Toy ban
Liz Atwood talks about San Francisco's efforts to ban toys in kids meals and similar offerings in this week's Tween Tuesday:
Somewhere in my basement is a box of little toys that my kids got with kids' meals at fast-food restaurants over the years. I'm sure that many times it was the toy, not the food, that my kids wanted when I plunked down my money at McDonald’s or Burger King or Taco Bell.
But tonight, the leaders in San Francisco will vote on whether to outlaw the practice of putting prizes in kids’ meals that are not nutritious. The measure passed on a preliminary vote last week and comes up for a final vote tonight. It not only would forbid restaurants from offering a free toy with meals that contain more than set levels of calories, sugar and fat, but also require restaurants to provide fruits and vegetables with all meals for children that come with toys.
Certainly, McDonald's and the other restaurants have responded to criticism and already offer choices of apple wedges, milk and other nutritious food with the kids' meals. Still, on those rare occasions we eat at a fast-food restaurant, my kids want the sodas and the french fries. And as they’ve gotten older, the toy doesn’t hold the allure it once did. My 9-year-old these days prefers a Big Mac to a Happy Meal.
What do you think about the San Francisco effort to ban the toys from unhealthful kids' meals? Is it positive step toward fighting childhood obesity or more meddling in the free enterprise system?
Comments
This ban doesn't make sense to me, but maybe it's just my experience with my children. My kids don't want the happy meal for the toy. They like the treat of the cheeseburger, fries and sprite. 50% of the time, the toy is not interesting to them and gets ignored.
But we aren't worried about obesity either. Both kids eat healthy meals, don't actually eat a lot, and love to run and be active.
One of the big problems with childhood obesity is children who eat these meals more than once a week. When these meals are a regular dinner item, that's bad, and some parents without a lot of time turn to them (also because they are relatively cheap). We need to make sure kids love their fruits and veggies, not just french fries.
Posted by: MadCow | November 9, 2010 8:33 AM
I've always disliked the idea of luring kids into fast-food places with the promise of free toys. We actually joke with our two young boys that the food in those places is so bad they have to give away toys to get children to eat it.
I obviously don't believe the food is that bad (I have a guilty trip into a fast-food restaurant once or twice a month!), but as far as my five- and eight-year old sons are concerned, I just don't want them getting into the fast-food habit.
Banning these toys is probably a good thing in that regard. Some might see it as an infringement on free enterprise, but it is a pretty cynical ploy to start with.
Posted by: David Smith | November 9, 2010 8:53 AM
Instead of trying to assign the blame to McDonalds place it where it belongs on the parents. Just becasue a child wants something doesn't mean a parent has to pruchase it. True the toys are a ploy, but it's the parents not the kids who make the final decison,
Posted by: rino | November 9, 2010 2:50 PM
I have 2 young children and we eat at McDonalds occasionally. McDonald's job is to make money not raise our children. I would prefer that the government leave the raising of my children to my wife and I. McDonald's is fine in moderation. If we need the governement to tell us what we should and shouldn't feed our kids then we are in trouble.
Posted by: Ben | November 9, 2010 3:39 PM
Raising kids is hard, thank goodness the government is helping me. Hopefully they can start banning all the bad things for me so I don't have to make any decisions on my own.
We are living in an increasingly intrusive Nanny-state in America, and everyone just sits back and lets it happen. Limiting consumer choice is never a good idea. If I want to buy my kids Happy Meals with a toy, that's my choice.
Hopefully McDonalds, Burger King, Subway, etc will all sue to stop this overstep of government.
Posted by: jswo | November 10, 2010 10:30 AM
The San Francisco lifestyle is responsible for more health issues then childhood obesity, but you don't see them doing anything about that!
Posted by: John | November 10, 2010 11:57 AM
I understand that the happy meal is a marketing effort in order to lure kids with toys in their meals.
But the kids have parents to take them. In the end it should be the parents decision what to allow their child to eat, not the government.
If i want to take my child to a fast food joint and get a meal with a toy then so be it, thats my choice and responsibility
Posted by: B.E.Hellister | November 10, 2010 5:03 PM
Yes, this ban will definitely protect children! Oh, yes....
Now children will be able to go outside and play without worrying about some pedophile coming near them.
They will be able to go on the computer without worrying that some predator is posing as another child!
They will be able to turn on the television without witnessing violence and blatant sex.
They will be able to go the movies without having to see a total disregard for human life because everyone is killed in the movie, except Angelina Jolie, who won't allow her own children to watch her movies!
They won't have to worry about the kid that mimics that violence behavior by bullying them in school.
They will be able to have normal school experiences without worrying that they have to have a 4.0 plus to get into pre-school, elementary, middle and high school.
They won't have to have a 4.0 plus a full resume of volunteer work, travel sports teams, and curing major diseases on weekends to get into college.
Yes, this ridiculous ban is going to go a long way to curing the ailments and stresses of childhood!
Maybe the San Francisco city council should take time to look at the real risks and stresses in childhood instead of wasting time on something so frivolous!
Posted by: GK | November 10, 2010 7:09 PM