The article analyses the attitudes of modern libertarianism (F. Hayek, R. Nozick, J. Narveson) and its predecessors (J. Locke, A. Smith) to the problem of social justice. The Market symbolizes basic premises of libertarianism: a) productivity of commerce self-interest, b) an organic identity between private property and freedom, c) conceptual individualism. Conclusion, based on those premises, is that simple, commutative (making correction) justice only demands to undo any damage to other members of human society. Following these conditions enables peaceful collaboration among people. Meanwhile, the principle of social justice demands to divide material wealth among the society members according to the criteria of their moral merits or economic rights. The libertarians argue that it is impossible in the free society due to the following: 1) people attach different significance to different merits, 2) the connection between values of payments and merits is accidental, 3) the universal scale of merits, for instance, in accordance with work, could be applied at the expense of human rights. The tribal origin of social justice is found by the libertarians. They claim that hunting for social justice in welfare states (also in Lithuania) has laid foundations for "workers' ideology"– populism. As a result of populist politics, the states suffer from corruption, wasting of the budget resources and demagogic rhetoric. The libertarians do not claim having a universal key to solve all. [to full text]
The article analyses the attitudes of modern libertarianism (F. Hayek, R. Nozick, J. Narveson) and its predecessors (J. Locke, A. Smith) to the problem of social justice. The Market symbolizes basic premises of libertarianism: a) productivity of commerce self-interest, b) an organic identity between private property and freedom, c) conceptual individualism. Conclusion, based on those premises, is that simple, commutative (making correction) justice only demands to undo any damage to other members of human society. Following these conditions enables peaceful collaboration among people. Meanwhile, the principle of social justice demands to divide material wealth among the society members according to the criteria of their moral merits or economic rights. The libertarians argue that it is impossible in the free society due to the following: 1) people attach different significance to different merits, 2) the connection between values of payments and merits is accidental, 3) the universal scale of merits, for instance, in accordance with work, could be applied at the expense of human rights. The tribal origin of social justice is found by the libertarians. They claim that hunting for social justice in welfare states (also in Lithuania) has laid foundations for "workers' ideology"– populism. As a result of populist politics, the states suffer from corruption, wasting of the budget resources and demagogic rhetoric. The libertarians do not claim having a universal key to solve all. [to full text]
Exactly 200 years ago, from 1811 to 1819, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, one of the most famous English Romantic poets, held a series of influential lectures about William Shakespeare and his plays. His presentation of "Hamlet", a play hitherto not only negatively appraised, but even viewed quite negatively by the leading critics, most notably Samuel Johnson, was especially significant. His insightful analysis helped to change the general opinion about the play, and pointed to the qualities of "Hamlet" that made it into perhaps the best known and most frequently played drama in the next 200 years. In this paper, I examine the way Coleridge was able to recognise the neglected features of Shakespeare's profound tragedy up to that point. First of all, he identified with the main protagonist of the play, the Prince of Denmark, and described the unbridgeable gap between ambitions and power of imagination on the one hand, and inability to act on the other. Like Hamlet, Coleridge had \"great, enormous, intellectual activity, and a consequent proportionate aversion to real action\" (Coleridge 2014: 345). Aware of this shortcoming, but unable to correct it, the extremely talented and educated Coleridge presented it in fascinating detail. Secondly, he used his knowledge of the most influential contemporary philosophers, especially Kant, Locke and Hobbes, and the increasingly popular psychological approach to character analysis in order to paint an internal portrait of leading characters of the play. Due to the increasingly popular trend in recent literary theory and analysis focusing on the political and material context of an art work, the universal qualities of Coleridge's intepretation of "Hamlet" that contributed to the lasting influence of his critique have been largely neglected. This article intends, therefore, to re-establish the significance of Coleridge's "Hamlet" lectures
Exactly 200 years ago, from 1811 to 1819, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, one of the most famous English Romantic poets, held a series of influential lectures about William Shakespeare and his plays. His presentation of "Hamlet", a play hitherto not only negatively appraised, but even viewed quite negatively by the leading critics, most notably Samuel Johnson, was especially significant. His insightful analysis helped to change the general opinion about the play, and pointed to the qualities of "Hamlet" that made it into perhaps the best known and most frequently played drama in the next 200 years. In this paper, I examine the way Coleridge was able to recognise the neglected features of Shakespeare's profound tragedy up to that point. First of all, he identified with the main protagonist of the play, the Prince of Denmark, and described the unbridgeable gap between ambitions and power