Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

I would call myself a parent who is responsible for my child getting their whole lunch, even if that means I need to explain to the teacher what is in that lunch. It’s not my job to “support and back up” a teacher who leaves a kid hungry for most of the day because she didn’t like the order in which she was eating her food.

Following rules is important. It is, however, not as important to a 4 y/o brain than getting enough food, which is basically the minimum standard of care.

Did she say "No cookies allowed"? No. She said, eat the cookies last. Which 99% of people across the globe would think is the normal way to eat a meal. Your DD could have eaten lunch in any order at all and been just as full.

She came home all cranky and upset because it was her first day of preschool. What's your excuse?

I’m the poster you’re responding to but I’m not the OP. The OP states that because her daughter was upset she didn’t get to eat her yoghurt, her fruit OR her cookies, and the teacher made her stop before she was finished. Rather than do the teacher equivalent of sending the kid to bed without supper oe being weirdly rigid about the order of food the child ate, she could have just let a hungry child eat her lunch.

she ate her fruit
seems like the daughter wasted a bunch of time crying bc she did not get her way
which means she's probably a big brat and is given whatever she wants at home

You have a really messed up or potentially outdated idea of how to feed kids. Being allowed to eat what you want from a selection of nutritious food your parents provide isn’t “getting your way” it is in fact how children are supposed to eat. Have you not read a single piece of literature on childhood nutrition in the past decade?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

I would call myself a parent who is responsible for my child getting their whole lunch, even if that means I need to explain to the teacher what is in that lunch. It’s not my job to “support and back up” a teacher who leaves a kid hungry for most of the day because she didn’t like the order in which she was eating her food.

Following rules is important. It is, however, not as important to a 4 y/o brain than getting enough food, which is basically the minimum standard of care.

Did she say "No cookies allowed"? No. She said, eat the cookies last. Which 99% of people across the globe would think is the normal way to eat a meal. Your DD could have eaten lunch in any order at all and been just as full.

She came home all cranky and upset because it was her first day of preschool. What's your excuse?

I’m the poster you’re responding to but I’m not the OP. The OP states that because her daughter was upset she didn’t get to eat her yoghurt, her fruit OR her cookies, and the teacher made her stop before she was finished. Rather than do the teacher equivalent of sending the kid to bed without supper oe being weirdly rigid about the order of food the child ate, she could have just let a hungry child eat her lunch.

she ate her fruit
seems like the daughter wasted a bunch of time crying bc she did not get her way
which means she's probably a big brat and is given whatever she wants at home

Anonymous wrote:Idk if this is worth a discussion with the teacher. Yesterday was my DD's first day of preschool (4yo). I packed her a sandwich, yogurt, berries, and oatmeal/banana "cookies" that I made. She ate her sandwich first and then said she went to eat the cookies and she said the teacher stopped her and told her she can't have the cookies until the rest of her lunch is eaten. DD started crying and the teacher explained that we have to eat the healthy food before the treats. By the time DD calmed down, she ate the berries and then the teacher said lunch time was over and she had to pack up the rest of her lunch to take home. She did come home with the yogurt and cookies in her lunch bag.

My DD is 99% for height and a huge eater. What I packed is a typical lunch for her and the sandwich and berries alone definitely wouldn't have been enough for a 7:45am-2:45pm school day. I don't want to be a crazy parent, but should I address this with the teacher? We are of the camp that we provide our kids with balanced meals and they choose which and how much to eat. I'm fairly certain DD would have eaten everything in the order of sandwich, cookies, then mixing the berries in the yogurt. I also don't like that the teacher called the cookies unhealthy. They were bananas mashed and baked with oats and cinnamon. We don't really discern good vs bad food in our house because we don't have many sweets anyway so when we do, we don't make it a big deal.

Thoughts?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk if this is worth a discussion with the teacher. Yesterday was my DD's first day of preschool (4yo). I packed her a sandwich, yogurt, berries, and oatmeal/banana "cookies" that I made. She ate her sandwich first and then said she went to eat the cookies and she said the teacher stopped her and told her she can't have the cookies until the rest of her lunch is eaten. DD started crying and the teacher explained that we have to eat the healthy food before the treats. By the time DD calmed down, she ate the berries and then the teacher said lunch time was over and she had to pack up the rest of her lunch to take home. She did come home with the yogurt and cookies in her lunch bag.

My DD is 99% for height and a huge eater. What I packed is a typical lunch for her and the sandwich and berries alone definitely wouldn't have been enough for a 7:45am-2:45pm school day. I don't want to be a crazy parent, but should I address this with the teacher? We are of the camp that we provide our kids with balanced meals and they choose which and how much to eat. I'm fairly certain DD would have eaten everything in the order of sandwich, cookies, then mixing the berries in the yogurt. I also don't like that the teacher called the cookies unhealthy. They were bananas mashed and baked with oats and cinnamon. We don't really discern good vs bad food in our house because we don't have many sweets anyway so when we do, we don't make it a big deal.

Thoughts?

