Is unhealthy food worth it? (s/o of school lunch post)

[emilyjh75]

This is an extension of the school lunch post recently bumped. I mentioned in a reply to that post about how our school is not serving healthy food for our children, and how I wanted to keep my preschoolers home for breakfast.

Well, after two days of feeding my lovely children hot, fresh, whole oatmeal, raisins, bananas, and apples at home for breakfast, I've been informed by the preschool that because our program (Head Start) is funded and supported by the USDA, they are *required* to feed the children that slop that's being handed out. That is, if I keep my children home during breakfast, I'm still required by law to bring them to the breakfast room when I get to school, sit with them, and make them eat it, regardless of whether they've already been fed at home.

I've called the district nutrition supervisor to find out my options, but in the mean time, I guess I have to decide whether it's even worth fighting over at all. I'm asking for opinions here: is it worth it to you to fight over, or even pull your kids out of preschool, over feeding them proper, healthy food? (When they get old enough for elementary school, they can bring their own food.)

Perhaps it's not such a big deal for one or two years of a child's life, but I just can't get it out of my head the health risks that my children are being exposed to, twice a day, for 2/3 of that year or two. I also think about how it may influence their tastes, and perhaps gear them away from the proper food they get at home. Are the benefits of preschool worth the risk? I'm leaning towards no...

Just how important is fresh, whole, healthy eating to you and your family?

[jeanmarieok]

The Head Start program is different than regular preschool. It's specifically designed for economically disadvantaged children, who may or may not be getting attention and 'proper' meals at home. The meals part is an important part of the charter, and for some children, may be the only meals they get. I think it's important that the meals are healthy. If you have the time and can work with the nutrition supervisor, that would be wonderful. But overhauling school lunches, especially for the Head Start program which is funded at a national level, may not be easy.

You need to decide if the preschool program has enough other benefits to your family to outweigh your nutritional concerns, I think.

[gardencook]

Emily, I still think you have other options.

My nieces and nephew were in head start pre-school and one of them had (has) sensory processing disorder. She was fed before school every morning with no issues at all, while her siblings ate the foods at school. My sister told me that they get the funding for attendance, not for actually serving the food.

We're probably in a different state, so things may work differently around the country (and may not apply to you), but I would push back on this because this story is really fishy. I really don't see how they can MAKE you put this food in front of them. It just doesn't make sense. I hope you pursue this a little more.

[emilyjh75]

It doesn't make sense to me either. I asked for clarification, if children are absent, do they lose funding? And the food services director told me no, they lose funding if the child is marked "present" for the day but not served a tray. I would imagine she means that the powers-that-be must tally the number of students present and compare it with the number of trays served. But then, I'm not sure how they view a child being late or absent for a meal because of doctor's appts, oversleeping, and what not.

What I really need to do is schedule a meeting with the school district food services people and try to figure out who makes the rules, what exactly the rules are, who does the purchasing, etc. And there are two organizations involved here: Head Start, who claims they must follow USDA rules, and the school district, who purchases and provides the food. I also plan on attending the school board meetings once I get a clearer picture of the food services situation, and see if I can start the discussion on what they are actually serving our kids.

[escondido123]

I do not have kids so I have not dealt with these programs at all. I find the whole story so bizarre I just don't even know where to start. So first they "had" to eat this "slop" but then the story keeps changing "Feel free to attack whatever it is you are focused on attacking, but what are the facts, as in what is actually true not just hyperbole?

[Chemicalkinetics]

Emily,

First of all, I am not one of those people who believe kids (or adults) have to eat healthy food all the time. It is fine to be bad once awhile I think. This being said. The story you told us sounds so ridiculously bad that I don't know what to say. You wrote "I've been informed by the preschool that because our program (Head Start) is funded and supported by the USDA, they are *required* to feed the children that slop that's being handed out." If this is true, then this is horrible. I really don't think anyone can force your child to eat something you oppose. This violates your right as the parent of the child. You have the final say of what your kid can consume. What if you and your kids are Buddhists and vow not to consume meat and fish? They are going to force them to you? Absolutely, impossible. Are you sure, this is not some misunderstanding? Thanks.

