Your Opinion: San Francisco bans Happy Meals’ toys
San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors has voted, by a veto-proof margin, to ban most of McDonald’s Happy Meals as they are now served in the restaurants.
The measure will make San Francisco the first major city in the United States to forbid restaurants from offering a free toy with meals that contain more than set levels of calories, sugar and fat.
The ordinance would also require restaurants to provide fruits and vegetables with all meals for children that come with toys.
“We’re part of a movement that is moving forward an agenda of food justice,” said Supervisor Eric Mar, who sponsored the measure. “From San Francisco to New York City, the epidemic of childhood obesity in this country is making our kids sick, particularly kids from low-income neighborhoods, at an alarming rate. It’s a survival issue and a day-to-day issue.”
After the vote, McDonald’s spokeswoman Danya Proud said, “We are extremely disappointed with today’s decision. It’s not what our customers want, nor is it something they asked for.”
-By Sharon Bernstein
What is your opinion?
I personally think it’s ridiculous. McDonald’s is a rare treat for my children and those toys are the highlight. It’s the parents’ and children’s choice what they should order. I’m proud to say 9 times out of 10, my kids order the apples and milk over the fries and soda.
Are the children eating the toys? Because the last time I check eating plastic didn’t make kids fat.
And since I devoted a post to the joys of the McDonalds Happy Meal Toy this week….I’m going to have to say this is ridiculous.
This is NOT the role of government. Period.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mile High Mamas and Stephanie S Smith, Chris Bird. Chris Bird said: RT @milehighmamas: Moms Blog: Your Opinion: San Francisco bans Happy Meals’ toys http://dpo.st/cdQHn7 [...]
Why do we even need parents? Let’s just let governments in cities and states and the federal government raise our kids. Clearly, they know best.
Parents are SO overrated when compared to a Board of Supervisors.
When I first saw this, I thought it was a news story in the Onion.
The last time I checked, *I* ultimately decide what my child eats for lunch. Yes, she gets “choices,” but they are within reason and come from a list that I create. Are they ALWAYS the most healthful option? No, but you know what? There’s nothing wrong with that. Do we make up for that in our other dietary choices and exercise? Yes.
Toys or not, kids need to know how to make good choices, and these city officials are missing the point.
I think it’s a great idea. Yes, I ultimately decide what my child eats. However, I get insanely frustrated that when we are eating on the go, very few places offer a healthy meal to children. Even at nicer restaurants, the offerings are fried chicken nuggets, hot dogs, pizza and other garbage. Fast food is no better. The only gleam of hope has been apple fries/slices. But the entrees need to better. Toys just make kids want the meals, even though it’s high calories and fat. Take out the fat and calories, bring back the toys and kids will suddenly want the healthier meals. I like it, and wish it was further reaching than San Fran.
If a parent can’t stand her ground against a 5-year-old’s desire for a cheap action figure with a side of fries, there is no hope.
If the food choices at restaurants are so abhorrent, my suggestions are to plan ahead, scale back the outside obligations (so you’ll be home at mealtimes), take your own food in a cooler when you are out and about, or order something off the adult menu that meets your definition of healthy and box up the remainder for later. There is no law that states a kid under 12 MUST order from a kid’s menu.
You cannot legislate healthy eating. About 80 years ago, the government tried to legislate sobriety. How’d that work out…?
I think this is awesome! I don’t have kids yet, but thankfully I’m educated enough to know what is healthy for them one day. However, many people I know are not in social circles or don’t have the education to understand why this food is such a big deal, and their kids may call the shots or whine enough until they give in. Go San Fran!
Sounds ridiculous to me. If a kid wants a happy meal, he/she wants a happy meal, toy or not. My kids get them occasionally because they want the chicken mcnuggets.
Oh for crying out loud.. I say parents hit some Dollar Stores then head to San Fran McD’s and hand kids toys as they eat…
I am so glad to see all these posts that say how ridiculous this is!
