Parents - your kids are bringing garbage snacks to school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

Neither has much nutritional value, their main purpose is in delivering some calories so a kid's blood sugar doesn't dip too much. Which is also usually the point of a mid-morning snack at school, it's just a bridge to lunch so kids aren't falling apart while they wait for their lunchtime.

I don't send Doritos because I personally think they are gross and messy, it's not something I buy my kid. But when I send pretzels, I don't do so under some illusion they are healthier than Doritos. They are both "empty calories" in that they don't offer many other nutrients and aren't really providing the key things my kid really needs -- fat, protein, iron, vitamins. It's just a hit of carbs. But if it gets her to lunch without feeling famished, okay.

I also don't sit around juding the parents who send Doritos, even though I don't like them. It's not my business.

This is is an anonymous forum, nobody is personally being judged or harmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

The denial on this thread is unreal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

The denial on this thread is unreal.

So you don't think underweight kids exist? All kids are overweight and need to go on diets?

[Anonymous]

Dumb question but is my kid's public elementary school an outlier in that we aren't asked to send a snack? We just send lunch. Maybe because dc is still in 1st grade and their lunch is at 11. Is this something that most older kids have - a snack time in the morning?

Back when dc was in daycare I hated the number of snack times that they had. It totally ruined her lunch and the snacks were not especially healthy. Things like goldfish, animal crackers, breakfast bars and canned fruit. DC is tall and skinny and on the low end for bmi and I am pretty sure she gained weight once she started K and didn't have a snack time. She still gets snacks at aftercare but often eats most of her lunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

Neither has much nutritional value, their main purpose is in delivering some calories so a kid's blood sugar doesn't dip too much. Which is also usually the point of a mid-morning snack at school, it's just a bridge to lunch so kids aren't falling apart while they wait for their lunchtime.

I don't send Doritos because I personally think they are gross and messy, it's not something I buy my kid. But when I send pretzels, I don't do so under some illusion they are healthier than Doritos. They are both "empty calories" in that they don't offer many other nutrients and aren't really providing the key things my kid really needs -- fat, protein, iron, vitamins. It's just a hit of carbs. But if it gets her to lunch without feeling famished, okay.

I also don't sit around juding the parents who send Doritos, even though I don't like them. It's not my business.

This is is an anonymous forum, nobody is personally being judged or harmed.

The kids and parents in OP's classroom are being both judged and harmed, because their teacher is making assumptions about them and their families based on her assessment of their snacks. An assessment that includes completely meaningless assumptions like that pretzels are a health food or chocolate milk is the reason children become overweight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

The denial on this thread is unreal.

So you don't think underweight kids exist? All kids are overweight and need to go on diets?

It’s a red herring. I promise you the underweight kids are not the ones pounding whole sleeves of thin mints or canisters of pringles as their snack. Maybe, just maybe this isn’t about you. Don’t be so defensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are being weirdly defensive about crackers when we are talking about Doritos and cookies. Not everything is about you.

Also, just spitballing here but fruits/veggies that could easily make it 3-4 hours without an ice pack:

Apples
Bananas
Clementines
Grapes
Pears
Carrots
Peppers
Cucumbers
Grape tomatoes

Exactly. My kids don’t eat the healthiest by any means. Our “snack cabinet” (food that they can choose occasionally (not daily) for an after school treat right now contains: pop tarts, trail mix packs w m&ms, plain ruffles potato chips, little fruit squeeze pouches that I know have tons of sugar, etc. So I’m not exactly super strict on providing only healthy snacks.

But, no, parents sending this junk for snack every single day all school year are not “doing the best they can.” You can buy a bunch of bananas or a bag of apples cheaper than that costco size pack of Doritos or Oreos. They don’t need to be refrigerated. If your kid won’t eat an apple or a banana and you can’t use ice packs, plain popcorn or pretzels are also very cheap and easy things to send still healthier than Cheetos or chips ahoy. I volunteer at my kids’ school lunch often and it’s honestly really sad and appalling what most kids are eating on a regular basis—both those who bring home lunch and those who get school lunch.

LOL Please explain the health benefits of pretzels.

Pretzels have a lower calorie and fat content than Doritos. They have a lower fat, calorie, and sugar count than cookies. I'm not the PP, but I think pretzels were suggested as better than Doritos or potato chips for a snack. Certainly we all know they aren't as nutritious as say kale, but there's a place for carbs in a healthy diet.

Fat isn't unhealthy and most the fat in Doritos isn't even saturated. Doritos are probably healthier for a lot of kids depending on the rest of their diet.

Nobody said fat is unhealthy. But I will say that Doritos aren't healthier than pretzels.

And you'd be wrong, because "healthy" isn't a concept that exists in a vaccuum. Some kids need more fat in their diet because they don't naturally want to eat much. I have one like this, and I'd much rather see her eating Doritos than pretzels. She'd prefer the pretzels, but sometimes I push stuff like Doritos that would be less healthy for me, because her dietary needs are different.

So do you think that's why many kids are bringing whole sleeves of cookies for snack, or is your kid maybe an outlier?

DP. All kids are outliers. You are operating from the standpoint that the vast majority of kids need the same thing, and that you can dictate what that is. You are ignoring people in this thread who are saying "hey my kid's situation is different than yours, the stuff you are deeming unhealthy is actually a win for my kid in this specific situation." You want to dismiss each example like this as an "outlier" because it challenges your belief that there is simply a correct way to feed kids in this situation and you know what it is and anyone deviating must be wrong. What we're explaining is that if it's not your kid, you have NO IDEA what they need. You don't know how the family arrived at whatever the snack is. You think it's up to you to approve or disapprove of some other kid's snack without knowing the circumstances, and if someone says "hey here are the circumstance that actually make what you think is unhealthy appropriate for my kid in this situation," you immediately dismiss that one person as an outlier.

