• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Chicago school bans lunches brought from home

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
School's food is the only option for some kids - chicagotribune.com

At his public school, Little Village Academy on Chicago's West Side, students are not allowed to pack lunches from home. Unless they have a medical excuse, they must eat the food served in the cafeteria.

Principal Elsa Carmona said her intention is to protect students from their own unhealthful food choices.

"Nutrition wise, it is better for the children to eat at the school," Carmona said. "It's about the nutrition and the excellent quality food that they are able to serve (in the lunchroom). It's milk versus a Coke. But with allergies and any medical issue, of course, we would make an exception."

Carmona said she created the policy six years ago after watching students bring "bottles of soda and flaming hot chips" on field trips for their lunch. Although she would not name any other schools that employ such practices, she said it was fairly common.

A Chicago Public Schools spokeswoman said she could not say how many schools prohibit packed lunches and that decision is left to the judgment of the principals.
I assumed it was going to be to protect a child with a peanut allergy or some other reason like that when I saw the headline.

But no, it's because, "Nutrition wise, it is better for the children to eat at the school. It's about the nutrition and the excellent quality food that they are able to serve."

Sorry, but that's beyond ridiculous. Why are they forcing the kids to buy the lunches at school. I know the prices aren't all that high, but I think that's beside the point.

Thoughts?
 

viLky

ykLiv
Principal Elsa Carmona said her intention is to protect students from their own unhealthful food choices.
LOL WTF? At my school they served us pizza slices, cheese bread, cookies, coke and other delicious garbage. Have schools chanced since the last decade? =P

Anywho, this principal should NOT have a say over what my child eats. SHE is going to decide what is healthy and unhealthy for my child? Get the fuck out of here, that's asinine. If I went to that school back then I would just forget a lunch and eat nothing.

Thinking about it while I was typing up that last paragraph, do you think the school is using this as a ploy to get more dough? Kids spend $3.00 on a lunch that cost $1.00 to produce. That right there is a $2 profit. That's my only guess into why this nutty principal is doing this.
 
Last edited:

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
It's probably a scheme for the school to make some extra money from the cafeteria. It seems ridiculous to me for a school to control what the children eat. It's one thing to offer healthier food, but to force it on them just doesn't seem right.
 

Jeanie

still nobody's bitch
V.I.P.
Oh hell no. Being the food nazi control freak that I am, there is no way I'd let someone else determine what my kid is going to eat. I can understand wanting kids to get proper nutrition - a coke and a bag of chips is not going to help a kid learn anything - but this is not ok.
 

Millz

Better Call Saul
Staff member
V.I.P.
I think it's absolutely ridiculous and I'm not sure how they can enforce something so stupid. So what this school is saying is they know what's better for your kids to eat then you do?
 

BigBob

Registered Member
LOL WTF? At my school they served us pizza slices, cheese bread, cookies, coke and other delicious garbage. Have schools chanced since the last decade? =P
Actually, some schools have stopped with all of that, except maybe the cookies but that's easier to make fat-free. My school actually stopped strombolis but it still made pizza, haha. Didn't make a lot of sense.

Like everyone else, I think it's ridiculous. They better be giving every kid not allowed to bring their food from home free lunches because sometimes it's the cheapest way to go. Go buy a loaf of bread and a can of peanut butter, some kids could eat that every day for a month and they'd save a lot of money then buying school lunches.
 

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
I agree with all the sentiments here. I have no problem with the school offering nutritous foods and getting rid of junk foods but to FORCE students to buy from the cafeteria and not allow sack lunches is ridiculous. Just another example of a government agency attempting to control and undermining parental authority.
 

Stegosaurus

Registered Member
Not surprising. It sounds like a way to profit, that's for sure, but this is an indication of something deeper in the education system. The real question--aside from, "What nut in his/her right mind would think that forcing a child to do something will make them 1. Obey and 2. Willingly continue to eat well post-graduation?!"--is, "How badly does the public education system have to 'starve' for money before someone takes a look and realizes they're hitting kids up for their lunch money to buy them books?"
 

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
Go buy a loaf of bread and a can of peanut butter, some kids could eat that every day for a month and they'd save a lot of money then buying school lunches.
I agree completely with you Bob. Let's take a look.

Loaf of bread costs 3$, a pack of lunchmeat about the same. Say you get 20 sandwiches out of each, that's about 35 cents per sandwich. Throw in a banana or an apple that costs about a quarter, and one of those flavor packets that you mix in with a bottle of water (20 cents). Total cost: 1.15$
 

Iris

rainbow 11!
That's completely idiotic and I don't see that lasting long. If my kid went there, I would check them out for lunch and check them back in after. Or change schools. Or something.
 
Top