Lunch Boxes

[AnonyMouse_3735]

I was a bit slow.. got distracted..

 

Inge

[AnonyMouse_30128]

approprate food contents could of course be refering to what is dangerous i.e. rice /mayonnaise products yogurts etc that may have sufficient time to breed large quantities of food poisoning organisms in a 4 hour period.

[Guest]

On page 27 it says:-

 

If parents provide packed lunches, providers should inform them about what can be stored safely and about appropriate food content.

 

Maz

Thanks Maz,

 

Which is why I think an appropriate lunch box policy guides all parents to appropriate content.

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Which is why I think an appropriate lunch box policy guides all parents to appropriate content.

You'll get no arguments here, dorisdarling! The trick is getting the tone of it right so that parents don't feel they are being lectured, or spoken down to.

 

Maz

[Guest]

Hi Zoe

 

Myself and the owner were talking about healthy packed lunches today, the only ideas we could come up with were putting a healthy lunchbox leaflets in our enrollment packs and having a healthy eating display in our reception, we had also thought of inviting a nutritionist in but werent sure how this would go down with parents, if we come up with any other ideas, I will let you know

[Guest]

We have a lovely lunchbox support leaflet that I think I found on here somewhere.....helpful suggestions etc.

 

That said I have just had a parent complain because we encourage the children to eat the sandwiches in their boxes first, we do this as when they go up to school in September the school is very stringent on this happening so we are trying to support this in the setting.

 

You can't please all of the people all of the time!

 

And if you do get it wrong there is always someone who will point it out for you!

[Guest]

Hi

 

I'm interested in the discussions about lunch boxes because I've been told by our local authority that we have to allow children receiving Nursery Education Grant the option to bring in a packed lunch if they wish rather than having our home cooked lunches.

 

Has anyone else been given this guidance? I think it's going to be quite difficult in our small setting to offer parents both options. For instance if lots of parents want the packed lunch option then it won't be able to afford to employ a cook. At the moment we charge £1.55 for a two course lunch.

 

Would be interested to find out what other nurseries are doing in September as this relates to the new Code of Practice on the Free Entitlement.

[AnonyMouse_19782]

I had thought the lunch box from home option was a condition of funding, rather than something local authorities were imposing ad hoc.

Certainly in Kent we have to allow packed lunches if parents want them - but it does sound like yours are excellent value for money and while you can prove to your parents that is so and that their children are eating them - I would think you will get a good take up surely.

[AnonyMouse_705]

Yes, me too. Read through our conditions of funding for the free entitlement only yesterday. There was something in there about giving parents the choice of bringing a packed lunch. The free entitlement must be free, and parents must not have to pay for anything extras as a condition of their attendance.

 

Your lunches do seem good value, and it must be a problem trying to make providing fresh cooked lunches sustainable.

[Guest]

Found this discussion very interesting.

As a school we encourage a healthy lunch box, with rules stating no sweets, chocolate bars or fizzy drinks. Then monitor any very badly balanced boxes.

I have just enrolled my daughter in a nursery that is a healthy setting and they have very strict lunch box rules (parents are strongly encouraged to take up the cooked meal) including no crisps, no breadsticks or crackers, ham only once a week... 'Banned' items are removed from the child's lunch box and a note put in for parents.

Any comments on this - seemed very strict to me - I'm all for encouraging healthy lifestyles but was surprised by this.

[AnonyMouse_19782]

I can't imagine myself removing anything from a child's lunch box on the basis you describe. As for putting a note in, surely if they felt their practice was sound, they would have no bother in talking to you face to face, a note indeed!

 

I think it is fair enough to advise on certain foods, particularly if your packed lunch children are sitting in amongst the schools hot dinner children and specify why you feel the need to advise.

[AnonyMouse_30128]

AAARRRGGGHHH the food police have gone mad again the guidance says we must tell parents about what can be stored safely - this depends on your setting and the fridge space you offer/don't - it's about storage not contents......and the appropriate food contents mean that if you do not have these facilities then you should advise against putting potentially dangerous items in (eg dairy/mayonnaise etc that could become high in bacteria in the storage time)...i would have serious issues with anyone who told me what to put in my childs lunchbox they do not know my child or the dietary requirements they have I DO!

[AnonyMouse_1999]

I am following this thread with interest.

 

In our preschool we promote healthy eating through various circle time 'discussions', stories etc. We do practical cooking activities and have lunchbox suggestion leaflets for parents. The leaflets came about from parents asking for suggestions.

 

However, whilst we 'do our bit' and take the healthy eating issue very seriously I also believe we have to be careful. As a parent I would be furious if someone else deemed my child's lunch to be 'unhealthy' or worse still to take contents out.

 

As for banning contents - well I am lost for words and why no breadsticks?? what's wrong with them??

The world continues to go mad !!

