School bans students from talking

[cassiesmom]

School bans students from talking

"You heard it right the Saint Rose of Lima in Warwick, Rhode Island has banned talking… during lunch that is "

"This new rule was brought into being after 3 recent choking incidents in the school cafeteria."

"In a letter to parents the school says 'all students must remain silent during lunch. Students who don’t follow the policy will receive a lunch detention.'"

"And you thought you had it tough in school."

verystrangenetwork.com

[BC_MoM]

Wow.. um. I'm speechless?

[caseysmom]

Wow.. um. I'm speechless?

Good one...I laughed so hard I almost choked

[momoffuzzyfaces]

"This new rule was brought into being after 3 recent choking incidents in the school cafeteria."

I'm surprised they didn't ban eating!!!

[lizbud]

Was this grade school or high school? Most HS students probably
think it's more important to talk then eat.Or eat while talking.

[Karen]

It is a Roman Catholic elementary school.

[cassiesmom]

My niece just finished 9th grade this past June. She had a lunch period of about 35 minutes, but she wasn't always able to eat because she often had somewhere else to be during all or part of her lunch period. (Speak with a teacher, meeting about an extra-curricular activity, pick up a book from the library, that sort of thing.) I can see where kids scarfing down their lunches quickly and chattering would lead to choking incidents. I think that's true in our office, too - we're under such pressure to get a high volume of work completed that we tend to eat on the fly and hurry back to our cubicles. Maybe not in other offices, though. I did have a previous job where lunch was 45 minutes in length and staff were encouraged to take their full lunch.

[Muddy4paws]

My niece just finished 9th grade this past June. She had a lunch period of about 35 minutes, but she wasn't always able to eat because she often had somewhere else to be during all or part of her lunch period. (Speak with a teacher, meeting about an extra-curricular activity, pick up a book from the library, that sort of thing.) I can see where kids scarfing down their lunches quickly and chattering would lead to choking incidents. I think that's true in our office, too - we're under such pressure to get a high volume of work completed that we tend to eat on the fly and hurry back to our cubicles. Maybe not in other offices, though. I did have a previous job where lunch was 45 minutes in length and staff were encouraged to take their full lunch.

I know how your niece felt! We had a 45 minute break to get the whole school in a canteen that sits about 200 people. We were always rushed in and out!

[crow_noir]

YIKES!!! I think that is a bit overboard.

John Stossel did a segment on Are we bring too safe? I wonder if anybody wrote in about this incident.

[crow_noir]

OK, if you find an article that actually explains it all it's not so bad. This is temporary.

http://wbztv.com/watercooler/local_story_025132201.html

Jan 25, 2007 5:59 pm US/Eastern
Choking Incidents Prompt Silent Lunch At School

(AP) WARWICK, R.I. The chapel isn't the only place where silence is expected at one Rhode Island Catholic school.

The St. Rose of Lima School instituted new lunch rules this week that require students to remain silent during lunch. The move comes after three recent choking incidents in the school cafeteria.

All three students are fine, but school Principal Jeannine Fuller said in a letter to parents: "If the lunch room is loud we cannot hear if a child is choking."

The letter laid out a laundry list of new lunchtime rules, including "All students must remain silent," "No child out of their seat," and "One trip to the trash can." Any child who breaks the rules will be put in lunch detention the following day, Fuller's letter said.

Christine Lamoureux, whose 12-year-old is a sixth-grader at the school, said she respects the safety issue, but thinks it's a bad idea.

"I don't think that they should have silent lunch. They are silent all day," she said. "They have to get some type of release."

She said students should be allowed to have quiet conversation while eating.

But mother Thina Paone doesn't mind the silent lunches.

"It can be very crazy (in the cafeteria)," said Paone, 33, who picked up her son Joey, 6, at the suburban school south of Providence on Thursday afternoon.

She said her son understands the policy and hasn't had trouble obeying the new rules.

"Whenever the teacher explains something to him he takes it seriously," she said.

Lori Healey, a fourth grade teacher whose son is a third-grader at the school, said "silent lunch" means students can whisper. It's a safety measure, she said, and it means they're not choking on their food.

"They know it's not for punishment," she said, "It's for safety, and they'll be the first ones to tell you."

Stacey Wildenhain, 40, a teacher's assistant at the school, said her 7-year-old second-grade son thinks the policy is no big deal. She said he told her that: "The sooner we eat, the sooner we can get out to play."

Wildenhain said she wishes more attention were paid to the two teachers who performed the Heimlich maneuver on choking students.

Fuller did not immediately return a call seeking comment, but Michael Guilfoyle, spokesman for the Diocese of Providence, described the silence rule as a temporary safety measure at the school, which has more than 200 students from kindergarten through eighth grade.

