This school year in Rhode Island, numerous hot lunches were snatched from children’s hands and tossed into the trash.
The discarded warm meals were typically swapped for two slices of bread with a cold piece of cheese, plus fruit, vegetables and a carton of milk while classmates watched.
The spectacle of removing hot meals and replacing them with cold cheese sandwiches had an obvious aim: to compel parents to settle their child’s low or negative lunch account balances.
While that unfolded in Rhode Island, a cafeteria worker at an elementary school in Pennsylvania resigned over similar measures. She told The Washington Post she couldn’t stand to meet the eyes of another hungry child as she confiscated his lunch because the family had no money to pay.
And those incidents aren’t unique. In Alabama, students were sent home marked with stamps that read “I Need Lunch Money” on their arms. In 2013, then-Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia suggested that low-income children who would otherwise receive free school lunch might “maybe sweep the floor of the cafeteria” to teach them that there’s “no such thing as a free lunch.”
School districts nationwide use a range of tactics to encourage parents to keep student lunch accounts current. Critics call these tactics “lunch shaming.”
Why Schools Resort to Lunch Shaming
It’s obvious that these policies humiliate children. But according to the School Nutrition Association — a nonprofit representing school nutrition professionals — most cafeterias that use such measures don’t intend to harm students (SNA statement).
Rather, the motivation is often fiscal: districts are trying to keep their meal programs solvent.
While the federal government covers meals for children enrolled in free lunch programs, those federal dollars don’t pay for meals for children who don’t qualify for free lunch yet whose families still can’t afford to cover the cost. School officials must figure out how to absorb that expense.
Unpaid lunch tabs are a significant financial burden.
The SNA reports that about 75% of schools nationwide finished the 2015–16 school year with unpaid student meal debt, a rise from 70.8% the year before.
“Unfortunately, for under-funded school meal programs, unpaid school meal debt can become a critical problem that can impact the quality of meals for all students,” the SNA said.
The SNA encourages parents and schools to collaborate on strategies to decrease that debt.
To ease the financial strain on both districts and families, people around the country — from Virginia to Portland — have donated or launched GoFundMe campaigns to help cover school lunch debt for students in their communities.
Even celebrities have pitched in: John Legend recently donated $5,000 to help pay off unpaid lunch balances in Seattle.
Still, districts nationwide will need far more resources to eliminate all unpaid balances. That means finding workable solutions with parents who might be able to contribute.
How Schools Can Handle the Debt
A recent USDA mandate requires districts to attempt to collect unpaid lunch debt and states that students who owe money at the end of one school year may still be responsible for that debt at the start of the next school year.
The USDA guidance gives districts latitude to create policies that fit their communities, and while it doesn’t condone leaving children hungry, it does allow for alternative approaches like those used in Rhode Island.
Whether a state follows Rhode Island’s example or takes the route that New Mexico has adopted — banning lunch shaming — the USDA is asking every district to have a written policy in place for the 2017–2018 school year.
In Pinellas County, Florida — where Savinly’s headquarters is based — more than half of students qualify for free or reduced-price meals. Our local district has chosen an approach more like New Mexico’s, deciding not to single out students whose families can’t pay.
“The policy of Pinellas County Schools is to never take away a tray from a student if he or she does not have adequate funds to pay for their school meal,” said Lisa Wolf, spokeswoman for Pinellas County Schools. “In addition, students without adequate funds are not given a lesser meal. They are allowed to take and eat the same full meal provided to all students.”
Each school maintains a principal’s account to cover meals when children can’t pay; those accounts are supported by local PTAs and other private donors.
“Students who regularly borrow from the principal’s account are politely encouraged to bring money, their parents are contacted or if needed, a free- and reduced-price meal application is submitted on the behalf of the student,” Wolf added. “Food service managers and school administrators work closely together to monitor the principal’s account and to work with parents of students who routinely cannot pay for their lunch.”
Some districts also publicize community resources and cheap school lunch ideas that can help families stretch their budgets and avoid future debt.
The Emotional Toll of Lunch Shaming
Pinellas County’s approach protects students from being singled out and humiliated, which is exactly what districts should strive for, said James Spratt, a child psychologist who has worked with Florida children for more than two decades.
Practices that shame students can harm behavior both immediately and over the long term, Spratt said.
“I don’t think the kids are aware of the fact that their parents don’t have money,” Spratt explained. “If they are denied lunch, (the children will think) it must be something that they did. They won’t necessarily say that the school did a bad job, the school is denying this.”
“(The child will think) it must be that I did something wrong. That’s why I’m not getting to have my lunch,” he added.
Spratt, who works with families near Orlando, noted that while young children may not grasp the reason their meals are taken away, the negative effects intensify as children reach middle and high school.
“The older the child, the more likely that they are going to feel uncomfortable,” Spratt said. “They don’t like to stand out, they don’t like to seem different from their friends, and they don’t react in the most positive ways when they are singled out.”
Repeated humiliation can lead to ongoing problems: acting out or falling behind in school could become persistent patterns.
Yet the USDA’s guidance leaves decisions about balancing budgets and handling families who owe money to local districts.
That means lunch shaming could move from informal customs to written policies in some districts around the country.
Ariana Morales is a staff writer at Savinly. She grew up using free and reduced-price lunch programs.
