Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

Mums' fury at school sweets ban

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
22 February 2007
A HEADTEACHER ordered chocolate bars to be seized from children after declaring a ban on sweets in an Edinburgh primary.
Leith Primary head Alasdair Friend introduced the new rules this week in a drive to improve the diet of children at the school.

But he was forced to back down after only two days when furious parents complained to the council about sweets being confiscated.

City council chiefs have now told Mr Friend he has no authority to dictate what children have in their packed lunch.

Parents today said the short-lived ban at the St Andrew's Place school had been "ridiculous".

They were told about the new rules coming in on Monday in a newsletter earlier this month.

Some chose to ignore it, believing it would never be enforced, but it is claimed when Mr Friend spotted eight-year-old Ian McWhirter with a Twix at lunchtime he immediately seized it.

The youngster's little brother Stephen, five, also had a Kit-Kat taken off him by a teacher.

The boys' mother Janet, 42, of Duke Street, a cleaner, said: "We received a newsletter from the headteacher saying no more sweets would be allowed to be brought into school.

"That's taking parents' rights away from them. Surely it's up to us what we give out children for their lunch.

"My boys brush their teeth. They get their five fruit and vegetables a day, why shouldn't they enjoy a treat at lunchtime?"

Sara Bremner, 31, of Restalrig Road, whose son Ryan, 11, and daughter Kia, six, attend the school, added: "I think it's absolutely ridiculous.

"How dare they tell me what I can feed my child. My kids don't eat a lot of sweets, they don't get any after school but they enjoy a treat at lunchtime and I enjoy giving it to them."

Mr Friend's bid to improve children's diets at the school includes plans to open a healthy tuck shop after Easter selling fruit and low-fat foods.

He surveyed parents on what they wanted their children to eat before Christmas, and believed outlawing treats during school time would be a popular move.

The newsletter said the ban was being introduced with the support of the school board and 82 per cent of parents. The letter went on to warn that any sweets would be confiscated and returned at the end of the day, adding "the school definition of a sweet includes Kit-Kat and Twix bars etc".

And it claimed that legislation going through the Scottish Parliament would prohibit sweets in school. In fact, the Schools (Health Promotion and Nutrition) (Scotland) Bill will only apply to the sale of sweets in schools, not food brought in by pupils.

An education spokeswoman at the council said today: "The headteacher genuinely thought he had the support of parents and the school board. He now realises that some parents have come out against him and he cannot impose it as a rule.

"As an authority we can't tell parents what to put in their children's lunch box."

SNP education spokeswoman and Lothians MSP Fiona Hyslop said the case highlighted the need for a "commonsense" approach to healthy eating.

"There is a serious drive on in schools just now for healthy eating," she said, "But you have to do it in a commonsense way that takes the children with you. Confiscating sweets is maybe not the best way of persuading pupils to eat healthily."

Colin Mackay, Edinburgh secretary of the EIS teachers union, added: "The headteacher must not take powers that are beyond what is reasonable.

"In this instance everyone's heart was in the right place and if there is a conflict between the parents and the school they should try and work that out together."

The full article contains 630 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 22 February 2007 4:57 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Children's Diet
 
1

Steve Paterson,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 11:58:57

I seem to recall a similar story, but with a positive outcome, some time ago at an inner London School. There the head teacher had the same aims as Mr Friend, but persuaded the parents to agree to the ban first and the end result was much healthier and better behaved children (the behaviour being due to the ban including fruit based drinks)

2

,

22/02/2007 12:00:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 390820, Article id was mapped to record!
3

Paul Voltaire,

www.paulvoltaire.spaces.live.com 22/02/2007 12:14:26

A Mars a day helps you work , rest and play.
I thought everyone knew that.
Where DO they get these teachers from?

4

john 1,

22/02/2007 12:16:39

#3 probably the same place as you.
It is being demonstrated everyday that chocolate never helped anyone rest.

5

non-furious Mum,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 12:17:40

In Mr Friend's defence, a questionnaire was sent out to parents last term. the majority of parents agreed that sweets should not be allowed in School. I also understand that children were given the offending items back at the end of the day.

6

,

22/02/2007 12:20:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 390903, Article id was mapped to record!
7

Treeza,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 12:23:09

I feel sorry for this headmaster. Trying to help to keep children healthy and with no support from the excitable mothers whose responsibility it should be.

8

Killick,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 12:30:34

I agree with #5 and #7 and, incidentally, the Headmaster.

9

Laura H,

22/02/2007 12:34:20

if parents aren't going to take responsibility for what they are feeding teir children - somebody has to. If these parents was to ram junk food down their childrens throats - they can do it in home time. Eating food full of additives and sugar can't be good for concentration in class.
I think this is a great idea and more schools and nurseries should be doing the same

10

Jakey Rowling,

22/02/2007 12:34:31

#5
Whilst the intentions were undoubtedly good, it's another example of someone overstepping the mark.

Just because the majority of parents decided that banning sweets was acceptable, they're not in a position to dictate such things to others. He should not have sent out the questionnaire in the first place.

11

Darren, Edinburgh,

22/02/2007 12:37:44

Well done to the headteacher for this initiative. I am only sorry that you have been forced to back down. I am surprised that the parents that complain don't want their children to be healthier. What a fuss they have made over a decision to improve the well-being of their children. When I was that age, I was only allowed one chocolate treat a week and I certainly didn't want that treat when I was at school. Much better saved to the weekend!

12

Mr Crisps,

Haddington 22/02/2007 12:41:04

"If ma bairn wants tae eat his chocolate and have his Buckfast and cigarette aifter then nae stupit teechir's gonnae stop him"

13

Martin.,

22/02/2007 12:44:50

Is it a Mum's fury or Mums' fury?

14

Martin.,

22/02/2007 12:45:35

Is it a Mum's fury or Mums' fury?

Quite a significant difference.

15

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 12:47:47

I think all the parents who complained should be forced to spend the entire afternoon after lunch coping with and trying to control children who are off their t*&s on E's, caffeine and sugar from the rubbish their parents sent them to school with for lunch.

My daughter already comes home from nursery asking for rubbish like chocolate bars and crisps.

What the h*ll is this country coming to? Fat, sad and violent is the way it's looking.

Hurray for the headmaster for at least trying to make a stand.

16

algie,

willy wonka's candy factory 22/02/2007 12:50:34

one of those kids in the photo looks like he has been nibbling too much candy on a regular basis!

so restricted choc intake doesn't seem like a bad idea.

it's a pity the parents' fury can't be directed towards more important issues in the fields of education and recreation.

why are the children taking in packed lunches?

doesn't the school provide nutritious, healthy, lunchtime fare (as recommended by jamie oliver!)

17

Spondoolicks,

22/02/2007 12:51:27

Sensible teacher: As you know obesity is rising in children and poor diet means poor grades and bad-behaviour in school. So let's try banning the sweets during the day

Idiot parent: Youse, are, JOKIN'!!!

Sensible teacher: ..er.. no - I thought you'd like the idea that your child could enjoy good health, good grades and less anti-social behaviour

Idiot parent: Look Mr Hoity-toity-teacher - oor family hus bin eating poorly fae generations and naeb'dy is gonnae to stop us noo!

Sensible teacher: But...but...your children could enjoy a longer, healthier life!

Idiot parent: And have tae mak actual provision for a pension?! No thank-you!! Ma bairns will die early just like me and ma familly afore me.

Sensible teacher: It's a fair cop - creme egg?

Idiot parent: Ah'll keep it fur aifter ma dyalasis...

18

Androsthenes,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 12:51:42

Apart from the fact that "confiscation" is a euphemism for "theft" ,I see the old overworked 'FURY' is making a comeback.

