Kids snacks at private schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just homeschool your kid if you are that much of a control freak.

calling someone a control freak for caring about what their kid eats is… a take...

A handful of goldfish crackers or pretzels at snack time is not going to matter.

Add up everything the kid eats during the day and think hard about if these goldfish crackers are making a difference. Or is it the other 95% of food that is consumed at breakfast, lunch, and dinner.


Focusing on this 5% shows how truly far gone your mind has become.

I believe OP has stated multiple times it is more than 1 small serving, it IS the overall nutrition throughout the day that is the problem. 95% of the day is school for a kid, so you are expecting that last 5% to compensate and it just doesn't work.

Where does your kid go to school that it's 95% of their day?

The GDS kindergarten day is 7 hours. For that to be 95% of your kid's day they'd need to awake 22 minutes outside of school. So, up at 7:49 and back to sleep at 3:11? If that's your kid, then you probablly need to take them to the doctor, because they have bigger issues than goldfish.

My kids didn't go to a Big 3 in elementary (one does now), but at that age they ate 16/21 meals and the majority of their snacks outside of school.

Reducing it to “16/21 meals” skips over the part where kids are eating multiple snacks at school AND assumes the child never goes to a birthday party or enjoys a treat at home, which is exactly what people are raising concerns about.

You forgot to mention that now the school has set a precedent for the meals you served at home and your kid is more likely to hunger strike until they get back to school...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just homeschool your kid if you are that much of a control freak.

calling someone a control freak for caring about what their kid eats is… a take...

A handful of goldfish crackers or pretzels at snack time is not going to matter.

Add up everything the kid eats during the day and think hard about if these goldfish crackers are making a difference. Or is it the other 95% of food that is consumed at breakfast, lunch, and dinner.


Focusing on this 5% shows how truly far gone your mind has become.

I believe OP has stated multiple times it is more than 1 small serving, it IS the overall nutrition throughout the day that is the problem. 95% of the day is school for a kid, so you are expecting that last 5% to compensate and it just doesn't work.

Where does your kid go to school that it's 95% of their day?

The GDS kindergarten day is 7 hours. For that to be 95% of your kid's day they'd need to awake 22 minutes outside of school. So, up at 7:49 and back to sleep at 3:11? If that's your kid, then you probablly need to take them to the doctor, because they have bigger issues than goldfish.

My kids didn't go to a Big 3 in elementary (one does now), but at that age they ate 16/21 meals and the majority of their snacks outside of school.

Reducing it to “16/21 meals” skips over the part where kids are eating multiple snacks at school AND assumes the child never goes to a birthday party or enjoys a treat at home, which is exactly what people are raising concerns about.

I have no idea how me saying that 16/21 meals are eaten outside of school assumes no birthday parties. Birthday parties are outside of school.

I addressed a completely made up statistic that someone posted, by posting actual statistics. I didn't assume anything. I accurately stated that my kids ate 16/21 meals outside of school.

I would have to assume that someone who would post that their kid spends 95% of their day in school, unless they have a kid in boarding school, is prone to hyperbole, and that their statement that the kids are getting chips three times a day every day is also hyperbole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just homeschool your kid if you are that much of a control freak.

calling someone a control freak for caring about what their kid eats is… a take...

A handful of goldfish crackers or pretzels at snack time is not going to matter.

Add up everything the kid eats during the day and think hard about if these goldfish crackers are making a difference. Or is it the other 95% of food that is consumed at breakfast, lunch, and dinner.


Focusing on this 5% shows how truly far gone your mind has become.

I believe OP has stated multiple times it is more than 1 small serving, it IS the overall nutrition throughout the day that is the problem. 95% of the day is school for a kid, so you are expecting that last 5% to compensate and it just doesn't work.

Where does your kid go to school that it's 95% of their day?

The GDS kindergarten day is 7 hours. For that to be 95% of your kid's day they'd need to awake 22 minutes outside of school. So, up at 7:49 and back to sleep at 3:11? If that's your kid, then you probablly need to take them to the doctor, because they have bigger issues than goldfish.

My kids didn't go to a Big 3 in elementary (one does now), but at that age they ate 16/21 meals and the majority of their snacks outside of school.

Reducing it to “16/21 meals” skips over the part where kids are eating multiple snacks at school AND assumes the child never goes to a birthday party or enjoys a treat at home, which is exactly what people are raising concerns about.

You forgot to mention that now the school has set a precedent for the meals you served at home and your kid is more likely to hunger strike until they get back to school...

