"Snack Shaming"?! Is this a thing now?

[WilderPegasus]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

He was given apples and oranges before. If he wanted to partake in the healthy snack time, he had the opportunity to do so. There's probably 30 other kids in that class, if you let Timmy eat a chocolate bar, why can't Sandy?


I hope it does apply to all snacks everyday. Assuming they get a snack time at like 10:00, what's wrong in only allowing it to be a healthy snack? If you want to eat unhealthy, wait until lunch. Meh, if gym class never existed and someone decided that for an hour a day students would be forced to partake in exercise that they may not like, the same people complaining about a time designated for a healthy snack would be having a ####fit over that.



Why not?


Also no indication it wasn't returned.


I don't disagree, but he was given the opportunity to partake. He could have ate an apple, he could have waited for lunch to eat his banana bread. Of course this is confusing for the child because the teacher is trying to teach students about healthy snacks while his mom doesn't understand, but this is more on the mother.


I was a fat kid even though I was active because I was a picky eater and ate gushers (which also had real fruit flavour!) for snacks and pizza pops and coke for lunch. I wish I had a policy that forced me to eat a healthy snack when I was his age.

There's an epidemic, half the population is overweight, a quarter are obese. Something needs to be done. Too many enablers nowadays, the idea that there's outrage that a 250 calorie "snack" with little nutritional value was taking away from a student during a healthy snack time, is the exact reason why we've reached the numbers we have.

Just because you had horrible parents doesn't mean that everyone is a horrible parent. You don't know anything about the kids diet other than he likes banana bread.

The way the teacher is dealing with the kid is far more likely to make him obese later in life than his mother giving him banana bread for a snack.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

Just because you had horrible parents doesn't mean that everyone is a horrible parent.

Lol. Way to be a ######, but I was just a picky eater...like this kid. And that was an obvious exaggeration. Of course my parents never cried to the media because a teacher gave me an apple as well. Probably would make me write a nice thank you note for a teacher caring enough, because they weren't attention seeking idiots like this mother.

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

You don't know anything about the kids diet other than he likes banana bread.

And that his mother won't pack fruits and vegetables for him specifically for a snack time made for eating fruits and vegetables..despite packing them before. This is rebellion by a special snowflake parent, probably a fatty who believes in HAES and skinny-privilege, if she's willing to call something like this the "nutritional agenda" that needs to be fought

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

The way the teacher is dealing with the kid is far more likely to make him obese later in life than his mother giving him banana bread for a snack.

In what way?

And why the focus on just this child. Let's focus on the policy,

It's a school policy. They have implemented a snack time where children can eat fruits and vegetables during a designated time. Encouraging children to eat something that studies have shown they are not eating enough of. This has contributed to a society where half the people are overweight and will experience health effects because of their eating habits. Is it a bad policy? Does it need to be removed?

If you disagree with the policy, I'd love to hear the reason why, especially if you believe gym is an appropriate class.

I'd also love to hear your thoughts on if a student only drank pop or other sugary drinks if they should be able to drink it during class instead of bringing a water bottle.

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Lol. Way to be a ######, but I was just a picky eater...like this kid.

Were you also autistic... like this kid?

[OMG!WTF!]

They made him go sit in the hallway to eat totally normal food. Why is it so hard to see that's totally f'ed up. What's the challenge here? I don't get it.

[monkeyman]

So it's no longer acceptable to declare winners and losers in sporting events, and it's no longer acceptable to fail students who don't do work, but it's perfectly acceptable to single out and embarrass a student because he brought banana bread? Good on you CBE, I guess, i'll be specifying my taxes go to the Catholic board of education this year.
Seriously, what is this world coming to?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

They made him go sit in the hallway to eat totally normal food. Why is it so hard to see that's totally f'ed up. What's the challenge here? I don't get it.

During a time dedicated to eating vegetables and fruits. If he needs banana bread, wait until lunch. Problem solved. Which is really as far as this should have gone. But this mother needs to fight against the nutritional agenda.

When a student wants to play dodgeball during gym, but the syllabus calls for floor hockey, do you change it?

If it's math time, but they want to read, do you forego your math lesson?

No, you try to accommodate while being the least disturbance to the other 20+ children. Sometimes that means sending a child out when they don't want to partake in the proper lesson, if they want to read and are throwing a fit, sometimes letting them do it outside of the classroom and doing your real lesson is the only thing that makes sense to be fair to the other 20 students They compromised by allowing him to eat something beyond the "lesson plan", but away from the other children so they didn't send mixed signals to the other 20. It wouldn't make sense to allow some students to eat chocolate bars while others had to eat apples.