19

Isabel,

22/02/2007 12:54:42

Many parents don't care that their children are obese, unhealthy, unfit, and have rotten teeth. There is no need for children to have sweets, crisps, and fizzy juice every. I don't see much harm in allowing them for a treat on a very odd occasion but they should not be eaten on a daily basis. Too many parents these days have more money than sense and take the easy way out by giving in to a child's demands. These parents not only make problems for themselves, they make problems for all others who come into contact with the children who have behavioural problems caused by bad eating habits.

20

Martin.,

22/02/2007 12:55:16

There is something fundamentally wrong with the general attitude of people in this country if they can force a headteacher to back down from this type of forward thinking initiative. This is just symptomatic of the attitude of (some) parents and it's little wonder that we're churning out a generation of lard-ersed youngsters who expect everything to be handed to them on a plate.

21

Andrew Wilson,

Dundee 22/02/2007 12:56:23

I do hope that the headmaster thought this through and didn't go "seize"-ing the chocolate from diabetics who are required to carry an emergency sugar intake in-case their blood sugar drops.

22

Jakey Rowling,

22/02/2007 12:56:27

Seeing as it's a school issue, why not try educating the kids for once.

Take a healthy lunchbox and compare it to an unhealthy one and tell the kids what it'll do to them if they continue this for the next seven years.

You have the chance to influence the kids, the parents are long since gone.

A lunch box without sweets doesn't make it healthy, far from it.

23

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 12:57:50

As I wrote in the other thread, all those parents who complained should be forced to spend the afternoon after lunch coping with and trying to control all those children off their rockets on the E's, caffeine and sugar their folks sent them to school with for lunch because they can't be bothered to get off their fat, lazy duffs to prepare them a proper meal.

24

Dave M,

22/02/2007 13:00:53

3 Paul Voltaire

Had a look at your website.

25

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

Newington 22/02/2007 13:05:05

I must have guzzled a million Sports Gums, Midget Gems, Black Jacks, Monkey Nuts, Acid Drops and god knows what else in school and it didn't do me any harm. These teachers should just be grateful the kids aren't sniffing glue.

26

derekh,

22/02/2007 13:06:41

My son's school, Lasswade Primary, already has a healthy eating policy and "fatty sweets" such as chocolate and crisps are strongly discouraged Monday - Thursday. They are allowed on a Friday as a "treat". Although they are not banned, most people accept the idea is a good one and stick to it pretty well. The one thing that is banned is nuts as the school is officially a nut free zone. I personally do not agree with that as it denies children who enjoy nuts a healthy snack, but can accept the reasoning behind it - prevention of nut allergy reactions.

27

Calum Mac,

22/02/2007 13:06:56

My partner has PMT at the moment. Should I remove all chocolate from the house? If so, can someone come and do it 'cos I'm feart!

28

Scaramouche,

22/02/2007 13:10:05

It should be mums' fury ...... but this is the Evening News. You want good grammar, you got the wrong rag!

The heidie should've consulted parents first. A wee bit a choc every day isn't a bad thing. It's chemical contents are supposed to be good for the brain. But of course most parents put too much choc in the lunch box. Let's face it, mandatory school lunches would be better and healthier (we hope) for all!

29

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD,

Dar-Es-Salaam Tanzania 22/02/2007 13:12:52

City council chiefs have now told Mr. Friend he has no authority to dictate what children have in their packed lunch.

City council is the one to keep the streets clean. Where is the education authority? No wonder the forest rangers etc come and tell off the new rules and dictate the headmasters of what to do brings the education low. Then England complain “Our education system is falling apart and there is a brain drain". If I were the head master or leg master, I too would go to Honolulu and teach there. At least there is MINISTRY of EDUCATION and inspectors to look after the mom, children, teacher. This sound like the Clinton Eastwood or John Wayne movie. Snatch. The kid must have cried his head. The friends laughing and the parents enraged.
Is this what you have in Scotland? We have mango trees mates for students to sit, the teacher who is very low paid but he attends whether it is Sunday or holiday. he respects the authorities when they inspect the classes once in ten years when the mango tree has ripe and the fruits are sold by the City council. SEC is out.

30

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD,

Dar-Es-Salaam Tanzania 22/02/2007 13:14:42

No wonder the council guys are complining about obesity. Whose? They are the ones who gobble the stolen candies and sweets.

31

Brookie Green,

22/02/2007 13:15:23

#5 - Janet

A bit of an immature, unnecessary comment is it not?

32

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD,

Dar-Es-Salaam Tanzania 22/02/2007 13:15:48

GARETH ROSE
And what have you done after reporting eaten the sweets and smiled.

33

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD,

Dar-Es-Salaam Tanzania 22/02/2007 13:18:28

Poor mum. There she goes again to the Marks and Spenders or British Home Sweets or Chochobury's Supermarket. No wonder these supermarkets are making money. City councilors indeed. Fiends or friends of the shops

34

andy48,

duddingston 22/02/2007 13:23:38

Seems this headmaster overestimated the intelligence of his pupils parents.

35

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD,

Dar-Es-Salaam Tanzania 22/02/2007 13:24:09

All forgotten and forgiven, can you please post those chocolate bars orthe left ones. Or these have been sold? Oh come on?

36

,

22/02/2007 13:26:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391215, Article id was mapped to record!
37

andy48,

duddingston 22/02/2007 13:27:00

#32
Yes, but was it accurate?

38

derekh,

22/02/2007 13:28:39

#29 "The key here is parental responsibility. It is they who decide what their children eat and do, complying with laws to do so."

Therein lies the problem. Some parents obviously have no responsibility and suff their kids full of crap all day every day, hence healthy eating initiatives being tried in schools.

It is NOT time for the government to butt out on issues like this. They should be criticised for not doing more as the country will soon be full of obese kids who will grow up into even more obese adults, and cripple our already overstretched NHS with their self inflicted problems.

39

Lock,

22/02/2007 13:32:59

How much do we read and hear about lack of discipline in school? Whether the policy is right or wrong parents were told that sweets would not be permitted yet still continued to provide their children with sweets. And we wonder why the children don't do what they are told?

40

martin001,

22/02/2007 13:34:17

"Just because the majority of parents decided that banning sweets was acceptable, they're not in a position to dictate such things to others."

#10, Jakey:
So using your logic all laws should be abandoned because some people will always want to break them even though the majority of the population believe they are required.

Sod it, I'm going to rob a bank and see if your excuse holds any weight with the police....

41

StuartA,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 13:35:16

#29

The whole point is Jim, that there are ppl out there quite clearly confused about how best to feed themselves and their kids. I'm sure the sensible parents already restrict choco snacks, its the objectors to this scheme who need to get a grip.
Another common sense initiative shot down...what a joke

42

Brian Wright,

Leith 22/02/2007 13:37:15

The sensible solution is the one used by my children's school. The tuck shop only sells fruit so if parents decide to "treat" their children with a sweet then they control it and the school's is doing it's job by promoting healthy eating without dictating.

43

arris,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 13:37:54

Sweets and fizzy drinks make kids high and cause problems with behaviour in the school. This, in turn, affects other members in the class and control becomes difficult. The long term effects on weight, teeth are obvious. Everything possible should be done to inculcate healthy life long habits in the children and the school can play an important role.

And 37. What is your point?

44

Martin.,

22/02/2007 13:38:26

#39. Agreed. The other thing is that it IS the responsibility of the headteacher and his staff to look after the welfare and education of children in his care. This has always been the case and certainly my parents would have supported my school's policies, even where they had reservations.

All these 'furious' parents have done is teach their children not to respect authority and it'll be all right if you come running (whilst you're still thin enough to manage a canter) home to mummy crying.

45

Immutable Name,

of Toll-X 22/02/2007 13:40:12

Remember the maxim for this kind of thing: it is what is in the child's best interests. That means not being on a sugar or additive high during school.
The nanny state exists because of people's incompetance at looking after themselves, or in this case, their children. "I demand the right to choose that my child grows up to be obsese" doesn't cut it.

