Non-Paying Students Given Courtesy Lunch
February 27, 2009 by Karen Weideman
Filed under financial matters
When my daughter started kindergarten this year, I received a list of breakfast and lunch prices. Along with the list was a note that stated if a child’s lunch bill went over a certain charged amount, they would receive an alternate lunch. I believe the alternate lunch was a peanut butter sandwich, fruit, and milk. Hmmm, makes sense. No sense in letting a child rack up a $200 lunch bill . . . or so I thought.
According to Yahoo! News, if students in Albuquerque, New Mexico can’t pay for their lunch they are given an alternative meal which includes a cheese sandwich, fruit, and milk.
These policies have become a necessity for schools that are trying to keep their budgets in the black, while ensuring that the children don’t go hungry. Other school districts in California, Florida, and Washington have also adopted an alternative lunch menu for deliquent lunch accounts.
There is a heated debate about this issue. Parents are saying that they don’t appreciate their children being singled out, that some kids don’t want to go back to school, and that one child now refuses to eat cheese.
I just don’t get what all the fuss is about.
~If you can’t afford school breakfast or lunch, then you can apply for free or reduced lunch. It is based upon income and how many people are in your family.
~If you don’t qualify for free or reduced lunch and you still can’t afford to buy lunch at school everyday, then why aren’t these parents packing the lunches at home?
As I wrote last week, I can’t afford to pay the $2.30 a day for my child to eat lunch. I pack her lunch each day. I can pack her lunch for less than $1.
Can I afford to go out to eat every day? No, and you probably can’t either. So, what do we do? We cook at home and we pack our lunches and take them to work.
These children are not starving. They’re being offered a healthy alternative if they don’t pay.
Since the new policy began, the Albuquerque school district has collected just over $50,000 from parents since the beginning of the year. It also identified 2,000 students eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunches. More children in the lunch program means more federal dollars for the district and less money being taken from other budgeted items.
Why are people seeing this as discrimination and not a courtesy?
The alernative lunch saved us a couple of times.. my kids typically buy lunch at school and on occasion their funds were depleted and I didn’t realize it. I was glad they had something to eat when their lunch account had nothing in it! And they didn’t feel shamed for taking it.
i believe per school policy, a notice is sent home when the child’s account is running low and another if the account has been empty for a number of meals…also stating what the policy is for alternate lunches. while i totally understand that no parent wants their child singled out or embarrassed, it’s the parents responsibilty to make sure there’s enough money to cover their child’s meals. it’s as simple as sending a check in with your child to be deposited in their account. if finances are an issue they can either brown bag it (which most kids would WANT a peanutbutter and jelly sandwich, fruit and drink) or contact the school and let them know there’s a hardship and make arrangements for free or reduced meals. the school cafeteria is no different than a restaurant…they have to cover their costs. you wouldn’t expect a restaurant to keep serving you if you didn’t pay for it….and i don’t think they’d offer an alternate lunch to make sure you weren’t hungry. i honestly don’t feel a parent has the right to complain about this.
p.s. hi karen… re: previous post…karen aka mom_of_14….signed in using roboform…lol.
I guess my problem with this is that kids are being singled out and its not their fault. Don’t get me wrong I’m glad they are at least getting food but they should ALL get the same food if they want it. Sometimes the food at school is the only food a child gets all day. And, just b/c a child doesn’t qualify for free lunch still doesn’t mean they can afford it or that their parents will give it to them. What if the kid has bad parents and they use all of their money for something else?
Because as a society, we look to make everything about discrimination of some sort.
If people are so up in arms about these alternate lunches – let the district pull the program. It is a courtesy and is being abused.
Great post. And great question. Would they rather their kids go hungry? I think if that was the case, the parents would REALLY be complaining. What a shame– all these complainers are doing is turning their kids into ungrateful whiners as well.
Jen: When I was in school, there was no charging lunches. At least I didn’t know of it. I remember one time I forgot my lunch and I thought I would have to do without. My teacher loaned me $1 though. I was thankful for that. I’m glad the alternate meal is in place for these kinds of situations.
Karen: I hope that a note is sent home to remind the parents that the account is running low. That may not be the case in all districts though. I agree. The schools have to pay for their costs.
Amanda (Mom Blog): I have to disagree. If the children with delinquent accounts are given the same lunch as everyone else, then there’s no reason for them or anyone to pay. The school lunch charges were already up to over $140,000 for just this school year until they implemented this policy. $140,000!!!!!!! The district is estimating that it would have been $300,000 by the end of the year. That money has to come out of the general budget. That’s the budget that’s used to buy math manipulatives, textbooks, computers, and other things for the kids to learn with. We can’t just say everyone deserves the same meal. Why should everyone have to suffer because of the poor decisions of others?
