Ontario introduced provincial legislation in 2010 (also known as PPM150) restricting what may be sold at schools. In my opinion, the legislation doesn't go far enough to restrict sugar and refined carbohydrates, and focuses far too much on restricting fat and salt; however, it's a start.
While this legislation is fairly toothless in reality, I'm motivated more by my desire to be a good parent than as an upholder of the law in my opposition to what I see going on in my childrens' school on a regular basis.
In my opinion the execution of this legislation falls far short of what could be done. Many of the parents on the parent council of our school don't feel nearly as strongly as I do about good nutrition. When they organize school events, the koolaid jammers and hot dogs tend to creep in. The teachers also frequently use candies, pizzas and freezies to reward good behaviour and academic achievement. I have often heard poor food offerings rationalized away by comments that there's nothing wrong with giving children a treat from time to time.
I'm painfully aware that this is a delicate situation. It's embarrassing to teenage children when their parents continuously challenge the majority opinion. I am also conscious of not wanting to drive a wedge between my children and their teachers, who have a difficult job to do, and who spend many hours every week with their charges. I don't envy them their job and admire the fact that they are able to control such large groups of children, many of whom have behavioural issues that can make classroom control quite difficult.
I probably also have more time than they do to read and think about subjects like childhood nutrition. It's quite possible that many of my kids' teachers simply haven't considered the harms of sugary food to the same extent that I have.
So my approach is to be careful. I volunteer a lot of my time and have helped coordinate many school fundraisers that involve innovative food offerings that easily match the spirit of PPM150, and just as important, are crowd pleasers too. I am not afraid to speak up from time to time, though sometimes my approach is simply to not participate in fundraisers I don't believe in.
Big Food's strategy to counter legislative restrictions is to form fake grass-roots organizations designed to appear to support consumers' freedom to choose for themselves. New York's recent push to limit soda portion sizes, for example, was framed by the beverage industry as a libertarian issue. I am not optimistic that common sense and nutritional standards will ever win out against the relentless marketing efforts that children are exposed to without legislation to curb Big Food. Yet at heart, I am drawn to libertarianism as an ideology, and the industry is aware of this dichotomy.
It occurred to me that there is a certain cognitive dissonance in our school system. We can probably all agree that our kids should be allowed treats from time to time. But surely we should be the ones to decide when and how to do this, not other parents or teachers?
It would be a better idea if children were exposed only to uncontroversial food choices at school or at school sponsored events. Let parents decide for themselves when and if to give their children sugary and processed treats.
No comments:
Post a Comment