Last week I wrote, “Breakfast Will Be Served on The Lido Deck,” about Chicago Public Schools (CPS) serving breakfast in the classroom. I did not agree with the concept, but after my friend Lisa explained to me how students would be humiliated if they had to go to the cafeteria, thus basically announcing that they were too poor to be able to afford to eat breakfast, I changed my tune. However, I will not change my view about the latest stupid CPS concept where students are being forced to buy lunches at school and are not allowed to brown bag it anymore.
The decision to prohibit packed lunches is the sole decision of each school’s principal. In an e-mail to the Chicago Tribune on this subject, CPS spokeswoman Monique Bond wrote, "While there is no formal policy, principals use common sense judgment based on their individual school environments. In this case, (Little Village Academy on Chicago's West Side) this principal is encouraging the healthier choices and attempting to make an impact that extends beyond the classroom."
I don’t understand how a principal can make the decision that a parent is no longer allowed to pack their own children’s lunches and force them to pay $2.25/day for cafeteria food.
When the Chicago Tribune visited a school they discovered, “At Little Village, most students must take the meals served in the cafeteria or go hungry or both. During a recent visit to the school, dozens of students took the lunch but threw most of it in the garbage uneaten.”
The Tribune also spoke with J. Justin Wilson, a senior researcher at the Washington-based Center for Consumer Freedom. He said, “This is such a fundamental infringement on parental responsibility. Would the school balk if the parent wanted to prepare a healthier meal?" This is the perfect illustration of how the government's one-size-fits-all mandate on nutrition fails time and time again. Some parents may want to pack a gluten-free meal for a child, and others may have no problem with a child enjoying soda.
Of course the big winner in all of this will be the CPS food provider, Chartwells-Thompson, who will make more money if students are forced to order cafeteria food every day rather than eating lunches brought from home.
I understand that school lunches are more nutritious than those served during my tenure as a student, but they are still horrible tasting cafeteria food. How can CPS force a child to eat mass-produced, re-heated slop instead of Mom’s meatloaf the day after?

Donald writes:
ReplyDelete"This blog is especially interesting to me because of the work we did at the FireWorks For Kids Foundation through grants from the Sports Philanthropy Project and the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation. The premise was more active kids with better eating habits not only were healthier, less obese, and less seditary...they were also better students and scored better on tests.
Our work was showing promising results but before we could move from pilot stage to complete roll out to the Chicago Southland and other Chicagoland target areas the Fire was sold and the outreach efforts were halted.
I am not saying that the schools should be responsible for what the kids eat.....however healthier menu choices in the school cafe are a step in the right direction. Ultimately, a portion of the work I mentioned above was educating the kids on healthy choices as well as the parents. Working together with the schools, programs that educate kids AND parents...and getting committment from all three to stay the course through programs (like that of the FireWorks mentioned above) prove to be successful."
Sue writes:
ReplyDelete"I couldn't agree more. What gives them the right? Their focus is totally on the wrong thing. Education changes infuriate me!"
This rule is outrageous. This one more step as the nanny state infringes on our liberty and makes all of the decisions.
ReplyDeleteBob writes:
ReplyDelete"During my school years, by Orthodox friends always brought their lunches. This was particularly true in high school, but the grade school I attended had a school lunch program all the way back in the 40s. It was not system-wide and I don’t know if it were a socio-economic consideration. Today, I doubt Orthodox youngsters are going to public schools so the “religious’ issue might be moot. I would be concerned about the allergy problem, however. I was a highly-allergic child and I came from a kosher home and carried a brown bag most of the time. "