonder our kids are so obese and suffer allergies with the paranoid comments posted here. When I was at school 20 years ago we ate loads of crisps, white bread with butter, cheddar cheese, ketchup, cheap beef and onion pies, chocolate, 99 ice creams, gallons of cheap orange squash, those awful McCain chicken pancakes and general rubbish. Oh and we were expected to find our own way to school at 7 and occupy ourselves. I was stick thin from playing so much sport, have never had any allergies, was never sick, have very strong bones and went on to graduate in law from Cambridge.

Oddly enough the kids who were helicopter parented and mollycoddled at school were the one's who never achieved anything. So stop worrying so much and just enjoy life with your kids.

[Jess]

I think the instructions to teachers are there for the right reasons and we should be encouraging our children to eat healthier and not associate 'saturated fat' with 'treat'.

The mother should realise it is the best for her child, if I were in her position I would not oppose such a plan. I think to keep both sides happy though there needs to be a mixture of healthy and unhealthy foods provided in school canteens- which from my experience there seems to be anyway. The unhealthy foods, however, should not be overly unhealthy as children may not be fully aware of the consequences.

At the end of the day children need exercise and eat a healthy diet, if not for the short term, for the long term health benefits and using the excuse that 'well we ate rubish and it didn't hurt us' isn't really good enough anymore as realistically the more serious side-effects don't hit you straight away, it may not be until your 60 and dying of heart disease that you realise were you went wrong.

[colorful squid]

It's none of the schools damn business as to what kids eat. When are people going to wake up and say NO to big brother??

[madmarce]

I'd invite the teacher round for a meal and then present her with a typical "nutritious" school dinner...

As for the nut allergy question, why does this problem only seem to affect the middle classes? Has feral yoof somehow developed immunity? If not, perhaps I should be carrying a bag of nuts round with me as a means of self-defence.

[Frankie]

I think children should be encouraged to eat well, but policing school lunches is out of order. My son is seriously allergic to peanuts and as they are not banned in school, he just removes himself from the close vicinity of anyone eating them. Children have to take responsibility for themselves too.

[Sabina]

I think the teachers' intentions are good but some sort of line needs to be drawn. I do not think the teacher did the right thing by sending the note because honestly: Who actually has the time and effort to make a balanced and healthy lunch to-go every single day without every now and then having something less healthy? And in addition it was the boy's birthday. I think it is great that the schools take action to support a healthy lifestyle - but it certainly does not justify criticizing a parent that only does this once in a blue moon. I think it is appropriate to take action if the child seems to only eat crap everyday but since this boy only had the unhealthy treat once i think it is ridiculous to make an issue out of it.

To be completely honest I don't know that much about the school lunch systems in the UK but in Finland everyone gets a free lunch and everyone eats it. I think establishing a similar model as in Finland where the students are offered one warm, healthy and nutritious meal a day (no, this is not pizza, burgers & fries etc fast food it is for example brown rice or potatoes with some kind of stew with veggies and meat, plus always some kind of salad e.g. grated carrots. Sometimes a fruit is also served.) would be a much better option than sending small sticky notes complaining about peanut butter on a sandwich.