[AnonyMouse_25331]

We are quite strict too... but on the basis that they have to eat something! And I won't let children eat sweets at lunchtime - and I put a note in.

 

In my defence..... we are required to encourage and promote healthy practices, if we condone a child with no sandwiches, but 2 ritz crackers, a bag of crisps, a mars bar and a packet of haribo, then I don't think we are doing that..... no child's dietary requirements NEED that sort of intake - and it does happen.

 

During a past OFSTED inspection I was criticised for drinking a can of coke!!!!

 

I don't think it is unreasonable, but we do need to be sensible... it's about balance and if we have policies about no sweets, avoiding crisps, high sugar and salt, then I think it is right to remind parents of this and offer suggestions for alternatives.

 

I also put notes in but these are lip-shaped post it's written with a 'sorry but no sweets at lunchtime, XXX can enjoy these at home.' and then a smiley face. Usually I get an apology - certainly no complaints come back to me...

 

But I also put in notes to say XXX really enjoyed their fruit, egg, dip or whatever. No-one expects that 'perfect' lunchbox but I can see the effects of children after lunch with a sugar rush and then suffering later.

 

It's all about balance, and advice not lecturing. It depends how it is done.

 

[Guest]

This has made for really interesting reading. My son has had the same packed lunch for the last ten years because he refuses to eat anything else and I am more concerned that he eats something at lunchtime. He has a wholemeal bread bun with ham in everday which wouldn't be allowed in some of your settings. I know we have to promote healthy eating but for goodness sake just when did we have to turn into the food police? Parents have the right to provide their child's packed lunch without being told that their child is not ' allowed' to eat what they have provided. How dare we take it upon ourselves to make those decisions,the parents are still in charge and it is our job to support healthy eating not to lay down the law as to what their child is allowed to eat when they are in our setting!

Probably not a popular point of view but mine nevertheless.

[AnonyMouse_7227]

Found this discussion very interesting.

As a school we encourage a healthy lunch box, with rules stating no sweets, chocolate bars or fizzy drinks. Then monitor any very badly balanced boxes.

I have just enrolled my daughter in a nursery that is a healthy setting and they have very strict lunch box rules (parents are strongly encouraged to take up the cooked meal) including no crisps, no breadsticks or crackers, ham only once a week... 'Banned' items are removed from the child's lunch box and a note put in for parents.

Any comments on this - seemed very strict to me - I'm all for encouraging healthy lifestyles but was surprised by this.

 

What?!

 

Thats terrible, think as a mum we can be 'judged' enough for what we should or should not be doing. My LO is 15 months and when she goes to her childminder she has breadsticks and hummous, or a sandwich with hummous, philidephia or peanut butter or marmite in, with organix goodies snacks and about 3 bits of fruit, sometimes a homemade sweet or savoury muffin as a snack, does that mean to say that this setting would remove half her lunch? it is not like those foods are unhealthy. Crisps, chocolate and biscuits every day is excessive but breadsticks WTF? maybe they are thinking of the salt content... even so isn't checking lunchboxes and removing items infringing human rights....

 

Even so, I have to agree with another poster that I don't think a parent should be told what the child should have or should not have in their lunchbox, more offer guidence. Some people geninuely do not know what to give their child so maybe it would be better to offer support and give information on what constitutes a good lunchbox. You can walk a horse to water but you can't make them drink so I think supporting parents and children offering healthier options at snack times as aforementioned is certainly the way forward.

[AnonyMouse_1999]

How dare we take it upon ourselves to make those decisions,the parents are still in charge and it is our job to support healthy eating not to lay down the law as to what their child is allowed to eat when they are in our setting!

Probably not a popular point of view but mine nevertheless.

 

.. and one I totally agree with

[AnonyMouse_12805]

As a parent I feel it's none of your (as in a setting) business what my child eats at linchtime as long as he/she eats. Quite frankly I would rather a child ate a jam sandwich and a choc bar every day then nothing at all. Which is what my son did for over 10 years of schooling. Everytime I tired to substitute the jam or the sandwich for something else he just didn't eat. So I gave up, no it wasn't healthy but every other thing he ate outside of school was (well most stuff!) and I didn't need anyone to tell me so. However he was my 4th child, if it had been my first I would have agonized over it and put myself and probably her through hell. You know what he's 24 now,never had weight problems, has a beautiful set of teeth and is as fit as a flea!! (and plays football 3/4 times week)

I think we need to be very careful over things like this. Far too many children are being taught far too early to worry over body image, 3 year olds shouldn't be worrying over what will make them fat.

[AnonyMouse_390]

At our setting we have a no sweets policy in line with local schools and encourage parents to put a healthy snack in at snack time. We have some guidance notes about what to put in lunch boxes that go out to new parents. However we would never mention to parents about what was in the lunch box as it is their choice what to feed their child. I also feel that as most parents pay us session fees what right do we have to say 'no you can't put that in'. Guide yes, but not force.

