Why are children's bellies becoming an ideological battleground in schools?

Why are we so unwilling to give of the abundance God has given us?

Children's bellies have become a battleground in the debate over school lunches and who should pay for them.

LOS ANGELES, CA (California Network) - There's a classic expression in economics that goes, "There is no such thing as a free lunch." It's abbreviated as TINSTAAFL, and the acronym is sometimes spoken as a single word. The expression means that someone has to pay for what we consume, even if it doesn't cost the recipient anything. Even if something costs no money, it still costs time, energy, and opportunity. 

Given this fundamental truth of economics, it makes sense that we should want the person who consumes the lunch to pay for it. But what happens when that person is a child in school? 

It's a regular discussion, one that seems to develop every year or so as schools wrangle with costs and pursue parents of children who did not pay their bills. Most recently, a Pennsylvania school district made the news by announcing that parents who did not pay off their children's lunch debts could have their children placed in foster care. 

This prompted a public outcry against the Wyoming Valley West School Board. The CEO of Colombe Coffee, Todd Carmichael contacted the Board President, Joseph Mazur and offered the sum of $22,000 to pay off the debts of some 1,000 families. Mazur declined the offer. Mazur has not explained why. 

The school's letter mentioned to parents that they have been sending their children to school without lunch or money to pay for it, so the school has been feeding the children for free. The letter warned that failure to provide adequate nutrition for a child can result in a referral to Dependency Court where a child could be taken from their parent and placed in foster care. The letter was signed by Joseph Muth, the director of federal programs for the school district. 

First, the district is within its rights to ask for payment because, TINSTAFL. Second, the letter to parents, while seemingly harsh, did not contain any false statements. It implied a threat however, that made it sensational and headline-grabbing. It may have been intended to produce urgency on the part of the parents, but has instead come off as a PR disaster. Finally, it should be recognized that the district has been feeding the children, which is a great credit. Children should never go hungry or be humiliated in school, for any reason whatsoever, and that includes the inability to pay for their lunches. 

The problem with the letter is that it is tone deaf. It makes no allowances for the unique circumstances faced by each family. It's harsh, and it presumes to speak for the Dependency Court, without that agency being involved. 

Chances are, very few parents are leaving their children without lunch because of genuine neglect -- that is a deliberate choice to harm their children by depriving them of basic necessities. Instead, the issue for most is poverty. 

While we stigmatize poverty, it should be noted that poverty is not necessarily a moral failing or evidence of a moral deficiency. That is an outmoded Protestant idea, which has long been discredited by economists. Poverty is merely a lack of money. People may lack money for many reasons, including misfortune, such as illness or the dependency of other family members who cannot be put to work. Many of the poor do in fact work, sometimes more than one job, and more than 40 hours per week. And contrary to popular belief, the poor are not mass-consuming double soy lattes, avocado toast, and cigarettes. That is a ridiculous caricature.  

Instead, the poor are more likely crushed by rents, which can now consume as much as half of a person's income, medical bills, which are skyrocketing, and other costs during a time of stagnant wages. Wages have been flat since the 1980s, and while they have recently risen, the increase is nowhere near what is needed to lift most out of poverty. In short, the system is taking too much from too many. Worse, the economy is showing signs of weakening, which means recent gains in wages will soon be lost to macroeconomic forces. 

Conversely, food should be a priority expense, especially for children. Parents who cannot afford the monthly cafeteria bill can pack a lunch more cheaply, or teach their children how to do so. A sandwich, some chips, a fruit, a thermos of milk, and maybe a snack are all that's required to get most children through the day. The expense of these items is small, even for a family with multiple children. Parents have few excuses. 

However, it also seems there are plenty of people willing to take a dignified, no-strings approach to this issue, such as Todd Carmichael. Why his offer of $22,000 was turned down seems inexplicable if the school's goal is merely to recover costs. Now, if the school is seeking to shame parents and make them miserable, then it's makes sense, but it's cruel. This isn't what schools should be doing; it isn't their purpose. 

As a society, we should not turn children's stomachs into ideological battlegrounds. When Jesus fed the five thousand, he did not worry about who would pay. When His disciples asked, Jesus merely said, "Give them something to eat," (Matt 14:16). This laconic command still applies, especially when it comes to children. 

It is time for all of us as individuals to reexamine our priorities and to ask who pays for our moral failings. We should not concern ourselves with the moral failings of our poor neighbor so much as we should concern ourselves with our own faults. The question should not be, "Why is my neighbor always in need," but "Why are we so unwilling to give of the abundance God has given us?" (Matthew 20:1-16, Luke 6:34-35).

Adults can work. Parents need to do better. But children are often limited in what they can do for themselves. This is what makes them children. It is our duty as Christians to ensure every child has a meal, regardless of their parents' shortcomings. We also have a duty to work towards holding parents accountable, but with a spirit of charity and goodwill, not judgmental cruelty. And we have a responsibility to do our part to change a system that will leave parents in poverty and children unfed, especially when the parent works full-time; for the worker deserves his wages, (1 Timothy 5:18). But above all, let's not make children the battleground over our differences. 

Want a FREE world-class Catholic Education? Check out Catholic Online School!

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online