Six-year old schoolboy suspended for not eating healthy?!

Open Forum in English
1

I just read about this in an Austrian newspaper and then I googled the original article:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sixyearold-schoolboy-suspended-for-having-mini-cheddars-in-his-lunchbox-9101236.html

First I thought, ok, that’s probably a private school so they can do more or less whatever they want. But then I read that the mother is a 24-year old woman with several kids, so I don’t think she could afford the tuition for a private school.

Apart from the fact that we probably all agree that we should provide healthy food to kids, I am wondering if that school is a public school. If it is, I wonder how they can suspend a child based on what the boy’s parents put in his lunchbox. That sounds kind of lunatic to me. And doesn’t the state have a duty to provide education to all children? Can anybody from England shed some light on the background of this story?

If the school is a private school I still think the school totally overreacted but then it probably has the right to suspend the boy.

2

It is a Church of England school and thus they have autonomy in questions of management.

It seems the boy got suspended as a punishment for the parents’ non-adherence to the school’s rules.

Is it ‘bureaucracy rules, ok’ or is it ‘parents rule, ok’? The lunchbox content sounds fairly processed, but then it could all be organic, for all I know.

3

A public school in Britain is just another type of private school. What you mean is a ‘state school’.

I will read the article now, but before I do, I am going to state for the record that I suspect the title of the article is a misleading representation of what actually happened.

4

Ok, maybe I was wrong. The title is not so misleading. They usually are for these sorts of stories. It is a bit misleading and if the newspaper was more interested in accuracy than sales, it probably would have used the title

‘Six-year-old schoolboy suspended for continually breaking school food regulations’

5

ad Colin: Ah, yeah, I should have remembered that the English call private schools “public schools” (some of them at least). A bit strange though, don’t you think? What is the rationale behind it? I mean “public” generally has a different meaning, doesn’t it?

Like if you hold “a public office” this normally does not refer to the private sector.

(…) ‘Six-year-old schoolboy suspended for continually breaking school food regulations’ (…)

Still, I think that is ridiculous. I mean how can a school tell its pupils what to eat? Are they afraid of the “bad influence” the little boy’s cheese crackers might have on the other kids? In Austrian German I’d say: Die Welt steht nicht mehr lange…(an expression we normally use to say that something is so crazy that we must be nearing the end of the world…;-))

Ad Sanne: A Church of England school… Does that mean it is a religious school funded by the state or where does the money come from? I can’t imagine that the young mother can afford to pay school tuition, but maybe I am wrong.

6

As eating healthily is one of the cornerstones of that particular school’s efforts to provide a good community service/education, they may feel totally entitled to enforce their rules. Faith schools in England have a certain autonomy.

I have just copied the following from a CofE website:

“The English system of education has been built in partnership with the Christian churches. The Churches were the first providers of schools, funding building and staff costs through voluntary donations. The State gradually became convinced that it had a duty to provide education and gradually assumed a larger part of the task. But Government has always recognised that Church schools are important partners in providing education for all. That partnership enables the State to use around 8,000 school buildings and sites owned by the Church of England and Roman Catholic Church free of charge, but in return successive governments, irrespective of political party, have continued to provide financial support for church schools.”

7

I wonder what children learn in “church schools”.

8

@Robert: “…Still, I think that is ridiculous. I mean how can a school tell its pupils what to eat? Are they afraid of the “bad influence” the little boy’s cheese crackers might have on the other kids? In Austrian German I’d say: Die Welt steht nicht mehr lange…(an expression we normally use to say that something is so crazy that we must be nearing the end of the world…;-))…”

I agree. The idea that a school would tell its pupils what they are allowed to eat is sinister and outrageous. It’s the nanny state gone crazy - grey suited Guardian reading bastards continually looking for new ways to interfere, intrude, and tell people how to live their lives.

If kids are violent towards teachers or other pupils, if they continually misbehave and disrupt lessons, yeah okay, throw them the hell out of there. But just because they don’t eat the right things? Please! :open_mouth:

@Robert: “…Does that mean it is a religious school funded by the state…?”