46

ddmc,

22/02/2007 13:53:44

#25 Acid Drops , i think your mistaking your teenage years with primary school, lol

But it has been proven that children who abstain from chocolate, fizzy drinks etc do better. Also people who use lo-cal options which contain aspartame are potentially poisoning themselves, & MSG along with high fructose corn syrup are potentially addictive substances which are added to almost all processed food regardless of whether it's needed or not. There is a lot of suppressed scientific study (google Rumsfeld & aspartame) to show that these substances along with trans fats are responsible for a lot of our ails. People used to spend an hour or more each day preparing their daily meals, now it's somewhere in the region of 20 minutes. Some people eat ready meals 7 days a week, when the obesity studies were done on the basis that people only ate them 1-3 times per week.

47

warden99,

gorebridge 22/02/2007 13:55:14

#37 wtf??????????????????????????????????/

i agree with taking away any sweets that kids are bringing to school, whats wrong with good old fashioned school dinners????
Chocolate does nothing for the kids bar making them hyper , fat and rots their teeth, if the parents dont mind this then let them do it at home.

yes i am a humbug , i have toothache and cant get my hands on a bloody dentist

48

,

22/02/2007 13:58:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391355, Article id was mapped to record!
49

Gilbie's Boy,

22/02/2007 14:07:51

I back the Headteacher on this. Some kids today have no boundaries. If more parents had the nerve to say no to the kids a bit more often, the kids would be healthier, know their limits and accept responsibility for their actions.

10 years from now the mum will probably try and sue the school for letting her kids become so unhealthy.

GB

50

Paula,

22/02/2007 14:08:05

No doubt those parents who complained about this are the same ones who buy Turkey Twizzlers and the like, you get more nutrition chewing on a stick.

Chocolate has a time and place (the weekend is a good start), same goes for what you feed your children before sending them to school. My twin boys go to a primary where chocolate is not banned but not approved, every morning they are sent off with belllies full of porridge and lunchbags full of good things to eat. We are not well off, we are not middle class but there is no reason to feed them muck that won't see them through the day. You can tell the kids that are so pumped full of sugary cereals and junk food they practically bounce off the walls.

51

Helen,

22/02/2007 14:34:05

Well said Paula!!! Your boys will be healthier and more able to concentrate than their classmates. Eating sensibly doesn't have to be difficult and doesn't have to be expensive...it does however take a little bit of planning and common sense.

52

Farmernot,

On ma traictor 22/02/2007 14:42:00

The laddie in the photae is a right podger who looks and is overweight.......well done the heidy...the wummin is aff her heid and you really must question her intellect

53

The Fly Fifer,

Fife 22/02/2007 14:42:52

ye jist hae tae look at the picture to see classic pre diabetes kid!!

54

Janet,

22/02/2007 14:47:35

i think i was right with my earlier post.

55

ddmc,

22/02/2007 14:50:19

53 & 54, i dont normally judge people from photographs but the lad on the right has double chins already unless that was his less photogenic side lol, but the mother says it all, who ate all the pies springs to mind :)

56

suz,

22/02/2007 15:00:17

The woman at the centre of the article says 'they enjoy a treat at lunchtime and I enjoy giving it to them." I think she enjoyed stirring up the headmaster at lunchtime and a great message she has given her kids in the process. If she enjoys giving them a sweet treat, surely she would get so much more pleasure out of watching them eat it. She's a twit and if she can't see that young Iain could well do without his sweet treats, she's a blind twit. I've got three words to say. Type-two-diabetes.

57

Feemcgee,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:09:46

I feel sorry for the headteacher, I hope that readers will look beyond the sensationalist headline and realise that he has not done anything that outrageous.
Loads of schools across the UK have done the same as Leith Primary, through schemes such as healthy tuck shops and banning drinks' machines. And the school did ask the parents - the majority were in favour of a ban.
As a parent of a young toddler, I don't want my child to grow up stuffing sweeties into her face - just look at the stats for heart disease and tooth decay in Scotland to see why. The occasional treat will then be a real treat.
Unfortunately, many parents don't agree, which is why schools have to do what they can to educate the kids in a bid to stop the cycle of bad diets and poor health.
Why can't these children eat their chocolate after school, at 3.30pm? Their mum is making a fuss over nothing. And I really don't believe that they get five fruit and veg a day - if they did, then that would mean that this woman cared a lot more about their diet and would not be giving them chocolate for school.
She is also showing her kids not to listen to authority, as all of the parents would have been warned not to send them to school with sweets.

58

arris,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:11:31

Just saw the photo of the obese kids and their overweight mum. My god, has the woman no sense? Just hope she's paying taxes to pay for the medical treatment the children are going to need in the future. Maybe a few fags when they hit 14 will help them on their way to chronic heart disease.

59

MummyWease,

22/02/2007 15:15:41

Schools are meant to encourage healthy eating yet when a head tries to put it in to practice he gets ripped apart by parents who could give their child the "treat" after school instead. Ah but then that means the parents have to deal with the hyper child from the sugar instead of the teachers!

60

Lena,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:17:43

The picture says it all!!

61

Mr Realistic,

22/02/2007 15:21:15

I hate to use the cliche "it didn't do me any harm" however, I went to Leith Academy Primary in the 70's and have to say that we had our school dinner with such memorable things as caramel flan, doughnuts and jam sauce, spam fritters, etc.
We then headed up to Ellen's sweet shop (sadly no longer there) and stuffed our faces with sweets and fizzy drinks. I don't remember very many fat kids in my school.
The problem is kids today get no excercise 'cayse their parents are happy to let them watch TV, play computer games etc.
Get them out playing football, to the swing park, etc.
And don't give me all the rubbish about it being too dangerous to let kids out on their own. The fear of crime is much worse than the reality.

62

Miss Sinclair,

22/02/2007 15:23:14

Isn't it about time parents started to appreciate what the Head Teacher is trying to put in place, he I'm sure is worrying about the amount of obese children that attend his school. I would be delighted if it was my childs school. I feel the Lady and her children in the picture are a prime example of why sweets should be banned from school.

63

arris,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:24:11

Should read:
"Janet McWhirter, with sons Ian, left, and Stephen, who fell victim to the mum."

64

,

22/02/2007 15:30:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391698, Article id was mapped to record!
65

Mr Realistic,

22/02/2007 15:31:02

I can't believe some people are posting comments slagging off a 5 year old for being fat!!!
You people should be ashamed of yourselves, if the wee boy is reading this, you are all guilty of bullying.

66

,

22/02/2007 15:31:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391703, Article id was mapped to record!
67

Andrew Moore,

Middlesbrough 22/02/2007 15:33:07

Have a look at the picture at the top again! This lot should be having their jaws wired or their stomachs stapled, never mind just sweets taken off them.

You should have been stronger Mr Friend.

68

Andrew Moore,

Middlesbrough 22/02/2007 15:34:20

Still, perhpas I shouldn't complain: Scots getting fatter and dieing earlier is perhaps one way we English can get some of our tax money back!

69

Lock,

22/02/2007 15:35:44

The boy on the right is only 5!

He has more chins than years!

70

Martin.,

22/02/2007 15:36:13

#67. Education has certainly advanced if 5 year olds have sufficient reading ability to go through these comments.

71

xcazx,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:42:20

i think that it is up to the parents of the children wat they have to eat so i suggest that the school leve the parenting to the parents and as for health reasons that would be on the mums head

72

Porry,

22/02/2007 15:43:10

Of course, it is the parents' decision what they want to feed their offspring. However, it would be nice if they thought of the results as well. Take Janet, at age 42, probably due to her diet, she looks a little advanced agewise, wouldn't you say? More like 54. And I doubt that her younger son will make it to 42--Mr KitKat leaves the impression as if he was about to explode.