My sister only ever ate boiled egg white - no yolk, pieces of ham, a few crips and a chocolate bar for most of her primary school life - at 28 she's done pretty well on it

[AnonyMouse_15046]

.. and one I totally agree with

 

Me too!

 

We are not dieticians we are educators! We should be educating children about how to make healthy choices and raising the matter with parents only if the food they supply can be shown to be detrimental to their child's well-being even as part of a diet which has an overall healthy balance.

 

My daughter occasionally asks for a packet of crisps in her lunchbox. She very rarely eats them at any other time and only has them in her lunchbox about once a month. She also has fruit, veg etc and the overall balance of her diet is perfectly healthy. I would be livid if some overzealous staff member decided to remove them from her and send them home again. What I feed my child is my own business unless I am causing her significant harm.

 

I have childminded a child who came with a ridiculously unhealthy lunchbox each day. I dealt with it by offering activities around healthy eating and getting her to prepare and eat healthy snacks. I told her mother what she enjoyed and offered other suggestions about healthier alternatives for the lunchbox. We worked together to make improvements and it was successful. A much better way that the overbearing attitude described by nsunshine.

[AnonyMouse_30128]

interstingly i am trained in food and nutrition and i would still not TELL a parent what to put in!

[AnonyMouse_6008]

We've refused to give a child the food in their lunchbox when we opened the sandwiches & discovered they were mouldy... and had to put a note in as the child was with us in the morning but school nursery in the afternoon from which she was collected from... The note said (grammatically!) sorry didn't give her sandwich as mouldy, gave her (reasonable alternative) from the childrens' snacks instead. Parent very grateful & (needlessly) apologetic.

 

Also we had a little one severly allergic to peanuts & asked everyone to respect that & not supply products with peanuts in - had one child with peanut butter sandwiches (& there were plenty of other things he ate), phoned mum, no answer all morning so again gave her reasonable alternative and told parent.

[AnonyMouse_29641]

This story will run and run. As a childminder I accepted packed lunches for my first minded children but not after they left. The sorts of things packed were often not what I wanted my own children to even know existed - and there they were in MY house. I skirted around addressing the issue with the parents, but didn't renew the contract. It horrifies me to that my children are exposed to no end of rubbish now that they are at school. We must remember it may be the right of parents to feed their own children whatever they want, but parents who want to protect their children also have rights.

 

Honey

[Guest]

When I was a child, my mum refused to let me ever have white bread (must have been the big health fad at that time). The moment I could get my hands on the stuff (at parties, once I'd left home), it was my favourite thing of all time.

 

There was a really interesting experiment on TV a while back, where they made raisins a 'banned' snack in a classroom. Within a week, what the children wanted most of all was those banned raisins.

 

It's the 'forbidden fruit' that seems sooo tempting.

 

There was another really interesting experiment where they had children attending two different parties. At one party they gave the children organic foods, but they entertainment after they'd eaten was high impact, lots of excitement. At the other party, they gave them processed rubbish, but the entertainment was much calmer. After, they asked the parents to guess what their children had eaten, based on their behaviour, and guess what the majority got it the wrong way round. The children who had the calm entertainment were calm, and vice versa, it was NOT about what they had eaten.

 

Also, not sure if anyone saw that series on E numbers? Apparently the vast majority of them are made from entirely natural products, for instance seaweed! Also, it is actually a fallacy that sugar somehow gives children an energy 'buzz'. All food gives you an energy 'buzz', it's just that some foods are processed slower than others, and so the energy comes at a different rate.

 

Have a look at the Bad Science website sometime, and don't believe all the government hype you read!

[AnonyMouse_29641]

While we're on the anecdotal - When I was a child I was allowed a treat every day. I ended up with an eating disorder!

 

Dried fruit for children is now controlled to be eaten only within the context of a meal, as the acid the sugars produce have been proved to erode teeth. If raisins are eaten at meal time which is finished with basic foods like milk, the danger is reduced.

 

The concern about quickly broken down sugars is that children will feel hungry again sooner than if they have eaten more complex carbohydrates, so the total calorific intake for the day will be increased. If an excess consumed it will be stored as fat.

 

Many E numbers come hghly packaged - which I object to, and at an increased price. I want my children to learn where their food comes from and how it is made and I don't want to spend over the odds for them and have to dispose of mountains of waste.

 

Many religions choose not to eat certain foods for reasons other than scientfic ones. Do we ask Hindu, Muslim or Jewish childminders/nurseries/schools ensure non observant pupils/minded children can bring in their 'forbidden' foods? I'm up-front with my policy. Just because I don't want my children to think think food from plastic packages is better than fresh foods, and that chocolate is an everyday food, doesn't make my ethic any less respectable. Fortunately my Local Authority support me in providing fresh meals made from scratch and using homegrown produce, while ristricting highly processed foods which are lower in nutrition.

 

Honey