In an extraordinary rejection of parental decision-making over their children’s diets, the administration at Little Village Academy on Chicago’s West Side has banned homemade lunches to protect students from the unhealthy diet choices of their parents.
Students will now need a medical excuse to bring a lunch because Principal Elsa Carmona does not trust the nutrition choices of the parents. She explains “[n]utrition wise, it is better for the children to eat at the school. It’s about the nutrition and the excellent quality food that they are able to serve (in the lunchroom). It’s milk versus a Coke. But with allergies and any medical issue, of course, we would make an exception.”
While I respect the motivation, I find this policy to be another unnecessary intrusion into parental rights and authority. I have no problem with Carmona sending nutritional flyers to parents and encouraging their inclusion of healthy foods.
I will not get into conspiracy theories surrounding certain lunch ladies:
Source: Chicago Tribune
Jonathan Turley
Excuse me,
Your. Long day at work.
Jim,
You’re “no one specific” bares an awful close resemblance to the Scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz.
Jim
if you want to generalize then how about this
most liberals don’t agree with making the lunch manditory because of the lack of nutrition in the meal shown
most conservitives disagree with making the lunch manditory because “you cain’t make me”
personally i think if you’re going to give a child milk for lunch you need to provide some way for them to clean their teeth afterward.
i worked in milk prossesing for a few years and bacteria loves the stuff. it tends to outweigh any benefit you may get from the calcium.
Jim: “rafflaw … Privatized if the cafeteria is built by private money and operated by private money.”
—
Not the answer; that is in essence what has happened with the gyre of school food subsidies through food manufacturers/suppliers and schools. Your plan just adds another level of profit-taking IMO.
chimene: “anybody see Jamie Oliver’s first school lunch series back in WV? Kids were bringing “homemade” lunches that consisted of multiple packets of commercial cookies & snack-size chips — ONLY, and then choosing the strawberry-n-sugar or the chocolate-n-sugar milk from the cafeteria. just sayin’ ”
——
Yes, and I was thinking about that too as I read this article. Some of the home lunches were pitiful and so were some of the school lunches.
I saw Jamie on Jon Stewart’s show last week and he was saying that he came to California to do a season 2 of the show but the school board chairman wouldn’t let him. When Jamie was asked why he said he believed it had to do with something funny going on with the food procurement contracts that would be obvious if he focused on California school’s. Ouch!
One of the big take-aways for me from the West Virginia system was also the food procurement system which was stated to be ubiquitous in the US. I had just seen a documentary on the farm subsidy system which is primarily a corn subsidy. You can’t make money on growing corn, no matter how little or much of it you grow, without corn subsidies. Corn is overproduced and sold for less than the cost of production. It is only profitable at all due to the subsidy. Because it is cheap and plentiful it is the major food source for all animals raised for food, used as a primary ingredient in somewhere around 90% of what we consider snack food and as well is a ubiquitous filler and binder in most packaged foods.
Here’s the tie in: The JO episode wherein he and the school board members visited their food warehouse because he wanted to see their food supplies. All there was in the warehouse were cases of prepackaged meals, meal components and snack food. When JO asked about the cost and methodology he was told the cost per case and was greatly surprised at how dirt cheap the stuff was.
He was also told that the school has to commit it’s funds a year in advance to get the price so that made any deviation to another school food program financially prohibitive. He was also told it was so cheap because the government subsidizes the food manufacturers for school sales. He kept looking at the ingredient lists on the cases and their contents and a major (and often THE major) ingredient was corn. Yea, CORN.
There is a soil to table subsidy (IMO) for corn and it benefits large food producers/suppliers as well as the growers. Kids in school are a captive market for corn based crap that passes for food and both the producers/sellers make it impossible for schools to change the system because they tie up their food budgets a year in advance. They sell the product so cheap that any alternative is more costly. It’s a big economic circle jerk with the middle men, the producers and suppliers, making a lot of tax-payer money and nutrition be damned.