He said the school doesn't expect complete silence but enough quiet to keep students safe.

Still, first-grader Joey said the school expected him to be quiet during his 20-minute lunch. And while he said he's OK with the changes, some of his classmates were having trouble obeying the rules.

Amanda Karhuse, of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, a group for middle-level and high school principals, said students shouldn't be running wild during lunch, but they also shouldn't have to be silent.

"It seems kind of ridiculous in our opinion," she said. "Kids need that social time, and they just need time to be kids at that age."

Kara Casali, who has a 6-year-old son at the school, said she got the letter this week, and understands the school's motive. But she thinks it will be tough to enforce.

"I can't imagine having a silent lunch," she said.

(© 2007 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

[Catlady711]

I'm sorry but I have a real problem with the "fear of any type of injury" mentality.

I mean c'mon, what's next?.......If they bite their tongue while eating do we remove all their teeth? If they stub their toes do we require everyone to wear steel toed boots? If they poke themselves with a rough fingernail do we have their fingernails removed? If they scratch a mosquito bite until it bleeds do we forbid outside play and scratching? If they bump their heads on a desk do we ban having a desk? If they trip over their shoelaces do we ban walking?

I grew up riding a bicycle without a helmet (never hit my head, but did once knock loose my front teeth which were saved and still healthy to this day) I learned that falling hurts and to be more careful.

I grew up rollerskating on the sidewalk without elbow/knee pads (I skinned myself up a few times, nothing serious) I learned that falling hurts and to be more careful.

I grew up playing on a playground that had gravel not woodchips (I fell a few times, got some gravel stuck in my skin a couple times, nothing serious) I learned not to do crazy stunts because falling hurts and had to be more careful.

I've stubbed my toes, skinned my legs/arms, got poked in the eye with a pencil eraser once (accidentally dropped my book on it and it flipped up to hit me in the eye, hurt for a few days then was fine), twisted my ankle once, and bonked my head a few times. I survived without any later consequences.

I was raised in a household that did NOT have outlet covers without major incidents. I was raised by a single mom in a household without locks on the cupbords (NEVER did I play with any cleaners or anything in the cupboards). I was raised without baby gates, baby monitors, and padded cribs. My mom made sure to keep a very close watch on me and made sure that anyone babysitting me did the same.

Given how I, and many of my peers, were raised and ALL survived without major incidents, I have a hard time with this "fear of any type of injury" mentality. Sometimes a kid kinda has to get a little banged up to learn things from riding a bike to learning that the stove is hot don't touch it.

Many may not agree, but that's my opinion anyways.

[crow_noir]

*round of applause*

Your speech makes up a bit for me not hearing John S. rant about this.

Thank you.

I'm sorry but I have a real problem with the "fear of any type of injury" mentality.

I mean c'mon, what's next?.......If they bite their tongue while eating do we remove all their teeth? If they stub their toes do we require everyone to wear steel toed boots? If they poke themselves with a rough fingernail do we have their fingernails removed? If they scratch a mosquito bite until it bleeds do we forbid outside play and scratching? If they bump their heads on a desk do we ban having a desk? If they trip over their shoelaces do we ban walking?

I grew up riding a bicycle without a helmet (never hit my head, but did once knock loose my front teeth which were saved and still healthy to this day) I learned that falling hurts and to be more careful.

I grew up rollerskating on the sidewalk without elbow/knee pads (I skinned myself up a few times, nothing serious) I learned that falling hurts and to be more careful.

I grew up playing on a playground that had gravel not woodchips (I fell a few times, got some gravel stuck in my skin a couple times, nothing serious) I learned not to do crazy stunts because falling hurts and had to be more careful.

I've stubbed my toes, skinned my legs/arms, got poked in the eye with a pencil eraser once (accidentally dropped my book on it and it flipped up to hit me in the eye, hurt for a few days then was fine), twisted my ankle once, and bonked my head a few times. I survived without any later consequences.

I was raised in a household that did NOT have outlet covers without major incidents. I was raised by a single mom in a household without locks on the cupbords (NEVER did I play with any cleaners or anything in the cupboards). I was raised without baby gates, baby monitors, and padded cribs. My mom made sure to keep a very close watch on me and made sure that anyone babysitting me did the same.

Given how I, and many of my peers, were raised and ALL survived without major incidents, I have a hard time with this "fear of any type of injury" mentality. Sometimes a kid kinda has to get a little banged up to learn things from riding a bike to learning that the stove is hot don't touch it.

Many may not agree, but that's my opinion anyways.

[Catlady711]

*round of applause*

Your speech makes up a bit for me not hearing John S. rant about this.

Thank you.

Who's John S.?