School Denies Lunch to Students

By: Assocaited Press
By: Assocaited Press
Massachusetts school district denies lunch to students becuase they didn

Side salads await the students of Eastside Elementary School in Clinton, Miss., Wednesday, Sept. 12, 2012. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis)

School officials say as many as 25 students at a Massachusetts school were denied lunch this week because they either could not pay or their pre-paid accounts did not contain enough money.

Outraged parents say some students at Coelho Middle School in Attleboro cried when they were told by a worker they could not eat on Tuesday.

Superintendent Pia Durkin tells The Sun Chronicle that a worker for the contractor that provides lunch service at city schools has been suspended. She has also scheduled a meeting with officials at the company, Whitson's.

Meanwhile, workers have been told not to deny any child a meal.

Holly Von Seggern, vice president for marketing and community relations for Whitson's, says the company apologizes and is investigating.

You must be logged in to post comments.

Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by Pete Location: Lansing on Apr 17, 2013 at 02:39 AM
    Packing a lunch is cheaper than buying lunch at school if money is a problem. In fact, my kids liked it because they could eat faster and get outside. Thinking others are responsible to feed, clothe, transport etc your kids is wrong. Consider the financial responsibilities before you procreate. Besides, now that services are now being contracted out to for-profit companies, why does anyone think they should dip into their pocket to feed your kids instead of their ow?
  • by someone's grama Location: Howell on Apr 15, 2013 at 04:07 AM
    I guess another, maybe better, way to make sure your kids eat lunch would be to pack their lunches every day! Is this outdated or something? Buying lunch was a treat for many kids rather than the norm. There wasn't always extra money to send to school for lunch, but there was always food in the house to pack something they would eat. Maybe parents should take more responsibility about feeding their kids by actually feeding them and not just giving them money. As one parent stated, the money often doesn't make it to school, sometimes the kids "forget" and it stays in their bags. There are always the parents who don't look in the bags everyday to see what's there either. Please, don't start in about how "busy" parents don't have time to check their kids' bags for notes, money, etc.! I worked too, but my kids were priority.
  • by Name Location: Location on Apr 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM
    V, yes it would. My kids would not have asked, nor would they have said anything. They would have went without. Kids go without a meal all the time by choice, outside playing, don't like whats being served, can't put down a vidio game. I have never met an American child that is literally starving. I teach my children not to be a burden on to others.
  • by V Location: GL on Apr 12, 2013 at 07:30 AM
    Name, yes it is the responsibility of the parents. I am sure your mom or dad forgot once or twice to send lunch money. I have sent cash for my kid to turn in only to find out 2 weeks later, after getting a letter from food service, that she never turned in the money, she had 3 envelopes stuffed in the bottom of her bag. My point is that we don't need the govt. setting birthing restrictions. As you pointed out, the spending is already out of control. This could have been handled much differently. The food services co./school district had no reason to refuse meals to these kids. I do hope that you are not suggesting that we should not feed children over what could have been a mistake. Would your postion be the same if it was your kid that was being refused lunch?
  • by V Location: GL on Apr 12, 2013 at 05:41 AM
    Taxpayer, all the activities you listed can kill others if not performed with caution. We start talking to/educating 14yrs on how to drive, but we will never talk to our kids about sex. we let the schools do it, and can see how that is going. You are right, we are heading for a sad future if things don't change. Who is to blame? We the parents. Rather than actually raising our children, we throw them in front of the TV, computer, Tablet, Nintendo, etc. Then we send them to school and sit them in front of teachers that don't have much more sense than a High School student. Kids are not the reason there is a change in american, adults are. When things go wrong we are so quick to blame everything/everyone else but ourselves, and call for government intervention while we sit back in disbelief at how everything went wrong. It takes a village, the only problem is not many adults want to be a part of that village. The schools can front a few lunches without have to close the doors. The economic stability of a household can change in an instant. Parents may forget to log on and make a deposit, maybe they thought the other parent did this already that day. We just don't know. This is a problem that will never be solved, and if this is the worst a community experiences, they are better off than the rest of us. What we don't need is more government.
  • by Name Location: Location on Apr 12, 2013 at 04:21 AM
    V, I get your point. Although the otherside of this is, is it not the parents responsibility to feed their children? If they forget or fail to do so, it is not the Food Service Co. problem. The government(Fed.,State,Local)now spends(50K) more per household than the average median household income(49K). It now pays better to stay at home and not work, do you think people could atleast feed their own kids!?!?!?
  • by Taxpayer Location: Michigan on Apr 11, 2013 at 05:24 PM
    V, we need to have specific qualifications to hunt, drive a boat, and drive a car. Isn't raising a child more important than any of these. Yet, we let anyone who can have sex bring children into the world and dump the work of raising them on society. Something is wrong with this picture. Nuclear families are not the norm anymore. Our society is headed for a sad future if things don't change.
  • by V Location: GL on Apr 11, 2013 at 08:48 AM
    That's right taxpayer, lets let the government control one more aspect of life. I like the idea of people being told what they can and cannot do by a group of 500 in D.C. instead of PARENTS TEACHING THEIR YOUNG ADULTS the risks, hardships, and responsibilities having children comes with. Besides, some of these parents may not have been in financial hardhsip when they had children. So, lets say that in your futuristic utopia we do have to prove our economic worthiness to have children. A parent looses a job, and the two parents can no longer meet the minimum requirements to have a child so are you going to take away the kid(s) they already have?
  • by Taxpayer Location: Michigan on Apr 10, 2013 at 09:18 PM
    Right on Leroy! People should need to prove that they can provide for a child before they have the right to create one. So there you are ACLU.
  • by Leroy Location: Okemos on Apr 9, 2013 at 01:37 PM
    If you can feed them, don't breed them.
  • Page:
WILX 500 American Road Lansing, MI 48911 517-393-0110
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 201431031 -
Gray Television, Inc.