I checked into income requirements for the North Carolina free lunch program. A family of four earning $26,845 or less per year, would be eligible for free meals. The same family would qualify for reduced-price meals at an annual income of $38,203 or less.
I believe the reduced lunch rate is around 40 cents per day. So, if you make $38,000/year, you can’t afford 40 cents per day? That’s only TWO dollars per week. I just don’t see the problem here.
Boy, things have changed since I was in school. We had to take our lunch money every day, grabbing our dollars from a port-wine cheese crock that my dad filled every week. I had no idea that kids nowadays “charged” lunches.
I don’t think kids on free or reduced lunch should get a different meal than other kids have – that’s akin to separate but equal.
But in the case of alternative lunches, I guess the policy makes sense. I presume that when a child’s lunch account runs out, the parents are expected to replenish it and — if they are unable — they can apply for free or reduced lunch.
Karen, I agree with you on this one! I feel bad for the kids if they’re shamed by taking the free lunch, but really it’s the parents’ responsibility to either pack or fund the lunch account.
Lindsey and Amanda: Yes, it seems everything is about discrimation these days AND they want to government to pay for it all. There is no way to regulate what the parents spend their money on and we can’t be acountable for each and every household. When I was in school, I packed my lunch every day and not because I wanted to. I was constantly amazed at how some of the kids that got free lunch wore nicer clothes than I did, had the Members Only jacket (lol), and had the nice backpacks. And then when I worked at a grocery store, I would see kids come in with food stamps and buy 20 oz sodas, candy, and candy bars, all things I couldn’t afford. These things are in place for people that need them to get back on their feet or for those that are disabled. It’s a shame that the system is so abused.
Meanwhile, my daughter is asking me why she can’t buy lunch every day. She tells me that they have things that she likes and asks why she can’t get the school lunch. I just keep explaining that it costs a lot more than packing. I’m trying to give her choices though and not make it seem so bad.
Karen, I get a lot of what you are saying but if we can raise money for other countries, give money to large corporations for bailouts, and feed our prisoners then really we should be feeding our kids.
Do something to the parents not the kids!
And, thanks for your comments on my post.
Amanda (Mom Blog): I don’t agree with the bailout/spending bill, but that’s another issue all together. If we fed lunch to all the kids in public schools every day, it would probably cost TRILLIONS each year. It’s not the government’s responsibility to feed our children. Yes, there are programs in place to help those in need and I’m thankful for that, but I’m not interested more taxes.
This year our family started sponsoring a child in Haiti for $35/month. It is a sacrifice, but I don’t feel badly for it. You see, Americans have opportunities that no other countries have. We have Medicaid, public schooling, free breakfast and lunch programs, WIC, welfare, food stamps, community food banks, churches, and so much more. In Haiti, children have to walk miles just to get clean water to drink. I can’t imagine raising my child in such helpless conditions.
I recently watched a 20/20 special about the children of Appalachia. I felt sorry for them, but honestly, much of their parent’s decisions affected their lives so much. Yes, these people are poor. They are REALLY poor. But then I saw parents on the show being addited to pain killers and drugs. They were smoking cigarettes and the kids’ teeth were rotting out from drinking Mountain Dew. It’s crazy! I’ve been really poor before, but I certainly wasn’t going to spend the little money I had buying cigarettes, Mountain Dew, or even sugar to make Kool-Aid. You have to set your priorities. We can help people, but we can’t be responsible for every poor decision they make.
Lunch programs are better than they used to be and now kids don’t have to be embarrassed. Years ago, free lunch students received tickets that they had to present each day for their lunch. Now they just walk up to the cashier and give their student number. No one knows if they’re free, reduced, or if they’re using money in their account.
My point is that there are children out there who have horrible parents or parents that make very bad decisions with their money. These children should not be singled out for it. After all they are just kids.
As for the Appalachia thing (I hope to write about that soon too) I live probably 30 miles away from there and while there are people here who are like that the majority are not. Those parents really piss me off but on the other hand those kids have no control over it. I ultimately thing the parent should be held responsible.
Again, I still like ya!
Amanda (Mom Blog): I understand what you’re saying. These kids are being affected by their parents’ mistakes and choices. But I guess we have to agree to disagree because I just don’t think we should be financially responsible for it nor can we micromanage people’s lives.
Th Appalachia thing is a mystery to me. One of the moms on there says she gets like $485 or $535 a month (something like that) in food stamps every month. She says it’s just not enough and the kids say before the month is over, they’re running out of food. Perhaps this is too much of an assumption, but I’m guessing the two children are getting free breakfast and lunch at school. And they’re getting around $500 in food stamps and they’re still running out of food? What the heck are they doing and why can’t they make it on that amount of money? That’s interesting to me. I’d like to see what you have to say on the topic, especially since you’re so close to the situation.