Eighth grade Weaverville Elementary School student Kyle Bradford was given a chicken burrito for lunch in the school cafeteria. His friend got a cheese sandwich but didn't like it. So 13-year-old Kyle did what many not hungry kids would do and shared his lunch with the friend. Kyle noted that it seemed like he couldn't get a "normal lunch." He was doing what he thought was a good deed -- helping another kid out. That act of kindness landed him in detention.
Kyle didn't deserve detention. Why are we worrying about the wrong things?
I understand that this is about safety and the potential allergies of another student. But we are talking about 13-year-olds here -- they know if they are allergic to something or not. And even so, Kyle's record shouldn't be tarnished for being kind to another. A warning would have sufficed.
The Superintendent of the Trinity Alps Unified School District that oversees Weaverville School in California said, "We have a policy that prohibits students from exchanging meals. Of course if students are concerned about other students not having enough to eat, we would definitely want to consider that, but because of safety and liability, we cannot allow students to actually exchange meals."
I get that. I agree. But detention? Seems excessive. Now if Kyle was a serial lunch sharer, then yes. If he was warned a few times not to share his lunch and he continued to do so, then I would understand. But our little Robin Hood of the cafeteria doesn't deserve to be punished for being kind, for having a heart. That isn't what we should teach our kids. Kyle, apparently, is a bit of a rebel and said he would share his lunch again despite the rules. He's just going to have to learn to be a little more sneaky about it. And make sure he's not giving peanuts to the peanut allergic.