73

Mr Realistic,

22/02/2007 15:44:03

Martin# you know the point I was trying to make. It obviously doesn't matter to you that all these so called adults on here are taking the mickey out of a child.
I hope you are all proud of yourselves. I'm sure you are all beautiful men and women, with perfect bodies and not an ounce of fat between you all.
You all make me sick.

74

F.B.,

22/02/2007 15:44:20

Mum says they enjoy the occassional sweet

- three piece by the look of it!

75

Comerscroft,

22/02/2007 15:44:45

~~~67###

He IS fat! And the 4-finger Kitkat he is holding, and which presumably Mum gives him every day, isn't going to make any difference except to make him even fatter.

10 years on, and the taxpayer picks up yet another bill for a porky 15yr old with type 2 diabetes.

Mind you, she's probably first to demand mass-medication via fluoride in drinking water, to save her brat's teeth, these all being rotted by sugar in the chocolate he's holding.

Yes.............they know their rights. About time they exercised some responsibility too.

Who would be a teacher, faced with moronic mums like her, and her pasty-faced offspring?

76

Xena - Warrior Princess,

22/02/2007 15:45:03

#58 I agree with you there is too much interference already from Government. #67 You will notice it is always the same sad people that are continually slagging other people off, I wonder if they are so perfect. #72 That's ok then eh! the five year old won't know the disgusting things that grown up adults are saying about him so there is no problem.

77

LVT,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:48:42

The heidie has probably overstepped the mark. By the looks of the picture, some members of this family might well be addicted to chocolate and have to be weaned off it slowly......no offence intended, but the camera does not lie!

78

Penny Dreadful,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 15:50:12

"They get their five fruit and vegetables a day"

Yeah right. Five bars of Fruit and Nut more like.

79

Martin.,

22/02/2007 15:51:11

#58. You seem to be going off on a tangent. This is simply about a headmaster taking a view (a view which incidentally is was supported by the majority of parents) that certain things are not appropriate for the well being of the children in his care and implementing and enforcing a policy to support it.

There's nothing new here, it's been going on since before people started to harp on about the 'PC Brigade' (whatever it is?). If anything you could argue that schools are a lot less resrictive today and more tollerant of behaviours which would not gone unchecked 20, 30 or 40 years ago.

80

Koffindodger,

22/02/2007 15:51:31

Perhaps if she paid a bit more attention to her families diet and a little less to he "human rights" she might a slightly less aged looking 42 (shes only a couple of years older than me but she looks older than my mum) and her kid may be slightly less of an obviously obese child.

I think its time for Ewan Aitken to take up this headmaster's cause.

81

adogcatcherwearsauniformto,

peoples republic of eastlovia 22/02/2007 15:53:03

Was it 82% of those parents who responded or 82% of all parents, as there is a bit of a difference.

Re childs size/weight; do you know if he has a medical condition? maybe yes maybe know but why let logic and facts stand in the way of a good rant!

Yes, it was a good idea and it may actually have worked if you had the parents and children working with you rather than imposing something.
The point of a democracy is that those who have differing opinions are still allowed to have them; it really is so gratifying to see that all these people are so understanding and supportive to the individuals choice.

LISTEN UP communisim is dead

82

alicia,

22/02/2007 15:54:14

I sympathise with the head, it sounds like he was well intentioned. There will always be that kind of parent that will shout about their rights, it's a pity the determination to win that "battle" overrides their concern that their actions may have a detrimental effect on their kids.

Two of my children have intolerances to colourings and preservatives and react to certain foods. The difference in their behaviour and ability to learn drastically improved once I realised what they were reacting to. My childs school banned fizzy drinks and strongly encourages the kids to just drink water. It's made a huge difference to the behaviour of the kids and had a knock on effect with their learning.

Speaking from a teaching perspective, some childrens behaviour after breaktimes and lunchtimes can be drastically different from before the time they had the sugary, full of chemicals and colouring "treats" they bring with them. I wish more parents would take care what they are filling their children up with. There is a place for treats, but it should be at home, not school. That way it's easier for parents to monitor what works best for their kids without leaving the responsibility for controlling them to the teachers.

83

Martin.,

22/02/2007 15:55:18

#75. That would be putting words in my mouth.

#75 & #78. I think you'll find that I, and the majority of people who have responded here, are actually concerned for the health and welfare of our future generations.

84

Mr Realistic,

22/02/2007 15:55:19

I give up!!
You people are all so perfect, you obviously have nothing better to do. You really must be sad individuals who really need to get a life.

85

Calum Crubag,

22/02/2007 15:56:48

#5. Of course, stating that the sweet was the outcome of a parent's opinion poll dosent' make good news.

Judging by the photo, the kids could do with less sweets anyway.

86

Scrooge,

Portobello 22/02/2007 16:08:11

HOORAY! What's this? A teacher acting like a TEACHER? Saying 'no' to the little darlings? - Go figure.

As a teacher/educator myself, I think it is wonderful that an educator actually is showing leadership.

For those who have somehow missed the facts: Sugars are one of the main culprits in discipline problems in schools and children. Corporations are 'branding' to younger and younger audiences.

For those angry parents: why don't you just push your kids down a flight of stairs? It's the same thing. A sugary, chemically saturated diet leads to them being fat, ignorant and unable to learn.

Hats off to the forward thinking academic who sought to make a dent in the fact that this generation of British children are the first generation in contemprary history destined to not outlive their parents!

87

Xena - Warrior Princess,

22/02/2007 16:09:29

So concerned Martin that you have to be nasty with it. Good sound bite though.

88

Filled Rolls,

22/02/2007 16:15:10

#84 An indictment of the naive, yet arrogant attitides of many in the teaching profession. Parents shouting for the rights of their children - what do they know.

You've got to pity us, after all we haven't had the priveledge of five years at Moray House and sometimes we get it wrong. We are all little children to you, aren't we.

Seriously though, why don't teachers stop tinkering on the periphery? There are many bigger issues you should be tackling, like early identification of special learning needs and such like.

You really can't do everything - so maybe what parents give to their children is a lower priority for you?

By the way, I found your post arrogant and patronising - nothing new there, as far as some teachers are concerned (IMHO).

89

Mr Realistic,

22/02/2007 16:15:36

Scrooge: "A sugary, chemically saturated diet leads to them being fat, ignorant and unable to learn"

What you are really saying is "I'm a crap teacher/educator but it doesn't matter because I can blame it the kid's diet."

What's all this "educator" business anyway, is there a difference between the two?

90

,

22/02/2007 16:19:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391886, Article id was mapped to record!
91

Jakey Rowling,

22/02/2007 16:19:28

#41
Your analogy does your argument no favours.
This is not about law breaking or anything so dramatic.

It's about choice and as indicated above, I'm in favour educating the kids as to the contents of their lunchboxes.

What I don't like is someone dictating to others when it's out with their authority to do so.

What next, the majority of parents think all packed lunches should be organic so you have to go along with it.

Let us know how you get on with the police, I might give it a go.

92

think again,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 16:20:42

Like mother like child , in todays world the kids should be taken in to care , if parents don't know the way of lifes future they should not be allowed to have any, lets get onto the health secetary and put more tax on fat food.

93

PC McGarry#452,

999 Letsby Avenue 22/02/2007 16:22:52

Did nobody watch the programme last night on BBC1, 'The 34 stone teenager'? that's where the wee lad on the right is heading and then some. Her mother didn't give a monkeys either and she turned into a blob. The mother here probably has a beef with the heidie over something else anyway and was paid a couple of bob for promoting KitKat as well.

94

Filled Rolls,

22/02/2007 16:23:40

#88 If you just stick to teaching and leave issues like health, and -say - law and order to those who are paid to do it, you will probably find that we'll start to produce school leavers who can read and write again.

Or have you just given up on that one?