Meh, I've said my peace. I like the idea of a snack time dedicated to vegetables and fruits. It's a lesson as much as it is about snacking. As long as they don't overstep their bounds and start throwing away lunch food, I think this was a great idea. I mean statistics show how poorly youths are eating. Sixty percents of children do not eat enough fruit, 93 percent don't eat enough vegetables. This has lead to a fourth of children being overweight, and half of adults being overweight. Why shouldn't schools focus on physical health when society is failing them so much?

[OMG!WTF!]

Yeah. You're not going to understand this. All good.

[Weitz]

If you don't eat tasty snacks I will shame you.

I'll assume without reading further I fit in with the majority here.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

Were you also autistic... like this kid?

If you're not trying to be a ######, while I'm not autistic, I did require special attention as I had problems focusing and required individual attention, including one on one teaching a couple times a week when I was, coincidentally, in grade one.

I spent my fair share of time out in the hallway, and for most of my classes I sat in the corner by myself away from distractions, namely the other kids to talk to. In a couple classes I had those folder things they use at science fair surround me so I couldn't even see other children. So I probably understand better than most how being singled out in school felt. I wasn't even a problem child, I was more of a teachers pet, I just got distracted easily. Today I would probably be diagnosed as something and potentially given medication I imagine.

Looking back on it, I think teachers did too much for me and probably unfairly had to focus on students like me while neglecting the other children. I also don't think it helped my development in that I became academically lazy as I knew I could get away with never doing homework. And if anything it's gotten worse today. The real world doesn't coddle you, I think schools have become a bit too lax on what you get away with regardless the situation (with more of a focus on teenagers than children in that regard). At one point or another, this child is going to learn that the world won't bend backwards for you, maybe it shouldn't be at six, maybe it should, but it's got to happen and speaking from experience, I hope it's while he's in school and not after.

[WilderPegasus]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Lol. Way to be a ######, but I was just a picky eater...like this kid. And that was an obvious exaggeration. Of course my parents never cried to the media because a teacher gave me an apple as well. Probably would make me write a nice thank you note for a teacher caring enough, because they weren't attention seeking idiots like this mother.

Yeah, she's such an attention seeking idiot. Do you even know what her name is?

And that his mother won't pack fruits and vegetables for him specifically for a snack time made for eating fruits and vegetables..despite packing them before. This is rebellion by a special snowflake parent, probably a fatty who believes in HAES and skinny-privilege, if she's willing to call something like this the "nutritional agenda" that needs to be fought

Snack time is for snacks, not for teachers to dictate what kids eat. But nice of you to make silly assumptions like she's a fatty. Seems like you have some unresolved anger issues about mothers. Was your mother a fatty and you're trying to take your anger out on her for making you a fatty on this woman?

And why the focus on just this child. Let's focus on the policy,

It's a school policy. They have implemented a snack time where children can eat fruits and vegetables during a designated time. Encouraging children to eat something that studies have shown they are not eating enough of. This has contributed to a society where half the people are overweight and will experience health effects because of their eating habits. Is it a bad policy? Does it need to be removed?

If you disagree with the policy, I'd love to hear the reason why, especially if you believe gym is an appropriate class.

I'd also love to hear your thoughts on if a student only drank pop or other sugary drinks if they should be able to drink it during class instead of bringing a water bottle.

They are not encouraging kids to do anything. They are forcing kids to eat what they dictate what they think they should eat. They are teachers, not parents. They have no right to dictate what kids do or do not eat as long as what they eat does not have the potential to hurt other kids. They can teach what foods are healthy and which foods are not but those kids might be a little young to be learning those lessons.

What the hell does gym have to do with this? Or drinking pop in class? Those are irrelevant to this situation.

Who do you think should decide what kids eat? Teachers or parents? What makes teachers qualified to determine what is an appropriate diet for a 6 year old?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

Snack time is for snacks, not for teachers to dictate what kids eat. But nice of you to make silly assumptions like she's a fatty. Seems like you have some unresolved anger issues about mothers. Was your mother a fatty and you're trying to take your anger out on her for making you a fatty on this woman?