It’s like the Administration telling the Pentagon to buy Gulf seafood whenever possible and feed it to the troops. People are simply the last stop in a production/marketing line, based on a collusive relationship between business and the government. Maybe not the last stop though- a corn based diet causes such damage to beef cattle that they need to be killed at 3 years old, their illness and organ disease become unprofitable thereafter. Maybe with people living on a corn based diet the last stop is the medical profession.
Never been to a Ruby Tuesday’s
The only reason to go is the salad bar in my opinion. It’s always fresh and I like to mix the sweet French dressing with the bleu cheese dressing.
Never been to a Ruby Tuesday’s.
Always afraid Keith Richards would come through and smash my dinner with a Telecaster.
rafflaw,
I’ve known parents of means who “forgot” to pack their children lunch and sent them to school with no lunch money. One family I remember well did that two or three times nearly every week.
When I was a teacher, I saw some pretty poor lunches–high in sodium and high sugar–that were packed by parents. Then again, I saw some pretty sad school lunches too. That said, you can serve a child a nutritious healthful lunch–but that doesn’t ensure that the child will eat it.
Home is where it starts. My daughters favorite place to go Ms. Elaine is Ruby Tuesday’s for the salad bar.
The lunch at school maybe their own real meal for the entire day.
They would be better off if the school handed them 5 bucks so they could sing.
You guys would be horrified to see the school lunch programs. I have lunch with my daughter once a week as does my wife. The only day my daughter doesn’t get something fixed from home is when my wife brings her lunch on her day. Not McDonalds or Wendy’s food from Panera Bread. My Daughter gets to invite one friend if we eat outside or I sit in the cafeteria with the rest of the class. The food is disgusting but the conversation is priceless 🙂 Not only that, the kids who buy desert such as ice cream typically eat it first so it doesn’t melt. Hey at least it’s vitamin D.
If you really want to get the full effect see if you can arrange to go to one of your local schools and see exactly what they are serving. It’s a trip watching other parents bring bag loads of Wendy’s, Mickey D’s and others when they could make there own special connection with their child by preparing them a healthy choice and it only takes an extra few minutes.
rafflaw
Privatized if the cafeteria is built by private money and operated by private money. Otherwise, get rid of all lunch programs and make the Parent who is ultimately responsible.
Jim,
in a lot of inner city areas, the lunch at school maybe their own real meal for the entire day. I don’t want the schools to decide if I as a parent can prepare a lunch for my child, but I understand the thought behind it. I thought for sure that someone would have linked the lunch lady video from Saturday Night Live by now!! 🙂
By the way, how could any self respecting “conservative” not like the fact that the cafeteria’s are privatized??!
Elaine M.
I don’t believe government should be paying for school lunches. Now we decide who gets free lunch, reduced lunch, or those who have to pay. Get rid of all of it and make the parents provide the lunches which is their responsibility.
Jim,
Who said liberals agree with what that Chicago school is doing?
*****
chimene,
When I was a teacher, I saw some pretty poor lunches–high in sodium and high sugar–that were packed by parents. Then again, I saw some pretty sad school lunches too. That said, you can serve a child a nutritious healthful lunch–but that doesn’t ensure that the child will eat it.
I was an extremely picky eater as a child–so was my husband. I had a nephew who’d only eat cheese sandwiches when he was young. He grew up big and strong and got a full scholarship to play football at a large university.
Not that I don’t agree that this Principal is out of her mind on this subject, but…
anybody see Jamie Oliver’s first school lunch series back in WV? Kids were bringing “homemade” lunches that consisted of multiple packets of commercial cookies & snack-size chips — ONLY, and then choosing the strawberry-n-sugar or the chocolate-n-sugar milk from the cafeteria.
just sayin’
Chicago is full of liberals. It is a general statement. A liberal can’t be pro-choice and agree with what Chicago schools are doing. I am not referring to any one person.
Jim,
Who is the pro-choice “Liberal” who supports government dictating what people eat of which you speak?
Liberals should be having a filed day of excitement watching government intervene into people’s lives. How can a Liberal be pro-choice and support government dictating what you eat?