You t-e-a-c-h-e-r-s not guardians of society's morals, or is that a new module at Moray House now? "Gettin Thum Tae Dae Whit Thur Telt".

95

,

22/02/2007 16:25:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391908, Article id was mapped to record!
96

Mr Realistic,

22/02/2007 16:27:19

Crazy Horse, thanks for that well thought out, intillectual reply.

97

,

22/02/2007 16:32:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391923, Article id was mapped to record!
98

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 16:33:56

Well said, #44.

Why doesn't the mother give them their 'treat' after school?

Oh, let me guess, because she'd rather someone else put up with children high off caffeine, sugar and additives.

It is a FACT that these substances affect childrens' behaviour, so therefore they should be banned in order for children to learn in the best environment possible.

Her son is so young, and already obese!

How sad!

99

,

22/02/2007 16:37:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 391937, Article id was mapped to record!
100

Filled Rolls,

22/02/2007 16:37:52

The attitudes of the teachers here suggest that they genuinely believe they are superior in all aspects of raising children. Perhaps the time is going to come when we give up our kids at birth, and act as love nurturing and child raising consultants as part of a holistic approach to whatever it is schools are actually trying to achieve.

I may be pushing things a bit far here, but as parents I think we have the right to be considered stakeholders.

Honestly, I am raging about this. The amount of times the teaching profession messes up kids lives, and yet these people still have the gall to come on here and tell us they know what's best.

If you have the answers, how come British kids have the worst behaviour and prospects in the world? Never mind, I'm sure you'll get it right eventually.

It's a lovely day tomorrow.

101

Filled Rolls,

22/02/2007 16:39:00

er, Tomorrow Belongs to Us

102

JML,

22/02/2007 16:48:05

Accuse me of bullying if you like, I doubt very much if the child himself is reading this but I hope to God the mother is!! Her 5 year old is grossly overweight, at this rate he'll be dead before he's thirty. Give him fruit instead of chocolate xx! Do you want to kill your child!?!?

103

Martin.,

22/02/2007 17:07:09

#89. Nasty? Hardly! I think you're confusing me with sombody else! Well done though, it's a good sound bite.

104

Ecco Warrier,

Emburra 22/02/2007 17:11:00

The mother should be prosecuted for force feeding the wean Kit-Kats.
Mr Realistic me thinks has been overdosing on Mars Bars.

105

Repton,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 17:14:48

Mr Friend is no friend of the children.Reminds me of Thatcher the milk snatcher.

106

alicia,

22/02/2007 17:19:06

childrens behaviour and morals should be coming from the HOME not SCHOOL.

Oh and Filled Rolls? Get your facts right "coming from a teaching perspective" does NOT mean "I AM A TEACHER"?? What a chip you have on your shoulder about anybody who came from Moray House - did you get knocked back or something?! Spend more time reading the postings, and less time developing that boulder on your shoulder.

As a parent, see that word P A R E N T?? It is the parents responsibility to make sure their child is not being prejudiced by reacting to chemicals and colouring unnecessarily. Do I love my child less than you because I limit chemicals in their diet? Or do I care as much for them and want them to do their best?

There are some kids out there that are wrongly being diagnosed with a variety of disorders and special needs when it is their DIET that is needing modified. These kids are losing out, not because the teachers "think they are superior" and aren't doing their job, it's because the kids brains are so addled with these chemicals they are seriously struggling to follow what is being said to them. And your comment about teachers not picking out special needs kids? When you see the hoops they have to jump through to get these kids assessed and then they have to battle with the parents who will argue till they are blue in their face that their kids have NOTHING wrong with them, then you have the right to comment. A wrong opinion that teachers don't care or indeed that they think they are superior. If they comment you jump on them, if they don't comment you then think they don't give a stuff. Think about it - when is the teacher actually doing it right IN YOUR BOOK??

That is NOT saying there are no special needs ones there, there are kids that have a disorder that is NOT diet based, but would you really want your kid put on drugs and treatments when all it takes is a modification to their diet?

Get off

107

edin nurse,

22/02/2007 17:21:26

it looks as though both the mother and the child on the right could do with eating a bit less of the old chocolate!

108

scottie2812,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 17:30:35

mmmmmmm. think head is right an aple or banana is more healthy than biccys. obviously this mum cannot see what effect it has on her child. my daughter is also on the large side and i only have myself to blame. so i have stopped the biccys and its fruit instead . you have to look at your children and realize what junk does to them.

109

scottie2812,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 17:39:21

perhaps when the mother and the child on her left see the picture of themselves ,they will lose the biccys. or perhaps they wash it down with plenty diet coke to counter balance the calories lol.

110

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 17:51:35

Good on the Headmaster. How many times do people try to blame the schools about things like discipline and healthy eating.
Looks like one of the lads has had his fair share of pies and chocolates.
If you want to feed your kid 'crap' do so at your own house, if the school doesn't allow it..........TOUGH!!!!!!
While the kids are at school the teachers are in charge, not you.
The mum could do with a little more healthy eating.

111

himsel,

Shubenacadie 22/02/2007 17:52:56

Surely it is well enough known by this time that lunch-time chocolate eating by kids is contributing to Global Warming (the sea will soon be lapping at the castle's gate) and almost certainly encouraging Al Qaeda . . . . .

112

suz,

22/02/2007 17:55:35

Right on JML!

And to Mr Realistic, stop being a bleeding heart-If the mother were slim and looked like she were bursting with vim and vigour and her kids glowing with health whilst holding up the sweets, nobody would be staring at their computer screen with horrified faces asking 'is this woman for real?' It is not bullying to say that the child is fat, although it would be bullying to go round to his school and shout it through the school gates. Had the headmaster got the kid by the ear at assembly and made a public example of him for having sweets in the school, that might be considered to be bullying but as it happens, his mother got the local newspaper to make an example of him by taking a photo of him holding the offending chocolate bar and thereby opening the whole issue up to public debate. And she had a choice in that too, she wasn't forced into telling her story and she certainly wasn't forced to get her boys posing for the camera. In years to come those boys should sue her for holding them up to public ridicule but no doubt she will end up suing the Scotsman for injury to feelings and claim they were set up and that the article ruined their lives.

113

,

22/02/2007 17:59:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 392131, Article id was mapped to record!
114

Taxi for Brellier,

Parent of Gracemount pupil 22/02/2007 18:14:51

More doo-gooders following the Pc brigade manual.

It should be up to the individual & their parents what they wish to consume for lunch.

My child adores peanut butter sandwiches but cannot have any for her lunch as there must be an outside possibility that she may manage to infect a random pupil who 'may' have an allergy to peanuts.

Surely the education should (if not already given) be passed on to the allergy sufferer.

oh to return to the days where teachers taught subjects instead of trying to be life tutors.

Anyone else up for a form of protest against these silly rules and regulations?

I was thinking that maybe we could have a sponsored MARATHON...!!

115

Andrew Allan,

22/02/2007 18:15:47

This one is simple to understand, if the carbs you put into your mouth aren't complex, then you won't be able to do your work as good.

116

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 18:17:08

All I can say is...........those boys will grow up hating their mother.
I am not perfect, I was brought up on junk food, fried chips and eggs, cakes, chocolate and crisps.
Now I have a weight issue, I have been trying to control my weight since I was 10 and a member of Weight Watchers. I suffer from sore joints because of it Thanks mum, NOT!!!!!
I wish I had a healthier upbringing :(

117

Andrew,

22/02/2007 18:50:06

3) Your last line should be written, "From where do they get these teachers"? Failed English again!!

118

neil f,

22/02/2007 19:09:50

Leith Primary head Alasdair Friend, said afterwards "Vee VILL eat no sweeties. Vee VILL eat healthy foods. Vee VILL be the master race.......sorry, have forgotten to take my tablets again..."

119

Not a taxi lover.,

22/02/2007 19:20:26

I'm on the side of the head man.

120

Dave M,

22/02/2007 19:38:07

