-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- y8 happy wheels on 1950s Ads/commercials aimed at Women
- gorzow nieruchomosci on 19th century Household Technology
- When it comes to personal loans USA | 7N4ctwqy on Pros vs Cons of Gay Marriage
- idaho virtual office on Experience of Surrogacy
- Gansu, said construction lax control caused the day of a highspeed 31 kilo | www.louboutinpascher1221magasin.frkalF on Surrogacy in India
Frequent Topics
- 20th century
- 1950s
- Adolescents
- american dream
- anonymous
- birth
- census 2011
- childhood obesity
- children
- children under 2
- chores
- Christian fundamentalist
- commercial
- consumerism
- eugenics
- Family
- female targets
- Foucault
- gay
- Gay Marriage
- guest workers
- home economics
- homosexuality
- Homosexual Warning
- household roles
- Immigrants Hope Their 'American Dream' Isn't Fading
- kitchen
- majority not white
- marketing
- Media & Advertising
- minorities
- motherhood
- New York Times
- privacy
- Pros vs Cons of Gay Marriage
- school
- segmented marketing
- Slavery
- Social Media
- social network
- surrogacy
- television
- us population
- women
Archives
Categories
Meta
Tag Archives: Week 5
School health policy that goes over board.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-11/news/ct-met-school-lunch-restrictions-041120110410_1_lunch-food-provider-public-school
The article above is a perfect example of overreaction from schools regarding the obesity epidemic. Essentially, one school principal in Chicago started a policy six years ago that students were not allowed to bring any outside food into school and had to eat only the lunches and breakfasts that the school provided. Her reason was that she believes that parents are either unaware of proper nutrition or that they are irresponsible and let their children eat anything they want.
I believe that, although this policy was started with good intentions, it ultimately has more negative side effects and should be stopped. First, school for younger kids should not be about taking away their freedoms and what they enjoy doing. If recess and lunch are welcome rests during a long day of learning, then this policy basically cuts the children’s break time in half. After all, the article itself said that the school has seen a dropoff in meal participation because the students don’t like the taste of the food. This means that there are some children who would rather go hungry than eat the school’s food, and this cannot be good for learning.
Parents complain that some of the children might be diabetic or that they might be on a gluten-free diet. These parents are complaining that the school is taking away a fundamental freedom, which is to have their children enjoy life or be raised as the parent chooses, not as the school imposes.
Obesity is certainly a problem, and one that parents must be educated on how to prevent. However, for those who acknowledge the risk and still want their children to enjoy a sweet treat, then policies like these go against the basic concept of freedom.