Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

[Amelia]

Nanny state at its finest

Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.

....

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

These poeple are incredible.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Nanny state at its finest

Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.

....

Jesus fucking Christ. What is North Carolina's problem? As pathetic as this is, it's their state and it's up to them to decide how to best run it. If that's the kind of stupid shit they want, then let them have it.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Enough reason to send your kid to a private school......and to support education vouchers.....

 

[Big Fitz]

Nanny state at its finest

Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.

....

Jesus fucking Christ. What is North Carolina's problem? As pathetic as this is, it's their state and it's up to them to decide how to best run it. If that's the kind of stupid shit they want, then let them have it.

Not according to the Federal government and liberal do-gooder buttinskis it isn't.

 

[Conservative]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

If 'I' provide a lunch for my child, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has a right to over rule me on what I put in it. Period.

If they want to govern what THEY provide, by all means, they can do so. But they should not be able to govern what 'I' provide to my child.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Not according to the Federal government and liberal do-gooder buttinskis it isn't.

Do you even know what the fuck you are talking about, idiot? This isn't a federal law. It's a state law that North Carolina adopted for itself. The Division of Child Development and Early Education is a North Carolina state agency. If you bothered to read the article, you'd clearly see that it points to state laws and regulations as being behind this. Don't talk if you don't known what you're discussing. Now go away.

 

[paulitician]

I can't stand Socialist Nanny Staters/Police Staters. They're such assholes.

 

[Zander]

The parents should file a lawsuit.

 

[Inthemiddle]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

If 'I' provide a lunch for my child, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has a right to over rule me on what I put in it. Period.

If they want to govern what THEY provide, by all means, they can do so. But they should not be able to govern what 'I' provide to my child.

To be fair, from what the article says, it sounds more like the idea behind the regulation is that if a child doesn't have a balanced meal, the school is supposed to provide additional items for the child. They're not allowed to take the lunch away. But still, that means that this is a horrible failure of execution and implementation of the law. If the state is going to do this, they have a responsibility to do it right.

 

[Conservative]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

If 'I' provide a lunch for my child, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has a right to over rule me on what I put in it. Period.

If they want to govern what THEY provide, by all means, they can do so. But they should not be able to govern what 'I' provide to my child.

To be fair, from what the article says, it sounds more like the idea behind the regulation is that if a child doesn't have a balanced meal, the school is supposed to provide additional items for the child. They're not allowed to take the lunch away. But still, that means that this is a horrible failure of execution and implementation of the law. If the state is going to do this, they have a responsibility to do it right.

agreed. However, the idea that they would decide that what I put in the lunch isn't good enough, give the child something else (in replacement or addition), and then bill me for it? I don't think so.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

So three chicken nuggets are more nutritious than apple juice, a banana and a turkey and cheese sandwich? In what universe?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

If 'I' provide a lunch for my child, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has a right to over rule me on what I put in it. Period.

If they want to govern what THEY provide, by all means, they can do so. But they should not be able to govern what 'I' provide to my child.

To be fair, from what the article says, it sounds more like the idea behind the regulation is that if a child doesn't have a balanced meal, the school is supposed to provide additional items for the child. They're not allowed to take the lunch away. But still, that means that this is a horrible failure of execution and implementation of the law. If the state is going to do this, they have a responsibility to do it right.

what makes "nuggets" more healthy than turkey and cheese......?

the school provider's kickback....?

 

[Conservative]

So three chicken nuggets are more nutritious than apple juice, a banana and a turkey and cheese sandwich? In what universe?

The universe of North Carolina, of course.

 

[Newby]

Enough reason to send your kid to a private school......and to support education vouchers.....

Enough reason to keep the assinine government out of our lives, period.

 

[Zander]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

If 'I' provide a lunch for my child, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has a right to over rule me on what I put in it. Period.

If they want to govern what THEY provide, by all means, they can do so. But they should not be able to govern what 'I' provide to my child.

To be fair, from what the article says, it sounds more like the idea behind the regulation is that if a child doesn't have a balanced meal, the school is supposed to provide additional items for the child. They're not allowed to take the lunch away. But still, that means that this is a horrible failure of execution and implementation of the law. If the state is going to do this, they have a responsibility to do it right.

It's none of the State's business. Get the fuck out of peoples lives....we don't need to be micromanaged.

In this case, the child's lunch that was prepared by the mother was far better and more nutritious than the chicken paste that is sold and packaged as a "nugget"! But even if it wasn't, there is no reason that the state should interfere to this level. It's not as if the child's life was in danger.

 

[Inthemiddle]

agreed. However, the idea that they would decide that what I put in the lunch isn't good enough, give the child something else (in replacement or addition), and then bill me for it? I don't think so.

Personally, I don't really have a problem with providing additional items. I've worked with children for a long time. Over the summer, I work with the local YMCA summer camp program. If they come with a lunch that (to use the article's example) was nothing more than a coke and a twinkie, we'd make the effort to provide them with a PBJ or something like that, just so that they could have a reasonable meal and wouldn't go hungry. If all they have is half a sandwich, we'd give them something like an apple or orange to make sure they had enough to eat. Of course, we'd talk with the parent also to make sure they understand that we expect them to provide their child with a reasonable meal. But I do agree that the parents shouldn't be charged for it.

 

[Newby]

Nanny state at its finest

Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

Jesus fucking Christ. What is North Carolina's problem? As pathetic as this is, it's their state and it's up to them to decide how to best run it. If that's the kind of stupid shit they want, then let them have it.

Not according to the Federal government and liberal do-gooder buttinskis it isn't.

Yeah, you can't take a woman's 'choice' away to kill her baby, but by God, they can take your choice away of what you eat, all for your own good of course.

 

[California Girl]

Jesus fucking Christ. What is North Carolina's problem? As pathetic as this is, it's their state and it's up to them to decide how to best run it. If that's the kind of stupid shit they want, then let them have it.

Not according to the Federal government and liberal do-gooder buttinskis it isn't.

Yeah, you can't take a woman's 'choice' away to kill her baby, but by God, they can take your choice away of what you eat, all for your own good of course.

It's that 'freedom for me, but not for thee' mentality.

 

[Newby]

you have GOT to be fucking kidding me.

If 'I' provide a lunch for my child, NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE has a right to over rule me on what I put in it. Period.

If they want to govern what THEY provide, by all means, they can do so. But they should not be able to govern what 'I' provide to my child.

To be fair, from what the article says, it sounds more like the idea behind the regulation is that if a child doesn't have a balanced meal, the school is supposed to provide additional items for the child. They're not allowed to take the lunch away. But still, that means that this is a horrible failure of execution and implementation of the law. If the state is going to do this, they have a responsibility to do it right.

The state shouldn't be able to do it, period.