I don't get the hostility. My argument is that today's children are fat, and that a time for eating vegetables is a good idea. This woman opened herself up to criticism when she said should would not partake in the "nutritional agenda" as though it was some crazy idea that allowing a kid to eat an apple during the day was some diabolical scheme by this teacher.

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

They are not encouraging kids to do anything. They are forcing kids to eat what they dictate what they think they should eat.

They aren't forcing kids to eat anything. We have proof of this as apparently numerous times the child came home with uneaten apples and oranges.

What they are doing is providing an opportunity to eat a healthy snack, in the form of fruits or vegetables, at a certain time of the day. No one has to eat at that time and they are welcome to eat their lunch, however unhealthy it may be, at lunch time.

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

They are teachers, not parents. They have no right to dictate what kids do or do not eat as long as what they eat does not have the potential to hurt other kids. They can teach what foods are healthy and which foods are not but those kids might be a little young to be learning those lessons.

They are teachers, not parents. But they do have a right to decide what will be learned, they have a choice what exercise the children will do in gym class. Of course based on the syllabus, but why shouldn't they dictate a 5 minute time in the schedule to eat a vegetable or fruit when so many studies show how poorly we as a society are doing on this?

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

What the hell does gym have to do with this? Or drinking pop in class? Those are irrelevant to this situation.

Uh, eating a chocolate bar instead of a fruit should be fine, but drinking a pop instead of water is irrelevant? A can of coke has 150 calories, drinking that instead of water is pretty much the equivalent of the difference between eating an apple (50 calories) and a slice of banana bread (200). I understand that there's other factors at play, namely spilling, but nearly all teachers don't allow coke in class, yet at junior high it's perfectly acceptable to drink water during class. Ergo, the teachers are dictating what can be drank, which is the same as what can be ate. I fail to see a difference.

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus

Who do you think should decide what kids eat? Teachers or parents? What makes teachers qualified to determine what is an appropriate diet for a 6 year old?

I mean, parents should even though we have enough statistics to know that they do a piss poor job at it. The CDC says 93% of children do not get enough vegetables, so maybe we shouldn't actually allow the parents but fine whatever. Let the parents pack the lunch, if they want, and let the student eat that lunch...at lunch.

During the special snack time to eat a fruit or vegetable, allow only fruits or vegetables to be eaten in class. I really don't see an issue. If you don't want your kid eating fruits or vegetables, or they refuse, wait until lunch time like everyone else had to do for years to eat lunch. Encouraging the consumption of vegetables and fruit should not be vilified, because right now it's predicted that 70% of these six year olds will be overweight by the time they are 40, something needs to give and it's clearly not happening at home.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Other provinces offer programs similarly to this school's policy.

http://sfvnp.ca/

Why serve delicious BC grown fresh fruits and vegetables?
Eating fruits and vegetables is essential for good health. Canada’s Food Guide to Healthy Eating recommends that we should all eat at least five servings of fruit and vegetables a day. Many children eat much less. In fact, research shows that only 1 out of 4 children eat this daily requirement.
Our snacks are served during class time, so a teacher can use this opportunity to engage students in discussion about fruits and vegetables and healthy eating habits. Many children will be trying a food for the first time and will love how good these snacks taste and make them feel. These are the building blocks towards a lifetime of healthy eating.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16236195
Studies have shown that school intervention has a significant effect.

It is concluded that a whole school approach to increasing intakes of fruits and vegetables has a modest but significant effect on cognitive and attitudinal variables and on fruit intake.

Britain, New Zealand, and a ton of other countries, several provinces and states, have programs where students are given access to fresh fruit and vegetables to eat as snacks during class.
http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/l...ools-programme

The programme began in 2005 and at the start of Term 1 of 2017, 543 schools and 104,244 students were taking part.

FIS targets children at the eligible primary schools who each receive a free piece of fresh produce daily.

We got studies showing that 5 to 7 years bringing vegetables into the classroom can make even the pickiest eaters change their minds.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-sch...les-1487944388

Similarly, experts at Children’s Mercy Hospital in Kansas City have developed a curriculum that emphasize a healthy relationship with food. In their Food Scientist program, 5- to 7-year-olds focus on their senses to experience new fruits and greens. How does it smell? Is it bumpy or smooth? Does it crunch or slurp on the tongue? On average, even the most picky eaters learn to accept new fruits and veggies within six months.