I don’t understand why the government thinks they can legislate good health. Parents do need to take responsibility for what their kids eat. Even without the toys, there are a lot of kids who would think it’s a treat to get a happy meal.
Wait, let me check my address. Sheesh, it still SAYS I live in the USA, land of the free. I’m going to steer my tourism dollars clear of San Francisco, though, which is clearly NOT in the USA!
1. Do they realize that McDonald’s is on Health.com’s list of America’s Top 10 Healthiest Fast Food Restaurants BECAUSE they offer things like apple dippers and low-fat milk as an alternative to fries and sodas? Without the toy maybe kids will be less insistent on going there for a happy meal, and will start going to other, less-healthy fast food restaurants!
2. When our kids were small, McDonald’s used to sell the toys separately, even if you didn’t get a happy meal (for $1.00, I think), so you could get a drink and a toy for $1.00 extra. I assume they still do so. I have a pricing suggestion for McDonald’s in SanFrancisco:
Happy meal (without toy): $2.00 (or whatever a happy meal costs)
Toy: $1.00
Special combo deal: buy any entree (including a happy meal), purchase a toy for only $.01 more.
3. “an agenda of food justice”? Excuse me? What does THAT fall under in the constitution?
4. As a sign of solidarity, I’m going to make McDonald’s my exclusive fast-food stop. (Started with breakfast this morning – coffee and a fruit-and-yogurt parfait. Yummy!)
5. I hope McDonald’s takes the commies to court.
Unbelievable. This country gets more and more whacked out every day…
Regarding one of the earlier posts – I’m glad some people are educated enough to manage their own (future) kids. That’s the point, after all, isn’t it? It is also very caring of that person to support a law that, while it has no impact on her personally, will ensure that the poor uneducated masses are not manipulated by their fat-craving children. We can only pray that they will ban additional dangerous things – sports that could cause injury, playing outside in sub-zero temperatures, reading books with improper messages, etc. Go San Fran!
The Pentagon recently said that obesity is a danger to our national security. All this law does is says to people, if you are unable to take responsibility for yourself, are dragging yourself and your family into a long and costly health and social crisis, ultimately negating your productivity and personal responsibility, and your parents are unwilling or unable to provide real nutrition in your diets, then you will be unable to poison yourselves at certain establishments.
If it is OK to take into and do to your body whatever you want, then all drugs and abortions should be legal, as well as doctor assisted suicides, when the Happy turns to irretrievably Sad.
Anybody but me notice that the only poster on here who is supporting this measure is NOT a parent? I get so tired of people who have no children that think they \”know\” what parents and children \”should\” do…apparently, in Lauren\’s world, only the uneducated recluse, who has no \”social circles\” (whatever that means) is eating at McDonald\’s. Maybe Lauren will spend all of her time growing her own fruits and vegetables and preventing her future children from being exposed to food that\’s a \”big deal\” when she becomes a parent…more likely, she will become one of those billions of customers that McDonald\’s has, and will be buying a \”happy meal\” herself in a few years.
California (& people without kids): setting the bar for government control of every aspect of your life.
You people above are the minority – the parents who care about what their children eat. For the majority, this ban is needed.
kaz – This ban is NEEDED? They’ve told a restaurant, a business, what they can and cannot sell. Would you feel any differently if McDonald’s was allowed to put toys in happy meals, but San Fran banned you from buying them? How about if they banned you from buying anything with caffeine in it (or choose any product that you like)? It’s really all the same. I haven’t seen one comment that says “come on, fries and soda are great for kids!” The complaint is, that if a parent/guardian does not have enough control over a happy-meal-aged kid to tell them that they have to get apple dippers and milk (if that is the way they feel), it is not the city’s job to try to enforce this. What will they do next, ban colorful logos and cartoon characters from breakfast cereals that have too much sugar, or not enough fiber, or yada yada yada…? People, teach your kids to be smart consumers.