Yup, that’s about it.

@Paule: “…I wonder what children learn in “church schools”…”

The curriculum would be in großem und ganzen the same as any other state school.

9

@ Robert

"A bit strange though, don’t you think? "

Yes.

“What is the rationale behind it?”

@ Easy_Rider

" It’s the nanny state gone crazy - grey suited Guardian reading bastards continually looking for new ways to interfere, intrude, and tell people how to live their lives."

Let’s not go overboard. Schools are always telling pupils what to where, what to think, and what to do. I don’t really see why food is special in this respect. I am sceptical that changing a child’s diet will have a significant effect on their learning, I guess it depends on their original diet, but this is quite a popular thing to think. My guess is this school made this rule because of their terrible Ofsted results in 2012 and were under a lot of pressure to take some measures, so they went for some rather drastic policy that makes them look good, at least in the local media and to the parents, a lot of whom probably seen some Channel 4 shows that say you can transform your life by eating carrots instead of crisps.

@ Paule

As Easy said, they basically learn the same as kids in most other schools. Try going to a Rudulf Steiner school in Britain like I did for three years. Now that is some weird stuff.

10

ad Colin: Thanks for the explanations and the link. Interesting.

As for the case at hand, I agree with Jay.

ad SanneT: Thank you very much for the background information. I think we have a few of these schools in Austria too, but not many. I need to do some research on them.

11

@ Robert

So you also think this is the nanny state gone crazy, bearing in mind of course that these decisions were made by the school itself? There is nothing mentioned in the article about state intervention, so maybe you have information I don’t. Do you think that Jay’s explanation about “grey suited Guardian reading bastards continually looking for new ways to interfere, intrude, and tell people how to live their lives” is more likely than mine about the school being under a lot of pressure after a terrible Ofsted report? Ofsted reports really matter.

(Ofsted - Wikipedia)

12

The bit about “Guardian reading bastards” was probably a litte bit too fruity for a family show. But I stand by every other word. :smiley:

(BTW If they are state schools then they ARE a branch of the state, in my view…)

13

Well, E_R, you know that I’m one of those Guardian-reading… but that doesn’t mean I don’t read other papers and that I don’t enjoy the needling.

@Robert: I forgot to mention that there are no school fees to be paid. Schools can choose whom to admit, they generally go for upstanding members of the church community.

(Our daughter attended a very good CofE girls’ grammar school in London (although she hadn’t been christened and we weren’t churchgoers. The CofE primary school she went to must have recommended her to the headmistress - did they take pity on her for her odd parents?). She got a great education, 3 bibles as prizes and a shock once she went to a mixed 6th form college and discovered boys. She never went to church again. Such is life.

14

Sanne,

‘‘She never went to church again’’

I take it she read one of the bibles then.

2 Likes
15

Oh man, below the belt.

16

@Sanne: “…Well, E_R, you know that I’m one of those Guardian-reading…”

So am I, technically speaking - I monitor them now and again. :smiley:

17

ad Colin: (…) … So you also think this is the nanny state … There is nothing mentioned in the article about state intervention, so maybe you have information I don’t. (…)

Ah, Colin, you should know me well enough by now to understand that even if I (sometimes) agree with what Jay says I hardly ever would put things the way he does :slight_smile:

He is probably a Tory (not that they would be always wrong ;-)) and I probably would not vote for them in most instances. He also seems to enjoy using quite strong language, he is pretty well known for that. BUT he is one of the most interesting people I have come across here, he does have his limits (see his posts on some other threads) and as for the actual matter at hand I agree with him to the extent that I think the school improperly interfered with the life of the little boy (it is not as if he was taking drugs).

I was not paying enough attention to Jay’s suggestion that the “bullying government” is behind all that ;-). So, I guess I agree with him as to the interference but not as to who has interfered. And no, I would not use terms such as “bastards” etc. in this context.

I’ve never said anything about state intervention (but I agree that in supporting Jay’s statement where he suggests the state was behind these measures, I might have created the impression that I think so too. I took Jay’s comment more as a statement about a society at large trying to interfere with everybody’s life. My mistake).