You don't know what other people's kids need. And you're not going to find out by simply ignoring every single parent telling you that their kid needs something different than what yours might need.

The denial on this thread is unreal.

So you don't think underweight kids exist? All kids are overweight and need to go on diets?

My starting point is that a package of Doritos or sleeve of cookies isn't a great shack choice for most kids. If some kid is underweight and the pediatrician has recommended Doritos, fine. But I would be surprised if that's a concern for most kids. Being underweight is an outlier (a word that a poster upthread didn't like, but it's true).

[Anonymous]

I’m trying to imagine the expression on some of your faces as you try to argue in favor of Doritos and chocolate milk. Are you trolling?

[Anonymous]

This is why we need more violence in society. A teacher who acts like this needs to get sent to the hospital.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My younger kid is a restrictive eater with diagnosed autism and sensory issues around food and is quite thin. I’m fine with him getting some extra calories from a bag of mini muffins or Teddy Grahams or whatever.

When I was a kid in the 90s, kids were bringing cans of soda to school for lunch and drinking the whole can of Coke or sprite or whatever. Then in the mid-late 90s it switched more to Snapple and iced teas especially with the wealthier kids. Kids have literally always eaten “junk food” and they don’t need to be as restrictive with their diets as a 40 year old mom who works a desk job.

The 70s is when the amount of processed snack foods really increased and that's when BMIs started going up. So yes, what you're describing in the 90s is true. But it wasn't "always" that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dumb question but is my kid's public elementary school an outlier in that we aren't asked to send a snack? We just send lunch. Maybe because dc is still in 1st grade and their lunch is at 11. Is this something that most older kids have - a snack time in the morning?

Back when dc was in daycare I hated the number of snack times that they had. It totally ruined her lunch and the snacks were not especially healthy. Things like goldfish, animal crackers, breakfast bars and canned fruit. DC is tall and skinny and on the low end for bmi and I am pretty sure she gained weight once she started K and didn't have a snack time. She still gets snacks at aftercare but often eats most of her lunch.

It has varied from year to year for my kid and is usually dependent on when their lunch is. In most elementary schools, one grade or another gets shafted on the lunch front and gets the late slot, there's not much you can do other than build a snack time into the morning.

I hear what you are saying about snacks killing lunch appetites. But this is just a good example of how the real problem here is the way eating is structured at schools. Lunch often happens too late. Snacks take the edge off but can undermine lunch. There are restrictions on what can be sent because of school rules (our school dictates that all snacks not require refrigeration and be nut free, individually packaged, and not create undue mess since they are eaten at desks -- this eliminates most of the healthier options listed here and is why my kid mostly gets crackers of some kind for their snack even though that's not what I'd serve as a snack at home). I might look askance at Doritos or cookies as a snack, that's not what I'd choose to send (though my kid would LOVE it, now I'm curious if other kids at school are getting this because I bet she's so jealous). But because the situation is already just not ideal in any sense, I'm not going to judge those families because I don't really think there's a great answer to this problem. I don't think my kid's snack situation is set up to encourage healthy options. It's restricted in a way that pretty much dictates crackers, pretzels, or similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb question but is my kid's public elementary school an outlier in that we aren't asked to send a snack? We just send lunch. Maybe because dc is still in 1st grade and their lunch is at 11. Is this something that most older kids have - a snack time in the morning?

Back when dc was in daycare I hated the number of snack times that they had. It totally ruined her lunch and the snacks were not especially healthy. Things like goldfish, animal crackers, breakfast bars and canned fruit. DC is tall and skinny and on the low end for bmi and I am pretty sure she gained weight once she started K and didn't have a snack time. She still gets snacks at aftercare but often eats most of her lunch.

It has varied from year to year for my kid and is usually dependent on when their lunch is. In most elementary schools, one grade or another gets shafted on the lunch front and gets the late slot, there's not much you can do other than build a snack time into the morning.

I hear what you are saying about snacks killing lunch appetites. But this is just a good example of how the real problem here is the way eating is structured at schools. Lunch often happens too late. Snacks take the edge off but can undermine lunch. There are restrictions on what can be sent because of school rules (our school dictates that all snacks not require refrigeration and be nut free, individually packaged, and not create undue mess since they are eaten at desks -- this eliminates most of the healthier options listed here and is why my kid mostly gets crackers of some kind for their snack even though that's not what I'd serve as a snack at home). I might look askance at Doritos or cookies as a snack, that's not what I'd choose to send (though my kid would LOVE it, now I'm curious if other kids at school are getting this because I bet she's so jealous). But because the situation is already just not ideal in any sense, I'm not going to judge those families because I don't really think there's a great answer to this problem. I don't think my kid's snack situation is set up to encourage healthy options. It's restricted in a way that pretty much dictates crackers, pretzels, or similar.

We've had to send snacks for the reverse problem. Lunch is too early (on two hour delay days it's the first thing on the schedule), so we send a snack for the afternoon. It still doesn't always get eaten, so I send something that's not going to rot if it stays in the backpack for a few days, which means something processed. We send protein bars, but I'm not kidding myself that those are much healthier than the stuff OP is complaining about.

[Anonymous]

Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do some schools ask that snacks not require refrigeration? Does that mean you can send ice packs for lunch but not snacks? Why is that? I haven't heard of this rule.

At our elementary school, lunch boxes go in a cooler first thing in the morning and are taken straight to the cafeteria at lunch time. Unless you send two lunchboxes, you're going to have kids digging through the cooler to get their snacks. I can see why you'd want to avoid that.