Nobody's gonnae stop MA bairns from eatin' junk food!

Reap what you sow, Janet McWhirter.

121

richardkiwi,

22/02/2007 19:42:40

look at the two kids and mum for that fact another 2 generations added to the NHS time bomb. The mother should be taking a lead and teaching her children healthy eating. Go for a run and eat a carrot! - well done headmaster

122

JG,

Fife 22/02/2007 20:00:18

I think half the time these "controversial" people just say things so they can get their names in the paper - even if it is for the wrong reason!

123

littlestar,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 20:00:37

as a parent at the school ,id like to defend the head and say we were all asked our thoughts on the matter and as reported 82% agreed with mr friend ....he is also startin up a healthy tuck shop at easter and we are lookin forward to that.the mother in question will soon find somethig else to moan about and you can be sure to see her on front page of the news again .mr friend only started last year and has a young family oof his own and is tryin to do his best for the school .

124

Steve99,

Common sense 22/02/2007 20:12:50

The lady doth protest too much. She could do with a few, well a lot, of pounds off.

Not to mention the wee porker on the right of the photograph with the Kit Kat about to disappear down his gullet.

Give the wean a break missus. Do you really want him as a breathless sweaty slob at 14 or 15?

125

alicia,

22/02/2007 20:14:47

125 - thanks for the posting, he sounds like he is coming from the right heart space, and only has the kids best interests at heart.

126

<-HFC->,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 20:15:52

look at the size of the kid on the right!!!no wonder thers a ban on junk food at that school!!!

127

suz,

22/02/2007 20:20:40

*Taxi for Brellier* number 116.
Unfortunately with peanut allergy, some sufferers only need the smell of peanuts to go into anaphylactic shock so it isn't an option just to educate them and leave them to it. There was 8 children at my daughters school in Australia with nut allergies, including one severe allergy sufferer in my daughters class and there was never a question of anyone objecting to the ban on all nut products in our school. The thought that you could be directly responsible for the death of someone else's child is enough to turn you into a detective and we checked the ingredients of everything we bought that was likely to go into a lunchbox. My daughter loves peanut butter but we wouldn't let her eat it before school in case she still had traces of it on her skin or breath, because the childs nut allergy was really that bad. We adapted by having peanut butter after school and it wasn't a sacrifice. I used to thank God every night she wasn't my child because I don't know if I would have been able to let her out of my sight.
However, there is a big difference between a school ban to save people's lives and a ban to save people's waistline, teeth and hearts. I don't know if there are too many children allergic to chocolate, but it has certainly caused the wee boy in the picture to swell up! Maybe that is the health problem that a previous poster said might have caused him to be fat!

128

weeone,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 21:02:45

some should get a grip, my kid is at school and i would'nt have no teacher taking her sweets off her , that is her only bit chocolate in the day, what rught do teachers think they have.

129

Alex.,

22/02/2007 21:10:37

...and this mother will defend her childrens right to have a fag after sex while at secondary school. Mind you the one on the right could do with the exercise. There again so could I. Do with the exercise that is.

Well done, Mr Friend. And give them teeth cleaning lessons too. I doubt if those in the photo have been shown how to clean teeth properly by their overweight mater.

130

Robert12,

22/02/2007 21:10:38

The teacher here is right. It's about time the parents took some responsibility and stopped killing their kids by giving them crisps, chocolate and chips. Nice to see that woman is giving her kids nice Nestle treats too...

131

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 21:22:10

@131 if thats the hight of it slagging kids, your not very big mate , do you have kids yourself.

132

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 21:23:50

@132 agree to a extent , but your kids are allowed at least 1 treat a day.

133

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 21:38:10

'childrens behaviour and morals should be coming from the HOME not SCHOOL.'

Well, yes, in an ideal world, but increasingly those so-called values and morals are leading to HUGE societal problems.

134

I'm no really here,

22/02/2007 21:39:46

If you banned sweets and crisps from school, half the kids would die of starvation.

135

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 21:41:11

#135 A commonly used phrase......................I blame the parents!

136

whattheheck,

22/02/2007 21:41:56

What ever happened to an apple for a snack?

137

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 21:43:27

@137 thats all you hear ,it was the parents fault.

138

,

22/02/2007 21:45:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 392498, Article id was mapped to record!
139

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 21:49:18

@140 thats not very nice,at the end of the day the parents tell there kids what they can and cant have not a teacher.

140

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 22:01:02

Yes, but what the parents tell their kids to eat leads them to have behavioural problems in class.

And that effects EVERYONE.

And it's not the teacher telling them, it's the head.

Too lazy to feed your kids properly? DON'T HAVE 'EM!

And I say that as a parent myself.

I'm not here to be their friend, I'm here to be their parent, so the word 'no' and discipline are used often.

141

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 22:02:22

You're right, simply, obesity-related disease and premature death aren't nice at all.

If she were giving her children cigarettes would this be okay?

But somehow killing your children with food is?

Because believe it or not, in some parts of the world, obesity has caught up to smoking as a leading cause of preventable death.

142

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:04:40

#141 But when the parent is not present, the teachers resume responsibility for the child. So if they say no sweets, then it should mean no sweets.
Whats the world coming to?

143

alicia,

22/02/2007 22:07:09

I think part of the problem these days, and we are all probably guilty of it, is we have all fallen into the trap of assuming that "treats" have to be processed, fatty or sugary or it's not a "treat".

Maybe it's just my background (or me showing my age), but a treat was an apple/banana or orange, very rarely was it chocolate or crisps. We didn't have access to many fresh fruit and vegetables so it was a treat to get them. It also wasn't a daily occurrence. These days fresh fruit and vegetables are treated as something to be endured or to be bargained over with kids to make them eat them.

It's the parents responsibility to educate their children properly about healthy eating, not to pander to what they want rather than upset them. Kids don't know what is good and bad for them, sometimes as parents you have to be the big bad wolf and lay down the rules. I feel bad for the wee lad in the article, he's only 5. At 5, parents have complete control over what the child eats - I agree as they get older it's harder to control because they have access to money and are able to get their own things. But at 5, it's really storing problems up for the wee lad's future.

The problem here is parents are arguing the corner for the right to eat all that processed unhealthy stuff and labelling it treats, and turning their kids against the healthier stuff. This whole article just feels like it's a mother with a problem with authority determined that nobody is going to tell her kids what to do, even if it means their health being damaged.

Everything is meant to be done in moderation and balance.

144

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:08:36

how my kid gets 1 sweet a day, but still gets fruit veg and excercise , take it im a bad mother to all you, did any of you eat sweets as kids.

145

Jamesbuchanan66,

22/02/2007 22:09:16

I ate sweets at school and im not fat, people just assume if you eat sweets you get fat, its up to parents what the child eats. not teachers who THINK they know better.

146

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:14:28

#147 Yes I did, far too many............I'm paying for it now, for the past 26 years and til my dying day!!!!
I blame my parents, they prefered to gamble and smoke the money rather than give their kids a healthy diet.

147

mother of underweight child,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:15:39

no offence but this woman ought to get more fruit into her kids instead of kit-kats, you (mum) really are leaving your kids wide open to a life of bullying, obesity & god knows what else. look at you all your a great advertisement for INCH LOSS ISLAND, think of your kids, they should be on the at risk registar as you are harming them, so with you being headline news, i wouldnt be suprised if you have a visit from social services,cause it seems to me your neglegting their health
