Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Six-year-old schoolboy expelled for having Mini Cheddars in his lunchbox
This is not a joke!
Quote:
Riley Pearson was suspended for four days last Wednesday from Colnbrook CofE Primary School in Berkshire, after teachers found the packet of snacks in his lunchbox.
He had been due to return to school on Tuesday, but his parents say that both Riley and his four-year-old brother have now been permanently excluded because of the row over what he eats for lunch.
Quote:
The school, near Slough, had recently sent a letter to parents saying that from January 14 packed lunches should be "healthy and balanced".
Parents were told: "Chocolate, sweets, crisps and fizzy drinks are not allowed. If your child's lunchbox is unhealthy and unbalanced they will be provided with a school lunch for which you will be charged."
Quote:
Mr Pearson, who lives Colnbrook, said: "He is just six-years-old, all he does is take his lunchbox to school, it's us who puts the food into his lunchbox.
"We as a family believe that Riley is taking a well balanced lunch to school and that no rules have been broken. "
Riley's mother, Natalie Mardle, said his lunch usually consists of a sandwich, yoghurt tube, Dairylea Dunkers cheese spread snack, a packet of Mini Cheddars, and water.
Might want to include the reason the school says he was kicked out.
Quote:
In a statement the school said a pupil had been permanently excluded because "during the course of a recent four day exclusion, the pupil’s parents made it publicly clear that their child would not be following the school's policy on healthy eating upon their return".
It also said the decision was taken because of "the parent school relationship suffering an irretrievable breakdown that would have put [the] two pupils in an unacceptable position".
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Might want to include the reason the school says he was kicked out.
The first paragraph is pretty bogus, it basically says that the school decides on the students menu choice and not the parents. Last time I checked the school was there to educate and not act like the parents. If this was an issue where the kid was showing up bruised and abused then you'd have something, but isn't this a case of the state (in this case the school) butting in where it doesn't belong. Give the kids a healthy eating cafeteria where they can buy food, that's where it should end.
The second paragraph is questionable to me as well. Oh we can't deal with the parents (they don't want to do this our way) so we'll throw the students out. If I'm reading that right, its pretty ridiculous and goes against the unquestioned right to education.
The first paragraph is pretty bogus, it basically says that the school decides on the students menu choice and not the parents. Last time I checked the school was there to educate and not act like the parents.
Whether or not you agree with the school's healthy food policy is one thing, but the bolded section here is simply incorrect. The concept of in loco parentis has applied to the teacher-student relationship in Britain dating back many centuries.
Quote:
In loco parentis is a legal doctrine describing a relationship similar to that of a parent to a child. It refers to an individual who assumes parental status and responsibilities for another individual, usually a young person, without formally adopting that person. For example, legal guardians are said to stand in loco parentis with respect to their wards, creating a relationship that has special implications for insurance and Workers' Compensation law.
By far the most common usage of in loco parentis relates to teachers and students. For hundreds of years, the English common-law concept shaped the rights and responsibilities of public school teachers: until the late nineteenth century, their legal authority over students was as broad as that of parents.
The first paragraph is pretty bogus, it basically says that the school decides on the students menu choice and not the parents. Last time I checked the school was there to educate and not act like the parents. If this was an issue where the kid was showing up bruised and abused then you'd have something, but isn't this a case of the state (in this case the school) butting in where it doesn't belong. Give the kids a healthy eating cafeteria where they can buy food, that's where it should end.
The second paragraph is questionable to me as well. Oh we can't deal with the parents (they don't want to do this our way) so we'll throw the students out. If I'm reading that right, its pretty ridiculous and goes against the unquestioned right to education.
I think that there is a line where teaching your kids to eat unhealthy is a form of neglect. I don't want to discuss where that line might be exactly, and I assume that most people who have an issue with this story have a problem with where that line is drawn in this case. The school is in charge of keeping my kid safe when I leave them there, and if they think I am neglecting that kid, they better be doing something about it.
If someone is coming to school with insufficient or inappropriate food, then something else is going on, and the parents need to be educated. Providing a cafeteria is not going to stop that. Some parents, not necessarily intentionally, have no idea what kids should eat or have no idea that they should be providing food for the kids to take. As a foster parent, I could tell you some terrible stories about stuff like this, if I was allowed. You could use your imagination though, and think of the worst thing your kid could bring to school that actually qualified as food, and the truth is actually worse than that.
As for your second point, if kids won't follow the rules, and parents won't make them follow the rules, what should be done? You can't run a system like the schools where rules are broken with no consequences.
