Everyone has either experienced or witnessed a fellow student experience the feeling of dread when the lunch bell rings, their classmates rush off to the cafeteria, but their pockets are as empty as their stomachs are. These students often find ways to avoid the humiliation by claiming to either not be hungry or to not feel well when really all they want to do is to eat lunch like the other kids so that they can go on about their day learning without worrying about their stomach grumbling being heard by their peers. These students, at no fault of their own, have fallen through the cracks of the system that either celebrates the wealthy or pities the poor. Those that fall somewhere in the middle are left to deal with hunger and humiliation at the cost of their education and overall wellbeing. School lunches should not be a time of concern for these students but rather should be a time for the community to show that they legitimately care about the health and education of the next generation without any sense of bias regarding their parents’ financial statuses. In short, school lunches should be free for all students because hunger hinders learning, the students cannot alter their finances, and the school systems should not try to profit from the students.
The first reason that school lunches should be free is that school is for learning and going hungry keeps the students from reaching this goal. In fact, researchers explain that the society is well aware of this hindrance as “no one thinks it’s a good idea for students to try learning on an empty stomach” (Montague). If it is common knowledge that students have issues learning when they are hungry because they are distracted, undernourished, and often ill from hunger, then it should also be clear that “good nutrition is critical to student achievement” (Montague). If the student is unable to receive this nutrition through buying a lunch with money that may not be available to them, then the school cannot expect the child to succeed without providing them with this nutrition. It is not for the school to determine the financial status of the parents but rather to promote the best possible environment for learning.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"School Lunches".
This leads to the second reason why students should receive free lunch as they are unable to alter their parents’ financial statuses. While author, Fuentes, points out that some school districts do not have this concern, it is more common for school districts to have a wide range of socioeconomic statuses to be represented among their school population. Should this mean that the children of the wealthier parents deserve to eat while those who were unfortunate enough to be born poor or to middle class parents do not deserve such luxuries? Or, should this go even more general and “the costs of lunch be associated with “economic condition of the area from which the schools draw attendance” (Gunderson)? Students cannot select their family income no more than they can select what district their family will reside in. They cannot alter their financial statuses and they cannot get money from other sources. In other words, the students do not have income so they should not be treated as if they must pay for their food in order to be able to learn.
Finally, the schools receive money to provide an education so they should not look for additional funds by charging for the essential tools to gain an education such as proper nutrition during the school day. However, many schools have reported “turning the lunch program into a profit center that can help support other school services, which is especially helpful at a time of sizable budget cuts” (Fuentes). However, in order to gain federal funding for lunch assistance, the school must “operate the program on a non-profit basis” (Gunderson). This means that the schools are opting to profit rather than to provide the students with access to federal funds that would provide them with free and nutritious meals. Does the public not pay taxes for these programs? Can the schools select programs over nutrition? Can the students participate in these additional programs without proper nutrition? Money should not be considered as more important than the needs of the students.
In closing, schools should provide free lunches to all students because it is essential to learning, the students cannot control their financial status, and schools should not profit from their students. Budget concerns and social stigmatizations over socioeconomic statuses should not hinder a child’s opportunities to learn. Schools are for learning and it has been proven that this cannot take place when the child is more focused on their hunger than on their studies. Whether the child has parents who are below the poverty line, well above the poverty line, or somewhere in the middle is not the decision of the child. Therefore, their access to nutritious meals and proper education should not be left at the discretion of those who view the status of the parents as an indicator of the student’s potential for learning or right to these necessities. When students do not eat, they do not learn. When students do not learn, the entire society loses. Free lunch to all students would solve this problem and help to move the next generation into a much better place than any other generation before them.
- Fuentes, Annette. “School Lunches in Affluent Districts Emerge as Moneymakers.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 31 Mar. 2011. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
- Gunderson, Gordon. “National School Lunch Act.” National School Lunch Act | Food and Nutrition Service. USDA, 26 Aug. 2015. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
- Montague, Patricia. “When Students Can’t Pay for School Lunch, Everyone Loses.” Education Week. Editorial Projects in Education, 01 May 2016. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.