i feel sorry for the headmaster, it seems he is only trying to help the kids learn the goodness of healthy food.

148

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:20:06

@148 as a mother myself i control what my daughter eats, and dont agree with someone else trying to take over my job. telling someone else 's kid what they can and cant eat.

149

simply the best....,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:24:04

@149 that was your parents , im sorry but my kids have a healthy diet , it only includes 1 sweet.

150

I'm no really here,

22/02/2007 22:25:38

#145 Good point. The parents soon kick up hell if their kids get hurt.

#139 Perhaps you hear so many people saying it because it's true.

#134 Why is something that's bad for them considered a treat?

And before anyone starts on at me. I was part of the "Baby-boom" after the war (the last one, cheeky buggers), and that was when sweets and confectionery took off, after sugar was no longer rationed. At that time some of the most horrendous sweets were produced. Stuff that would be banned today. And I haven't got the teeth to prove it!!

151

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:27:32

I remember seeing an article on the tv about a mother who was charged with manslaughter for allowing her daughter to eat what she wanted.
A treat is ok once in a while, but by the looks of it these lads were getting a treat all day every day.

152

mother of underweight child,

edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:28:52

no offence but this woman ought to get more fruit into her kids instead of kit-kats, you (mum) really are leaving your kids wide open to a life of bullying, obesity & god knows what else. look at you all your a great advertisement for INCH LOSS ISLAND, think of your kids, they should be on the at risk registar as you are harming them, so with you being headline news, i wouldnt be suprised if you have a visit from social services,cause it seems to me your neglegting their health
i feel sorry for the headmaster, it seems he is only trying to help the kids learn the goodness of healthy food.

153

Loubie,

Edinburgh 22/02/2007 22:31:21

#152. Yes, but this woman is like my mother, feeding her kids crap!
Good on you for allowing your daughter a treat a day, she is eating healthily and you have a sensible aproach.

154

Happy in Sweden,

Living in a healthy country! 22/02/2007 22:48:27

Haha, this story made me laugh so much and i guess this wasn't what she meant...This could only happen in scotland!!!!!!!!
There are so many 'things' that can be given as a treat and its not all full-sized chocolate(and not even real chocolate at that)bars.
Im actually disgusted at this picture, the mother is clearly overweight and well the children.....I'll be nice by saying they dont look the happiest or healiest i've seen in a long time.
The headmaster should be praised by his actions and should complain to Jamie Oliver.
No no no, dont, can you imagine if this story gets to the nationals....Scotland dragged throught the mud again.

155

Fraser Jambo,

Central Scotland 22/02/2007 22:56:35

It's incredible the amount of people out there who have the audacity to suggest that teachers need to stop doing the "life coaching" (as one put it). We'd love to not have to do it, but unfortunately, parents DON'T do it any more! OK, I'm generalising, but parents in many communities ain't bringing up their children with any sense of
(a) moral values, including how to behave/respect; or
(b) how to eat properly and care for themselves.
(c) how to have responsible attitudes towards alcohol, drugs, smoking, sexual health etc

You have no idea how often we, as teachers, have to do things which should be a parent's job. Teaching kids when to go bed at a reasonable hour, how to tie their shoelaces, that belting somebody back isn't the best way to solve a problem. I could go on.

The headteacher in this school is absolutely right to do what he's doing - I wish more headteachers would be so sure of their powers and use them to good effect.

156

Dave M,

22/02/2007 22:56:36

Can anyone explain to me how filling your kids with
***** is a treat?

Are these people born losers or did they get a special grant?

I can't believe that people are defending her.

157

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 23:05:36

Here, here, Dave!

Want to give them '1 sweet'?

Then do it at home, where YOU can deal with the consequences of a child hyped up on sugar, caffeine and additives, rather than MY CHILDREN having to put up with their disruptive behaviour at the expense of their education.

The child on the right is obese, like a growing number of children in this country.

Something has to be done, and if the parents aren't willing to, then the government has an obligation to step in.

Don't want to be nannied, then act like an adult and a PARENT and do what's right by your children.

Filling them full of crap till they're obese isn't.

158

MoragtheToerag,

Embra 22/02/2007 23:07:23

My children get a baked good at home after their tea.

Chocolate cake, couple of biscuits, bowl of ice cream, etc.

That kind of processed crap isn't even FOOD, much less a 'treat'.

159

Lila,

22/02/2007 23:31:42

Sugar doesnt actually make you hyper, this is a myth, it is the colouring and additives in food and sensitivity to them...the situation the child is in and who he is with affects how hyper he or she is a lot...eg a calm storytelling session or bouncing on a bouncy castle at a party, one with sugary foods other healthy, the bouncy castle will win for super hyperactiveness every time....

160

Robert12,

22/02/2007 23:31:42

This is almost as bad as that video of those parents in England (can't remember where) passing the McDonald's through the railings to the kids after Jamie Oliver introduced healthy eating. I have never experienced laughing and being shocked at the same time. Probably the funniest video ever!

161

theladatthemcdonaldswindow,

deadinburgh 22/02/2007 23:44:25

the lady's logic is parallel with those who insist it is their right to smoke in their own home, even if young children are being raised in it.

you have to keep them alive long enough to keep collecting of the council darling. Throw a veggie burger in there now and then to at least have the chubby one live past 18.

Sweets and crap toys from asda don’t always mean love.

peace out

162

Bigdad,

Leith 22/02/2007 23:49:21

Pity the poor head teacher (and staff), having to put up with such an ignorant parent! Surely a bag of bananas would work out cheaper than a couple of choccie bars? I'm also wondering if all the meals in their house are microwaveable? Looks it!

163

JD11,

dublin 22/02/2007 23:51:24

Mother would have been be done for child abuse in years to come

164

Lila,

22/02/2007 23:57:42

and why has son on the left got the single kit kat, that's discrimination, no wonder the son on left has a double chin always getting the twin kit kat!

165

Bigdad,

Leith 22/02/2007 23:59:12

Nah, she'd probably try to sue the school for letting the kids bring rubbish, and eat it during breaks!

166

ghost chaser,

ramona, ca. usa 23/02/2007 05:55:38

i love the comments ! i have been reading, laughing, and reading the whole while I'm pigging out on huge chocolate bon bon, chocolate covered strawberries and lots of chocolate cookies. not to mention the carrots and celery i really am eating, the others are only a dream. i say cheers !!!! to mums all over the world who treat their children to huge amounts of fattening crap, just so they can complain later that their children are bulimic. now lets all raise our cups of chocolate milk to all those moms who stand up for the right to " treat " children to a little chocolate.

167

Pilrig,

Livingston 23/02/2007 06:45:55

Yet more control freakery.

168

weeone,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 06:52:36

@156 thankyou, i understand everyones points but me as a mother and giving my daughter chocolate , dont want to be judged as going too give her problems when she is older. and some comments state she is basicly trying to kill these kids.

169

Pilrig,

Livingston 23/02/2007 06:55:36

Next suggestion will be that the state - which always knows best- puts cameras in our fridges to check what we eat. For our own good of course !

170

Pilrig,

Livingston 23/02/2007 06:57:25

166 - seems to me that the child abuse (not to mention mum abuse) is coming from the majority of posters on this thread.

171

Alf Collett,

Leith 23/02/2007 07:20:40

What are our priorities here? We berate the lack of discipline in schools and wider society and then the same parents undermine a decision made by the highest figure of authority in a school, the head teacher. What message are we giving to the children? That it's ok to ignore school rules that don't agree with your version of 'human rights'? Sweets in school are a teaching and learning issue as well as a health issue. Nutrition has a huge effect on children's learning. Refined sugar adversely so.

172

ghost chaser,

ramona, ca. usa 23/02/2007 07:28:13

#173 Alf Collett, well stated !!!!!

173

Shazza1,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 08:16:16

I Can't believe that the mother is complaining! Her child is 5 years old and clearly from the picture on the front is obese! The school is doing her a favour where she won't help her children herself.