[emilyjh75]

IDK about religious issues, but for food allergies, you have to provide a doctor's note before they will allow modifications to the food served to that child.

[EWSflash]

Emily, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Somebody's trying to push the numbers upward for some reason, I can only hope that the kids would be the beneficiaries of this false reporting of how many kids are eating breakfast. Telling you you HAVE to feed them nutririonally inferior food and sit with them too sounds really, really suspicious.

[emilyjh75]

I'm sorry, I was a little hyperbolic there....they don't actually *force* the kids to eat, but they do require you to sit down and put the food in front of them.

My problem with this is the food they serve - my kids could eat a full bowl of oatmeal with raisins, an apple, and a banana, and if we went to school right after and they were presented with a bowl of Cocoa Puffs, they would absolutely eat it. (This has happened!) They are presented with literally junk food much of the time. What kid would turn down a rice krispy treat for a snack, even if they just ate (or *especially* if they just ate) a bunch of "normal" food?

I spoke with the food services director for Head Start here this afternoon, and she straight up told me if I wasn't interested in participating in the program, I was free to leave it. (!!) After talking a little while longer, she did admit that she does not like much of what the school district serves, but since they are constrained by budget and manpower, they don't have much of a choice.

She did tell me that some of their centers in town have on-site staff who cook and prepare food, entirely separate from the city school district. (The site my children attend is in a local elementary school, so they eat what the school district provides.) She has sent me a menu, so I'll have a chance to look it over, and if it's better than what the school district provides, I might be able to transfer my kids to another center, assuming they have spots available.

Otherwise, my choices are to: keep the kids at this center, and continue to put unhealthy choices in front of them; keep the kids at the center and refuse to take them to breakfast; or take them out of preschool and send them when they're old enough for elementary school.

[EWSflash]

I should have read the thread before I spouted off. I still think that it would be much cheaper, never mind healthier, to feed the kids oatmeal and a little fruit than cocoa puffs. I think it's a sin to put food out in front of kids knowing they wouldn't eat it and throw it away, no matter who's paying for it. criminal, maybe even, with so many people starving in the world.

[emilyjh75]

I completely agree. Not to mention how it just seems so wrong to insist that you provide the child the "option" to eat junk food. Even with their afternoon snacks (usually dry cereal, like cinnamon toast crunch, or graham crackers, and chocolate milk), you're allowed to bring healthy snacks for the entire class, but the teachers have told me they are *required* to also set out the school-provided snacks at the same time. I just.don't.get this philosophy.

And to add insult to injury, the parent handbook specifically prohibits any sugary or junk food snacks, you're only allowed to bring whole fruits and veggies, whole grain bread, etc. They don't even allow birthday cupcakes more than once per month. And yet they insist they are required by law to serve them cinnamon toast crunch and chocolate milk. WTH?

(I also spoke with the school district food services manager, and she insisted that their food was only following USDA guidelines, and that all food served was "low sugar." I replied that I would argue plain oatmeal with raisins is a healthier option than Cocoa Puffs. She had nothing to say to that.)

[gardencook]

I think that this is something important to fight for, as others have already said.

However, they can't force a child to eat, so I wouldn't worry about that at all. The food must be served, but they will get the funding reduced only if they don't serve the food in the first place. They can't show to anyone whether or not the food was eaten and your kids are not required by law to eat what they give to them (what if they served something they were deathly allergic to?) Seriously, they can't force a child to eat... whether you feed them at home, they just don't like the food, they're not hungry that day, or any other reason they may choose to not eat what is put before them.

Yes, I think it's important. I'm a big advocate of fresh, local, in-season, especially for kids. But I think your options are different than what you are stating they are. Take them to school and let them be served, then let it be thrown away. (I don't like waste, either, but it seems to be the lesser of two evils here.)

