Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”

Although it's a stupid law, isn't the subject heading a little misleading?

The law (or rule?) says they must supplement, not replace. The little kid, not necessarily able to make decisions for themselves (which is one of the reasons for the law/rule) did not eat her own lunch.

Whats pathetic is how the person who was in charge of this issue, seemed to confuse supplement with 'replace'. Or didn't take the responsibility to see that the student/child ate their home lunch.

I understand this if this was a case of a poor family who barely have enough money to provide all the necessary parts for a 'healthy' lunch. This doesn't appear to be the case.

Also, what do they do with students who have parents who, based on religious beliefs or allergies, can't provide certain foods to consume? Or have some kind of disability that makes it so solid foods can't be consumed?

If there continues to be a law like this, it should be for SCHOOL supplied food, not home supplied food. And if it's a case of a student not getting enough FOOD (not "correct" portions of food), just provide free or greatly reduced lunches then.

Oh wait, they already do that.

stupid law/rule.