I get that the parents are trying to change the rules, or more likely, where that line is drawn. I don't disagree with them trying, but I am guessing that given the schools response, they went about it the wrong way.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
I know that if I was teaching twenty-five 6-year olds, I wouldn't want them to be all jacked up on sugar and snack foods, so I can see why it matters. A little bit in moderation should be OK, but people might define that differently.
Sounds like the bigger issue was the parents being indignant and refusing to cooperate and not just one mini-cheddars incident.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
I think that there is a line where teaching your kids to eat unhealthy is a form of neglect. I don't want to discuss where that line might be exactly, and I assume that most people who have an issue with this story have a problem with where that line is drawn in this case. The school is in charge of keeping my kid safe when I leave them there, and if they think I am neglecting that kid, they better be doing something about it.
How are they teaching him to eat unhealthy? Its not like they're sending him to school with big macs and fries everyday or cash to go to 7-11 to but slurpees and chocolate bars like we did in our day. This is a hugely loooong way from neglecting their kid, especially if he's eating a balanced diet including his home meals.
from the article
Quote:
Riley's mother, Natalie Mardle, said his lunch usually consists of a sandwich, yoghurt tube, Dairylea Dunkers cheese spread snack, a packet of Mini Cheddars, and water.
She said Rily eats healthy, well-balanced meals at home, according to the Daily Mail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji
If someone is coming to school with insufficient or inappropriate food, then something else is going on, and the parents need to be educated. Providing a cafeteria is not going to stop that. Some parents, not necessarily intentionally, have no idea what kids should eat or have no idea that they should be providing food for the kids to take. As a foster parent, I could tell you some terrible stories about stuff like this, if I was allowed. You could use your imagination though, and think of the worst thing your kid could bring to school that actually qualified as food, and the truth is actually worse than that.
They are not teaching him terrible nutrition, this is not some morbidly obese kid
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji
As for your second point, if kids won't follow the rules, and parents won't make them follow the rules, what should be done? You can't run a system like the schools where rules are broken with no consequences.
This kid wasn't breaking vending machines or beating up and biting other kids, its a food dispute and the school in my mind is acting in a inappropriate and heavy handed matter. I would also question the ability of the teachers and principle to deal with this situation if they are tossing kids out of school for having what accounts to a bag of chips in a lunch bag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji
I get that the parents are trying to change the rules, or more likely, where that line is drawn. I don't disagree with them trying, but I am guessing that given the schools response, they went about it the wrong way.
The rules in this case are wrong, they are way out of context, there are better things that they could be doing then this.
How are they teaching him to eat unhealthy? Its not like they're sending him to school with big macs and fries everyday or cash to go to 7-11 to but slurpees and chocolate bars like we did in our day. This is a hugely loooong way from neglecting their kid, especially if he's eating a balanced diet including his home meals.
I am not saying they are, but the school has a responsibility to do things like make sure that kids are getting the proper nutrition. You were saying they didn't.
Quote:
They are not teaching him terrible nutrition, this is not some morbidly obese kid
You don't need to be morbidly obese to be neglected. Most failure to thrive kids that are the result of nutritional neglect, certainly are not obese.
Quote:
This kid wasn't breaking vending machines or beating up and biting other kids, its a food dispute and the school in my mind is acting in a inappropriate and heavy handed matter. I would also question the ability of the teachers and principle to deal with this situation if they are tossing kids out of school for having what accounts to a bag of chips in a lunch bag.
So he isn't doing physical damage so we shouldn't worry about it? He was kicked out not because he had something in his lunch bag, but because his parents refused to follow the rules and stated they wouldn't ever follow them.
I am not saying I agree that the items in question should be allowed or not, because i have no idea what they are. I have no idea what kind of process was used to determine what the rules were or how they would be enforced, so I can't really comment on that.
I do know that the parents likely would have been informed of the rules before hand and had an opportunity to comment on them, before they went into effect. If they were not given that chance, then the school is at fault. If they were, and the parents chose not to voice their concerns, then it is the parents fault. However, we don't know any of this from the article, so I am not going to jump to conclusions one way or the other.
Quote:
The rules in this case are wrong, they are way out of context, there are better things that they could be doing then this.
Of course there are better things they could be doing. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing this. I am not saying that the rule is right or wrong. I am saying that from the article, it looks like the parents didn't do the right things to combat the rule. I am also saying that the school needs to be able to enforce the rules it has, just as a function of it's role in society.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Six-year-old schoolboy expelled for having Mini Cheddars in his lunchbox
