When schools take away a child's freedom, they are taking away a lot from them at that age. The child reaps more benefits with choosing to eat junk food if it is present or not. At this point, there is a lot of discussion what is junk food and what is not. If the government can not define junk food, how can they expect an elementary student to be able to? If schools get rid of just vending machine and a la carte junk food items, the cafeteria will just serve unhealthy food through the lines. Will schools stop selling pizza and french fries in the cafeteria line? There are many decisions the government would have to make before enforcing this in schools. The student will not benefit from this.
The school could start by improving the curriculum about nutrition and requiring more physical activity before the government starts imposing a statewide junk food ban. This would give the student a choice with pulling out the freedom of choice from under them. The student could get more physical activity in gym , which is a required class, and have fun while doing it. Forcing a child to eat certain foods will neglect the child rather than benefiting them.
Teachers states " We believe that childhood obesity is a very serious issue, and principals, teachers, parents, students, and school boards should be doing their part to address this situation. But banning junk food without other strategies and local decision-making is a superficial remedy that dilutes personal and local responsibilities." This statement clearly defines how it should be handled with out neglecting the child's freedom while educating the children on nutrition, importance of physical activity, and leaning how to decipher from right and wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment