JHB;142851 wrote: Mommytlc - I'm not saying I disagree with you. Yes, of course, the parents should be responsible. But the flip side is that this country is looking at a healthcare crisis regarding climbing obesity rates and related diabetes in children. Then these issues increase costs of government programs and services. Plus we have the issue of its responsibility for its citizens welfare.

They introduced awareness and wellness programs into schools and nothing changed. So what next? Do they do nothing or implement restrictions? And will further restrictions help?

And there are 3 levels involved: federal, state, and school district. Again - I'm not arguing this the right thing to do, but at least they are trying. So for that reason, I'll be supportive and try to be more creative about how we can initiate programs that follow the rules but are still "fun".

Hi JHB -

I'm all for trying to promote wellness, but to me that has to include balance, moderation and common sense.

These over-the-top interpretations of the policies only create disdain for the effort. Big difference between having healthy options on cafeteria menu and outlawing pizza parties or (worse yet) outlawing fairly innocuous foods at parent-kid events.

I can support wellness policies, but I'll be a vocal critic of wellness policies that police everything just because they can.

"Everything in Moderation" is a good motto both for eating and health and for setting policies.

Tim

Mommytlc - I'm not saying I disagree with you. Yes, of course, the parents should be responsible. But the flip side is that this country is looking at a healthcare crisis regarding climbing obesity rates and related diabetes in children. Then these issues increase costs of government programs and services. Plus we have the issue of its responsibility for its citizens welfare.

They introduced awareness and wellness programs into schools and nothing changed. So what next? Do they do nothing or implement restrictions? And will further restrictions help?

And there are 3 levels involved: federal, state, and school district. Again - I'm not arguing this the right thing to do, but at least they are trying. So for that reason, I'll be supportive and try to be more creative about how we can initiate programs that follow the rules but are still "fun".

I think it is so ridiculous that many schools are not allowed to offer treats to the children or have candy fundraisers. Having a treat several times a year in school doesn't contribute negatively to a child's health. A student's health should be monitored by that child's parents and doctor. These rules are making it harder for PTO's to earn money for their schools by having to change the way fundraising can be done. There is nothing wrong with having a piece of candy or a slice of pizza or a cookie once in a while. The funny thing here is that stopping candy and pizza and other treats in the school is not going to stop consumption at home, which is where children are learning bad habits in the first place!

Our pricipal also told us a few months ago that we would have to come up with something other than Dads and Donuts due to the new nutritional regulations.

After much investigation, she did find out hat by ordering items through the cafeteria, we could still do Dads & Donuts (or Danishes) and Moms & Muffins. Since the cafeteria follows the minimum guidelines, this won't be a problem - it may cost a little more, but these events are important to us.

Have your princiapl check if this is a possibility for you guys - we thought that it was a lost cause until we did further investigation!

Oh - and we're in TX by the way!

NISI is correct - many of us have felt the pinch as more restrictive food policies have been put in place. It's driven from the federal level and school's can lose very important federal funds from the school lunch program if they violate the policies.
It's implemented at the state level, which might be more restrictive than even the federal guidelines.

Texas was among the first and among the most restrictive. When it first came out, it effected using food in the classroom, parties, muffin-with-mom type celebrations, sending cupcakes for birthdays, bake sales, vending machines on campus, pizza parties, and much more. As some exceptions were made and as people learned the rules, it was better. For instance, the state now allows 3 exempt days where the school can have parties or celebrations.

It's generally tied to students and what food can be made available to them when. So for instance, because a child can come to muffins with mom or donuts for dad, the rules applied. Had it been a parent-only event, the rules would not apply.

But the key is learning about the restrictions and exactly what the policy is and how it applies.

The schools can lose serious funding if they allow the policy to be violated.

Well that stinks. Especially with such short notice.

No, this isn't just a California thing. School districts all over the country are implementing wellness policies. Overall I think it's a positive, but some schools or individuals are going overboard in the interpretation, as in your case. But, in the short term, I think it's going to be easier to make some menu changes than to get anyone to change their interpretation.

Can you get a copy of the wellness policy and read it for yourself? Maybe with more information you could come up with an acceptable alternative and reschedule. For example, muffins don't have to be chocolate chip. Perhaps the language of the policy would allow you to serve low sugar pumpkin, zucchini, or carrot muffins? (They're not as bad as they sound, I swear! We have a wellness policy, too, so I made pumpkin muffins instead of cupcakes for my daughter's birthday treat and the kids really liked them.)

Also, it might be a good idea to find out who has final say on what's ok to serve and what's not and present the menu to that person for approval well in advance so you won't risk getting cancelled again. At our school it's the principal, so any time we want to serve food we run it by her first. Thankfully, she's very sensible in her interpretation of the policy, so we rarely get a "no", but it's best not to have any last minute surprises.