Recently, the city of San Francisco enacted a ban placing toys inside unhealthy happy meals and folks are outraged.
Tony Hicks wrote an angry column blasting the SF City Council for quote ‘ betraying me and any other parent for daring to believe that we know what is right for our kids’.
He then had the gall to speak on the behalf of low-income parents who can only afford to buy happy meals for their kids.
I would like to correct an implied misconception. The SF City Council is not saying that parents can’t take their kids to Mc Donalds. They aren’t telling a parent what they can or cannot do. What they are trying to do is not reward unhealthy eating. Mc Donalds is perfectly within their right to place the toys in healthier food options. And believe it or not- they DO have healthier food options. You can buy a happy meal with low-fat milk instead of soda or get apple slices instead of french fries. I am pretty sure with a little innovation and ingenuity they can even provide healthier sandwich options too. This ban might actually spur such creative thinking.
Shocking..but it’s possible!
The toy DOES matter. Parents can buy food at Mc Donalds from the dollar menu if being frugal was the only issue. No, the kid wants the toy. Half the time the kid doesn’t even eat the meal. They want what Ronald Mc Donald entices them with; the latest movie promotional product or other novelty item the Happy Meal has to offer.
As for low-income parents, if they had the option of buying a healthier meal for their child at an affordable price, don’t you think they would jump at the chance?
Wouldn’t any parent for that matter? Do you think parents actually want to clog their kid’s arteries and put their kids at risk for obesity or other chronic diseases?
Oh I GET IT…Tony Hicks just wants to make sure you have the right to do so. SMDH