[cleobeach]

My son's preschool handed this issue by making the food available, as in it was on the table in serving bowls with all appropriate utensils, plates, etc. If a child wanted to eat, fine. If not, fine. The act of having it available satisfied the government requirements, no child was required to sit or to eat.

I would have serious concerns about any preschool that forced food upon children, government funded food or not. I would be more concerned about that potential stupidity of the staff trying such a practice than the quality of the food they were offering.

It is not at all unusual for daycares and preschools to forbid outside food, while life threatening allegries and religous/dietary restrictions out there.

[mpjmph]

We had a similar approach at the after school program I worked for in college - we prepared a snack every day, and made sure every child had a chance to eat, but did not force children to take or eat food they didn't want. Of course, it was a privately run program in a fairly well educated/self sufficient community. We were required by law to provide the snack, but we weren't subject to any USDA commodity programs, and parents didn't expect us to provide an allergen free environment. Our typical snacks were frosted mini wheats or graham crackers, peanut butter or string cheese, and apple or carrot.

[L.Nightshade]

I think it is important, and I commend you for taking a stand. I wish I was nearby to stand by you! Judging by your posts on the other thread, it doesn't matter if "it's probably not a great school to begin with," as your options are limited. If it were me, and the food was as bad as you suggest, I'd fight it as far as I could, enlist others if possible, and only give in if you are truly threatened with removing your children from the program. Then you'd have to rethink your options.
I think you are fighting a good fight, not just for your children but for all the other children will be starting their days and their lives with a non-nutritive "headstart."

[emilyjh75]

Yes, options are limited here. It's a small-medium town, about 45+ min. from any large or metropolitan areas. We have one district, 5 elementary schools, 1 middle school, 1 junior high, and 1 high school. Almost all the preschool programs here are at least partially funded by Head Start (which is run by just one company, which has several "centers" around town, under various names), and are combined with day care facilities, and are almost entirely geared toward low-income, working parent families, so you're expected to take what you can get.

One of the reasons I particularly liked this preschool center my kids attend is that it is strictly preschool, with two small classes of 3-4 yo. My daughters can be together, and it's also on campus of the elementary school that I want them both to attend, so they can get used to the routine at the "Big School."

There are, AFAIK, two private schools in town, both religion-affiliated (but not my religion), and of course much more than I could ever afford. The tuition for just one child is almost what I pay for my monthly rent.

*EDIT* Also, I do plan on working with the school district and see if some changes can get started here. I'm already president of our preschool parent group, and I started a volunteer sign-up to bring healthy snacks in the afternoons. It's not much, but it's a start.

[wyogal]

The school is required... not the parent. I believe you could probably opt out, would require signing something. Our schools have pretty good meals, much improved over the last couple of years. They have at least two kinds of fruit and vegetables at every meal. But, there are lots of kids that bring a sack lunch or rarely eat what's on their plate. Same funding, no one can FORCE feed your child.
Is there a way to work with your school on healthier options? Especially if you have another 5 or 6 years to go there?

[emilyjh75]

There are a couple of separate issues going on here. First of all, the kids are in preschool right now, so they are bound by Head Start licensing rules. They're not allowed to bring food, and if a child is present but does not get served a meal, the USDA will not reimburse the HS program for that meal. So if my child goes to school after breakfast, I have to take them to the cafeteria and sit them down with a plate anyway. I suppose I could flat-out refuse, but then I'd probably get kicked out for shafting them on their funding.

However, once they go into the public school (next year for one, two years for the other), they are not bound to eat what the school serves, so I can send them with food. I do plan on trying to encourage the district to look at healthier options, but that may take some time.

[wyogal]

Seriously, no one can force feed your child. Opt out of the program and they won't get reimbursed, for a meal they did not serve.
They can't kick you out for "shafting" them, they are not being "shafted." Go to your pediatrician and get a note. If your school's administration can't understand that, are that difficult to work with, it's probably not a great school to begin with.