I think she should ask for help in one of those programs 'You are what you eat'. The child is 5!! and is overweight and notice he is the one with the bigger chocolate.. Come on Parents help your kids, a treat once a week sure but daily!!

174

maestra,

23/02/2007 08:44:20

It is hardly 'control freakery' to ban crap at school.

At home, (sadly), parents are free to feed crap to their kids all they want to.

The remit of schools is to educate. Steering kids towards healthy eating by not allowing crap to be eaten at school is well within the remit.

175

pickleskin,

23/02/2007 09:14:49

Yes it certainly looks like the kid on the right could use a few more chocolate bars!!!

The problem these days is the parents letting their kids eat whatever they want rather than what they need!!

When i was a kid we had an ice cream van come past our house EVERY NIGHT but it was only one Friday a month that we were allowed to go and get a treat...yes a treat, that's what it should be, not part of your every day diet. We were given some of the carrots that were being prepared for dinner or a satsuma if we were hungry.

Stop letting kids walk all over you, that's where all the problems are starting with them today...take control, their diet included!!

176

ghost chaser,

ramona, ca. usa 23/02/2007 10:05:52

one of my favorite treats that my mom made was baked apples. the apples had cinnamon , a little sugar or maple syrup and baked. she would make tea or warm milk with honey. or on friday and saturday nights we would eat oranges saving the peels so that we would have orange peel wars. these made for a treat to look forward to. we would look forward to the week end to see what our special treat was. we rarely ate dessert. even to this day i am not a big sweet eater.

177

ghost chaser,

ramona, ca. usa 23/02/2007 10:11:00

when i was a child and penny candy was sold, i had earned $5.oo. i went to the local store and purchased $5.00 worth of penny candy. my mom found the candy and then marched me back to-the store and i had to return what was left. i NEVER repeated it.

178

Koffindodger,

23/02/2007 10:16:57

At least the woman has got her name in the paper which I am sure she is quite happy about.

Pity its for stuffing her kids full of hydrogentated fat, what a numpty.

179

"Get yer gums roon ma plums",

23/02/2007 10:28:11

Ban fatties from the streets

180

warden99,

gorebridge 23/02/2007 10:30:26

Is kitkat paying her for the amazing advertising , the kid on the right looks like he will need more than 4 fingers inside him to fill him up hmmmmmm

181

Swilly Tisher,

Loch Maree 23/02/2007 10:30:58

It takes allsorts.

182

Dismayed,

Leith 23/02/2007 10:40:58

I agree with #125, I too am a parent at the school and while I didn't agree with Mr Friend about all aspects of the survey I felt he was putting my childs health first. When we were told that sweets had been banned from the school I didn't feel angry that my human rights had been taken away. I just removed anything sweet from my child's lunch-box, it wasn't a great hard-ship. This mother will now be happy as she has had the 15 mins of fame she craves, but obviously didn't think about her kids when contacting the press. Keep up the good work Mr Friend 82% of parents are behind you including myself. Some parents just have too much timeon their hands.

183

Isabel,

23/02/2007 11:00:02

#182
Do you think she might be getting a lifetime supply of KitKats?

She does look like a real 'bully o' the wash hoose' and her expression tells me that she is saying that they are her bairns and she'll give them whatever she likes.

It is such a pity that she exposed these poor boys to all this publicity. Anyone who can do that is not a caring mother - as is obvious from the photo.

184

warden99,

gorebridge 23/02/2007 11:21:56

#185 `bully o the wash hoose`thats kinda what i was thinking of lol

bet he is a spoilt we brat in the hoose ,,,,ma get me another 45 mince pie`s

185

non-furious Mum,

23/02/2007 11:32:22

The boys should not have been exposed to such ridicule - not their fault. A bit of an 'own goal' by their Mother, perhaps?

186

warden99,

gorebridge 23/02/2007 11:43:02

Maybe now with all this slaging of her kids and herself are getting she might take head (couth)and stop the chocolate all together and give them something better for them like buckfast , cheap cider , fags , dep fried mars bars.

187

mark jacobs,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 12:10:43

76. fab ive never laughed so many since i was a children,is mum using sunsilk or harmony lol or is it that old girlie fav crisp and dry .and i wonder why the kid on the left only has two fingers awww.

188

pickleskin,

23/02/2007 14:00:27

Of course the boy on the right has a bigger cake of chocolate, he is obviously 'big boned' and needs more crap to eat than the other kids!!

189

simply the best....,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 14:47:39

sorry that was right.

190

Loubie,

Edinburgh 23/02/2007 14:58:37

#191 Looks like mum has read and replied.
You should earn a treat, I get told that at Weight Watchers, when you've eaten your points (fat) allocation for the day and you want some more, you need to get off your fat erse and earn it or you will be a fat pig all your life...........well she is a little more polite than I am!

191

simply the best....,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 15:05:37

well truth hurts sometimes ,but it does sometimes take people to bring it to your attention. this case is a bit different from me giving my daughter chocolate. 1 of these boys are a bit overweight.@194

192

Douglas,

Bathgate 23/02/2007 16:47:45

I'm taken back to my youth by Joan Collins and the four finger Kit Kat. :o)

193

elayne,

fife 23/02/2007 17:46:25

no 63,aye i mind o "ellens"and manky it was too lol!!free flies with yer 5p mixture,but serously too many kids eat crap,and dont know what a "home cooked"meal is,that wee boy on r of photo is already way too fat,sorry to offend but its true!!!

194

dollydaydream,

leith 23/02/2007 18:29:33

goodness hasnt the mum had it really backfire on her.poor kids u have to feel sorry for them with a mum like that ,whats dad saying about it ??i wonder if she will be so quick next time to run to papers before she thinks about her family .then again maybe she thrives on the publicity and is enjoying her 15 mins of fame !!!!get a grip woman and think of your kids health before you speak next time !!!

195

who cares,

Leith 23/02/2007 20:03:24

Can she not see her son is a fat kid, you would think she would be the one banning them from eating rubbish,

196

Pilrig,

Livingston 23/02/2007 20:53:02

'Ban this, ban that' the parrot cry of our time.
Next we'll be told what books we are allowed to read, what cds we're allowed to listen to, what time to go to bed....

197

catherine noble,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 20:53:47

I feel very sorry for Mr Friend, headtheacher at Leith Primary. Do the parents at the school not understand that banning sweets and fizzy drinks can only be beneficial to their children? By all means if they wish to feed their children with sugar filled snacks they are free to do so after school, but surely the children would perform better in class after a healthy lunch which did not contain unnessessary additives and colourings.

I think this episode illustrates our society in general nowadays, whereby there is an overall lack of respect. If the parents are not supportive of decisions made by teaching staff, what message is that giving to their children.

At the school my four children attend a healthy lunch is encouraged and bringing sweets and fizzy drinks to school is discouraged and has been for some time. It is the best time to create healthy eating habits and can only help! I would welcome anything that it is in my children's best interest.

My children eat an extremely healthy diet, but they also enjoy sweets and treats. Not however, in their packed lunch box!!

198

ghost chaser,

ramona, ca. usa 23/02/2007 21:56:31

i am grateful that our schools in ramona, stopped selling sodas on campus. now it water and 100% fruit juices. this was the parents that took the initiative, not the schools. the schools were making money on the sodas.

199

littlestar,

edinburgh 23/02/2007 22:30:30

leith primary doesnt allow fizzy juice either and this wasnt mr friends idea it was in place before he took over .the mum in pic didnt make such a fuss then or go to papers with it ....maybe she has a problem withmr friend and wants to do anthing to upset him...i will say she was a bit quieter at school today lol!!!!!

200

Alex.,

24/02/2007 01:00:59

#131. Simply the best? Yes, I do have kids and they are in their thirties now. They have their own teeth and are not overweight. Maybe this is something to do with the fact that they were not fed sweets or chocolate all day every day. Friday after school was when they had their treat with a visit to the sweet shop. Maybe you should try this with the youngsters in your family. They will thank you when they are older because they have not been subject to bullying, rotten teeth or have diabetes. Try it!


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Would a ban on advertising junk foods make our children healthier?
Yes, it will make them less likely to eat unhealthy foods
No, ultimately it’s down to what their parents feed them
No, kids like the taste of junk food too much

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.