Sorry, that's a parenting issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just homeschool your kid if you are that much of a control freak.

calling someone a control freak for caring about what their kid eats is… a take...

A handful of goldfish crackers or pretzels at snack time is not going to matter.

Add up everything the kid eats during the day and think hard about if these goldfish crackers are making a difference. Or is it the other 95% of food that is consumed at breakfast, lunch, and dinner.


Focusing on this 5% shows how truly far gone your mind has become.

I believe OP has stated multiple times it is more than 1 small serving, it IS the overall nutrition throughout the day that is the problem. 95% of the day is school for a kid, so you are expecting that last 5% to compensate and it just doesn't work.

Where does your kid go to school that it's 95% of their day?

The GDS kindergarten day is 7 hours. For that to be 95% of your kid's day they'd need to awake 22 minutes outside of school. So, up at 7:49 and back to sleep at 3:11? If that's your kid, then you probablly need to take them to the doctor, because they have bigger issues than goldfish.

My kids didn't go to a Big 3 in elementary (one does now), but at that age they ate 16/21 meals and the majority of their snacks outside of school.

Reducing it to “16/21 meals” skips over the part where kids are eating multiple snacks at school AND assumes the child never goes to a birthday party or enjoys a treat at home, which is exactly what people are raising concerns about.

You forgot to mention that now the school has set a precedent for the meals you served at home and your kid is more likely to hunger strike until they get back to school...

Wow, some of you all have a long journey in parenting ahead.

[Anonymous]

So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents aren’t supposed to maintain perfect anything. Perfection doesn’t exist and attempting to maintain it makes raising kids a million times harder than it needs to be. It’s not good for you or the kids.

Thinking that you deserve perfection because you’re paying a lot of money also not great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents aren’t supposed to maintain perfect anything. Perfection doesn’t exist and attempting to maintain it makes raising kids a million times harder than it needs to be. It’s not good for you or the kids.

Thinking that you deserve perfection because you’re paying a lot of money also not great.

No one is arguing for “perfect nutrition.”
The point is that schools set a baseline, and right now that baseline is often the easiest, least nutritious options.

Expecting something better than that isn’t “perfection”, it’s a pretty reasonable standard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents are supposed to honestly describe the situation, not use dishonest hyperbole like 95%.

Parents are not supposed to maintain "perfect" nutrition at home. No one has said that, other than people who also think that schools should also provide "perfect" nutrition.

Feeding children has multiple components and multiple goals. They include:

Avoiding labeling or portraying foods as good or bad, or allowed or forbidden, because we know that doing so increases the likelihood of difficulties with impulse control and balance as kids get into adolescence and adulthood.

Providing enough calories for kids to be able to attend and participate throughout the school day.

Exposing kids to variety of foods so that they can develop their palate, and overcome the picky eating that is so common in early childhood.

Providing good enough nutrition for kids to grow well.

Allowing parents to feel smug and superior. (Note: this is an optional goal, but a high priority for many parents)

Both school and home should provide kids with variety, including foods that some people label as "treats", foods that are familiar, foods that are new to the child, fruits and vegetables, etc . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents aren’t supposed to maintain perfect anything. Perfection doesn’t exist and attempting to maintain it makes raising kids a million times harder than it needs to be. It’s not good for you or the kids.

Thinking that you deserve perfection because you’re paying a lot of money also not great.

No one is arguing for “perfect nutrition.”
The point is that schools set a baseline, and right now that baseline is often the easiest, least nutritious options.

Expecting something better than that isn’t “perfection”, it’s a pretty reasonable standard.

My kids are older but I never thought that the school set the baseline. The baseline is at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents are supposed to honestly describe the situation, not use dishonest hyperbole like 95%.

Parents are not supposed to maintain "perfect" nutrition at home. No one has said that, other than people who also think that schools should also provide "perfect" nutrition.

Feeding children has multiple components and multiple goals. They include:

Avoiding labeling or portraying foods as good or bad, or allowed or forbidden, because we know that doing so increases the likelihood of difficulties with impulse control and balance as kids get into adolescence and adulthood.

Providing enough calories for kids to be able to attend and participate throughout the school day.

Exposing kids to variety of foods so that they can develop their palate, and overcome the picky eating that is so common in early childhood.

Providing good enough nutrition for kids to grow well.

Allowing parents to feel smug and superior. (Note: this is an optional goal, but a high priority for many parents)

Both school and home should provide kids with variety, including foods that some people label as "treats", foods that are familiar, foods that are new to the child, fruits and vegetables, etc . . .