ABSOLUTELY SAY SOMETHING. She is a teacher not a dietician. f& her

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

I would call myself a parent who is responsible for my child getting their whole lunch, even if that means I need to explain to the teacher what is in that lunch. It’s not my job to “support and back up” a teacher who leaves a kid hungry for most of the day because she didn’t like the order in which she was eating her food.

Following rules is important. It is, however, not as important to a 4 y/o brain than getting enough food, which is basically the minimum standard of care.

Did she say "No cookies allowed"? No. She said, eat the cookies last. Which 99% of people across the globe would think is the normal way to eat a meal. Your DD could have eaten lunch in any order at all and been just as full.

She came home all cranky and upset because it was her first day of preschool. What's your excuse?

I’m the poster you’re responding to but I’m not the OP. The OP states that because her daughter was upset she didn’t get to eat her yoghurt, her fruit OR her cookies, and the teacher made her stop before she was finished. Rather than do the teacher equivalent of sending the kid to bed without supper oe being weirdly rigid about the order of food the child ate, she could have just let a hungry child eat her lunch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s also setting an example to the other children at the table, the importance of eating healthy first & desert last. Children watch and learn from each other and the teacher is considering the whole classroom is her direction.

Except this is the exact opposite of what children should learn. It is teaching that the other food is less rewarding and delicious, and the cookie is the "reward" for getting through the bad stuff.

This is what happens when teachers don't stay in their lane. Tell her you've consulted with a dietician and you do not want her policing any amount or order in which your child eats her lunch. Less work for her, and less harmful to everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

I would call myself a parent who is responsible for my child getting their whole lunch, even if that means I need to explain to the teacher what is in that lunch. It’s not my job to “support and back up” a teacher who leaves a kid hungry for most of the day because she didn’t like the order in which she was eating her food.

Following rules is important. It is, however, not as important to a 4 y/o brain than getting enough food, which is basically the minimum standard of care.

Did she say "No cookies allowed"? No. She said, eat the cookies last. Which 99% of people across the globe would think is the normal way to eat a meal. Your DD could have eaten lunch in any order at all and been just as full.

She came home all cranky and upset because it was her first day of preschool. What's your excuse?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

I would call myself a parent who is responsible for my child getting their whole lunch, even if that means I need to explain to the teacher what is in that lunch. It’s not my job to “support and back up” a teacher who leaves a kid hungry for most of the day because she didn’t like the order in which she was eating her food.

Following rules is important. It is, however, not as important to a 4 y/o brain than getting enough food, which is basically the minimum standard of care.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

I would call myself a parent who is responsible for my child getting their whole lunch, even if that means I need to explain to the teacher what is in that lunch. It’s not my job to “support and back up” a teacher who leaves a kid hungry for most of the day because she didn’t like the order in which she was eating her food.

Following rules is important. It is, however, not as important to a 4 y/o brain than getting enough food, which is basically the minimum standard of care.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a big eater too, we had to explain to her teacher in each successive classroom— yes, offer her everything we’ve sent at every meal. And each successive class gave me one day of pushback, then laughed with me for the rest of the session about how much my kid packs away. They leave a note when they have a sub that, really, this kid is going to eat all of that.

For people with children with smaller appetites— you know how your kid gets hangry and more prone to meltdowns? This is what will happen to OPs kid if she’s policed and upset and doesn’t get to eat her whole lunch. It’s in everyone’s interest to avoid that.

But the teacher didn't tell her she couldn't eat her whole lunch. She just asked her to eat it in a different order.

She didn’t ask— she told her she couldn’t eat in the way she wanted. I absolutely see the teachers point if she doesn’t understand the cookies aren’t junk food, but upsetting a hungry toddler and then her missing the bulk of her lunch isn’t good either. A brief chat with the teacher in which OP explains that anything in her daughter’s lunchbox is fair game should not mark her out as “that mother” to a teacher with experience.

We are going to far with what we consider toddlers. A 4 year old is not a toddler. They are a preschooler.

The DCUM age-policing is always very fun. It’s not relevant though because I wouldn’t want a teacher mistakenly policing my infant, toddler, preschooler, elementary, middle, high school or college age student. I think the teacher made an honest mistake that the cookies were a “snack” and the four year old is not able to correct her. The parent should do so, once, and that should be the end of the issue. The teachers I know are not such fragile creatures that they wouldn’t understand “hey this is not actually a snack it’s part of her lunch” without strain.

Parents shouldn't be such fragile creatures, either. The teacher told her precious snowflake to eat cookies last. GASP.

Seriously. Save your comments for when it really matters. And stop packing sugary treats in their lunches for goodness sake! Save it for after school snack or dinner. This could be a complete non issue if parents actually packed real food and not junk in their kids' lunches.

Something baked and shaped round is not “a sugary treat” unless a teacher doesn’t know the difference. Which it sounds like this one doesn’t. This isn’t about parental fragility, it’s about not letting a 4 y/o go without most of her lunch because a teacher didn’t understand what was in the lunchbox.

My goodness. So many parents who don't want to support and back up the teacher.

Take a step back. What should your DC be learning in preschool? How to follow another adult's rules.

Anonymous wrote:Op here.

In a strange turn of events apparently several other parents addressed it so the teacher sent an email to all the parents regarding classroom policy for eating.