I was just curious if the state indirectly supports such actions. Even if the school is run as some sort of private school I very much am against what they did.

So, if things are private anything goes? A private school does not have to adhere to certain rules or do you think, ok, if the parents don’t like it then they can just take their kids from these schools? This is actually true, but this does not mean that the school administration’s actions are ok. I don’t really care why they did what they did, I think it was wrong.

I read the part about the Ofset report in the article. They indeed got a bad rating there. So, they think they will become a more attractive school by actually forcing pupils not to eat “junk food” on their school premises? What about improving the curriculum, trying to reduce incidents of violence (in case that was a problem), offering more extra-curricular activities etc.?

Or actually trying to convince people of the importance of healthy food without forcing a 6 year old kid out of school because of his lunchbox. They really must fear for their authority if they think the “disobedience” of one couple of parents and a little boy acting as the “bad messenger” are going to undermine their great academic offer. Again, we are not talking about a violent, drug abusing teen here, the boy ate cheese crackers for heaven’s sake!

I am normally very much in favour of certain regulations. I have been known as somebody who supports state intervention more often than not (I’m sure you still remember the long thread on “freedom of speech” where I probably was the least liberal poster on the forum) but what this school did is simply ridiculous in my eyes.

18

ad Colin: (…) ‘‘She never went to church again’’

I take it she read one of the bibles then.
…

Oh man, below the belt.
(…)

I’m not sure if you referred to Jamie’s comment here.

If so, I don’t think that what he wrote was below the belt. A lot of people who go to church actually don’t agree with what the Bible says. Just think of the survey done in Austria and other countries which I mentioned in another thread. 80 % (!) of devout Catholics in Austria having taken part in the survey said they did not agree with most of what the official Catholic Church preaches and the Church supposedly takes the Bible very seriously.

To be honest, the Bible has always been one of the biggest stumbling blocks for me when it comes to religion. So, I think Jamie’s comment might actually be true. What is so bad about suggesting that if you read the Bible you might actually be put off?

That has happened to me more often than not and I know many people who had similar experiences. And there are people who think their lives were saved after they had read the holy scriptures. I’m fine with that too. But all that doesn’t make Jamie’s statement something that’s “below the belt”. At least not for me.

1 Like
19

The school will have its share of parents governors (In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, school governors are members of a school’s Governing Body. They have responsibility for raising school standards through contributing to the setting of strategic direction, ensuring accountability and acting as critical friends).

By continuing to leave their children at the school, parents agree to the use of cookies - sorry, wrong rules - agree to the lunch box expectations being stuck to.

I do know, however, how difficult it is for parents to get a child to eat a balanced meal, let alone four children, as in this case. My son, at one point, would eat only peas and then not too many.

My choice of a healthy content for a lunchbox would look different, but that doesn’t mean I am in favour of punishing parents through their children!

I’m just in favour of less processed cheese! (Processed cheese AND forbidden cheese crackers?)

P.S. I thought Jamie’s comment was quite funny.

20

Sanne, actually we are considering sending our daughter to a Catholic-funded school ourselves. We had a meeting with the head teacher there a few days ago. We didn’t see any stick-wielding nuns or dubious ‘‘fathers’’ there at all. What we did see were happy kids and a friendly, professional teaching staff. The school has excellent results and the religious nature of the school was almost incidental. However, we do live in France where all education is secular by law (there are no ‘‘faith schools’’ here). We don’t think the religious exposure to be detrimental; it might even be a good thing. In any case it will be suitably ‘‘balanced’’ at home.

The school is surrounded by mountains (we live a few miles from Grenoble) and the air is fresh and clean. I had to smile at the stark contrast with my own school experience at that age (at the risk of alluding to a certain Monty Python sketch): freezing in half-heated crumbling Victorian school building; legs turning blue outside (compulsory short trousers back then); and having to breathe in the smoke and toxic fumes from the nearby factories and chemical plants. Still, we were happy.