This is a broad philosophy of feeding kids, but the original question was much simpler—why some schools are routinely serving chips/cheez-its while others, using the same provider, are not.

Reminder: You brought the 95% and the smug parenting jabs first so maybe a mirror and self reflection is in order.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents aren’t supposed to maintain perfect anything. Perfection doesn’t exist and attempting to maintain it makes raising kids a million times harder than it needs to be. It’s not good for you or the kids.

Thinking that you deserve perfection because you’re paying a lot of money also not great.

No one is arguing for “perfect nutrition.”
The point is that schools set a baseline, and right now that baseline is often the easiest, least nutritious options.

Expecting something better than that isn’t “perfection”, it’s a pretty reasonable standard.

My kids are older but I never thought that the school set the baseline. The baseline is at home.

Where your kids required to eat school provided meals?

[Anonymous]

We toured HA. I left there impressed with so much. 3rd graders were offered bags of Doritos and chips for mid-morning snack. I’m no control freak about food, but dang.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents are supposed to honestly describe the situation, not use dishonest hyperbole like 95%.

Parents are not supposed to maintain "perfect" nutrition at home. No one has said that, other than people who also think that schools should also provide "perfect" nutrition.

Feeding children has multiple components and multiple goals. They include:

Avoiding labeling or portraying foods as good or bad, or allowed or forbidden, because we know that doing so increases the likelihood of difficulties with impulse control and balance as kids get into adolescence and adulthood.

Providing enough calories for kids to be able to attend and participate throughout the school day.

Exposing kids to variety of foods so that they can develop their palate, and overcome the picky eating that is so common in early childhood.

Providing good enough nutrition for kids to grow well.

Allowing parents to feel smug and superior. (Note: this is an optional goal, but a high priority for many parents)

Both school and home should provide kids with variety, including foods that some people label as "treats", foods that are familiar, foods that are new to the child, fruits and vegetables, etc . . .

This is a broad philosophy of feeding kids, but the original question was much simpler—why some schools are routinely serving chips/cheez-its while others, using the same provider, are not.

Reminder: You brought the 95% and the smug parenting jabs first so maybe a mirror and self reflection is in order.

I am the PP you quoted but not the person who claimed that school is 95%. That lie came started with someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents aren’t supposed to maintain perfect anything. Perfection doesn’t exist and attempting to maintain it makes raising kids a million times harder than it needs to be. It’s not good for you or the kids.

Thinking that you deserve perfection because you’re paying a lot of money also not great.

No one is arguing for “perfect nutrition.”
The point is that schools set a baseline, and right now that baseline is often the easiest, least nutritious options.

Expecting something better than that isn’t “perfection”, it’s a pretty reasonable standard.

My kids are older but I never thought that the school set the baseline. The baseline is at home.

Where your kids required to eat school provided meals?

For the years that this was the case, I was so grateful that I didn’t have to think about what to prepare/send for lunch that I can’t imagine having cared about a bag of goldfish here and there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight:
Parents are supposed to maintain perfect nutrition at home, but not advocate for the same at school or they are a bad parent... you have some twisted logic...

Parents are supposed to honestly describe the situation, not use dishonest hyperbole like 95%.

Parents are not supposed to maintain "perfect" nutrition at home. No one has said that, other than people who also think that schools should also provide "perfect" nutrition.

Feeding children has multiple components and multiple goals. They include:

Avoiding labeling or portraying foods as good or bad, or allowed or forbidden, because we know that doing so increases the likelihood of difficulties with impulse control and balance as kids get into adolescence and adulthood.

Providing enough calories for kids to be able to attend and participate throughout the school day.

Exposing kids to variety of foods so that they can develop their palate, and overcome the picky eating that is so common in early childhood.

Providing good enough nutrition for kids to grow well.

Allowing parents to feel smug and superior. (Note: this is an optional goal, but a high priority for many parents)

Both school and home should provide kids with variety, including foods that some people label as "treats", foods that are familiar, foods that are new to the child, fruits and vegetables, etc . . .

This is a broad philosophy of feeding kids, but the original question was much simpler—why some schools are routinely serving chips/cheez-its while others, using the same provider, are not.

Reminder: You brought the 95% and the smug parenting jabs first so maybe a mirror and self reflection is in order.

I am the PP you quoted but not the person who claimed that school is 95%. That lie came started with someone else.

Whether it was you or not, it reads as sliding past the point to add parental judgment instead of addressing why the menus differ across schools using the same provider, while accusing other parents of being judgmental.... in response to a comment calling out the person who did bring the argument that parents were bad at parenting for holding one expectation at home and not advocating for it at school...