And then of course we have the economic benefit:
http://www.aihealthsolutions.ca/news...table-deficit/

You could call it a fruit and vegetable deficit. Canadians are not eating their recommended daily servings of everything from apples to zucchinis.

This nutritional shortfall has a price: more than $1 billion a year in hospital, medical and drug bills and another estimated $2 billion in lost productivity, says a groundbreaking Alberta study.

And if money doesn't matter to you, maybe the children's success?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18336680

These findings demonstrate an association between diet quality
and academic performance and identify specific dietary factors that contribute to this association. Additionally, this research supports the broader implementation and investment in effective school nutrition programs that have the potential to improve student access to healthy food choices, diet quality, academic performance, and, over the long term, health.

The more I read, the more I disagree with my original stance that parents should decide what the students eat. It appears there's a huge benefit to a stricter control by the school on what children have access to eat.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/...article975928/

In schools without a healthy-living strategy, about 10 per cent of children were obese and 33 per cent were overweight, compared to schools with the program, where about 4 per cent of youngsters were obese and 18 per cent were overweight.

I'm all aboard the nutritional agenda train. I'm of the stance now that not only is the school's policy on a vegetable and fruit snack time a good idea, it doesn't go far enough. The social, economic and academic benefit of having greater hands on approach from the schools has been backed up by expert research. Time to get banana bread out of school completely!

[Titan]

Wow.

[woob]

Make snack time great again!

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

...

I'm all aboard the nutritional agenda train. I'm of the stance now that not only is the school's policy on a vegetable and fruit snack time a good idea, it doesn't go far enough. The social, economic and academic benefit of having greater hands on approach from the schools has been backed up by expert research. Time to get banana bread out of school completely!

While not likely to be popular, there's a decent chance this opinion is just ahead of its time. If schools survive in their current form, a day will likely come where people look back on days of schools allowing unhealthy foods on their grounds and view them as being uninformed and backward.

[OMG!WTF!]

Do you even know what autism is?

Also can you point to the part of this cutting edge research that says putting a student who likely has a much different concept of nutrition not to mention reality in the hallway during snack time is a good idea?

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Do you even know what autism is?

Also can you point to the part of this cutting edge research that says putting a student who likely has a much different concept of nutrition not to mention reality in the hallway during snack time is a good idea?

The article states that the child is at the high-functioning end of the spectrum. Also, no two manifestations of autism are exactly alike. Anyways, the article really doesn't provide the detail necessary to judge the teacher's actions with relation to the specific child.

Specific claims about the child, mother or teacher aren't going to have much merit without access to a lot more details. Regardless, whether or not the parent is "a snowflake" or the teacher is "a banana bread tyrant" in this specific case isn't really as interesting as the principles at play in deciding how schools should control student nutrition.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

The article states that the child is at the high-functioning end of the spectrum. Also, no two manifestations of autism are exactly alike

That's not really true. There are lots of commonalities within the spectrum of autism. One, first and foremost and most commonly is selective eating. Most autistic people have a very hard time with textures and the feel of stuff, especially food. It's super common for autistic kids to not like soft, squishy, cold food. I would imagine banana bread is the only way this kid would ever touch a banana. This is the kind of creative food prep most autistic parents must create. Forcing autistic kids to eat a certain way can actually cause physical harm. It's really safe to assume that a kid with any kind of autistic diagnosis should be given special consideration around a lot of common school issues.

[taco.vidal]

It sounds like the kid needs special accommodation and this became a disruption to what was trying to be accomplished in the class.
The banana bread is a minor point but its likely an indication of a larger issue going on in the classroom.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

That's not really true. There are lots of commonalities within the spectrum of autism. One, first and foremost and most commonly is selective eating. Most autistic people have a very hard time with textures and the feel of stuff, especially food. It's super common for autistic kids to not like soft, squishy, cold food. I would imagine banana bread is the only way this kid would ever touch a banana. This is the kind of creative food prep most autistic parents must create. Forcing autistic kids to eat a certain way can actually cause physical harm. It's really safe to assume that a kid with any kind of autistic diagnosis should be given special consideration around a lot of common school issues.

Common traits, yes, but not all alike, and it is a spectrum. There's a lot of assumption in what you're ascribing to this kid too. Really though, there's no point in discussing exactly where this particular kid lies on the spectrum and exactly what his autism is like, is there? Again, I think it's the general policy and approach taken rather than the specifics of this one teacher and one child, which we can't know sufficient details about anyways.