of imagination on the one hand, and inability to act on the other. Like Hamlet, Coleridge had \"great, enormous, intellectual activity, and a consequent proportionate aversion to real action\" (Coleridge 2014: 345). Aware of this shortcoming, but unable to correct it, the extremely talented and educated Coleridge presented it in fascinating detail. Secondly, he used his knowledge of the most influential contemporary philosophers, especially Kant, Locke and Hobbes, and the increasingly popular psychological approach to character analysis in order to paint an internal portrait of leading characters of the play. Due to the increasingly popular trend in recent literary theory and analysis focusing on the political and material context of an art work, the universal qualities of Coleridge's intepretation of "Hamlet" that contributed to the lasting influence of his critique have been largely neglected. This article intends, therefore, to re-establish the significance of Coleridge's "Hamlet" lectures
Exactly 200 years ago, from 1811 to 1819, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, one of the most famous English Romantic poets, held a series of influential lectures about William Shakespeare and his plays. His presentation of "Hamlet", a play hitherto not only negatively appraised, but even viewed quite negatively by the leading critics, most notably Samuel Johnson, was especially significant. His insightful analysis helped to change the general opinion about the play, and pointed to the qualities of "Hamlet" that made it into perhaps the best known and most frequently played drama in the next 200 years. In this paper, I examine the way Coleridge was able to recognise the neglected features of Shakespeare's profound tragedy up to that point. First of all, he identified with the main protagonist of the play, the Prince of Denmark, and described the unbridgeable gap between ambitions and power of imagination on the one hand, and inability to act on the other. Like Hamlet, Coleridge had \"great, enormous, intellectual activity, and a consequent proportionate aversion to real action\" (Coleridge 2014: 345). Aware of this shortcoming, but unable to correct it, the extremely talented and educated Coleridge presented it in fascinating detail. Secondly, he used his knowledge of the most influential contemporary philosophers, especially Kant, Locke and Hobbes, and the increasingly popular psychological approach to character analysis in order to paint an internal portrait of leading characters of the play. Due to the increasingly popular trend in recent literary theory and analysis focusing on the political and material context of an art work, the universal qualities of Coleridge's intepretation of "Hamlet" that contributed to the lasting influence of his critique have been largely neglected. This article intends, therefore, to re-establish the significance of Coleridge's "Hamlet" lectures
Exactly 200 years ago, from 1811 to 1819, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, one of the most famous English Romantic poets, held a series of influential lectures about William Shakespeare and his plays. His presentation of "Hamlet", a play hitherto not only negatively appraised, but even viewed quite negatively by the leading critics, most notably Samuel Johnson, was especially significant. His insightful analysis helped to change the general opinion about the play, and pointed to the qualities of "Hamlet" that made it into perhaps the best known and most frequently played drama in the next 200 years. In this paper, I examine the way Coleridge was able to recognise the neglected features of Shakespeare's profound tragedy up to that point. First of all, he identified with the main protagonist of the play, the Prince of Denmark, and described the unbridgeable gap between ambitions and power of imagination on the one hand, and inability to act on the other. Like Hamlet, Coleridge had \"great, enormous, intellectual activity, and a consequent proportionate aversion to real action\" (Coleridge 2014: 345). Aware of this shortcoming, but unable to correct it, the extremely talented and educated Coleridge presented it in fascinating detail. Secondly, he used his knowledge of the most influential contemporary philosophers, especially Kant, Locke and Hobbes, and the increasingly popular psychological approach to character analysis in order to paint an internal portrait of leading characters of the play. Due to the increasingly popular trend in recent literary theory and analysis focusing on the political and material context of an art work, the universal qualities of Coleridge's intepretation of "Hamlet" that contributed to the lasting influence of his critique have been largely neglected. This article intends, therefore, to re-establish the significance of Coleridge's "Hamlet" lectures
The Dissertation covers the aspect of term limits of head of state and its links with the principles of national sovereignty, separation of powers and supremacy of the constitution in various forms of state government. The analysis of the concept of powers and term limits of head of state, put into the context of development of the global legal thought, uncovers progress in the scientific understanding of the concept and paves the way to the key arguments of the Paper (the right to establish term limits of authorities lies with the nation (John Locke); the term limit of authority is inversely proportional to the greatness of power (Charles Montesquieu). The study into the features and dynamics of constitutional regulation of term limits of head of state is based on the analysis of the relevant provisions in over 500 constitutions; as a result, the study establishes the development trends in the definition of term limits enshrined in the said constitutions. Another part of the study looks into the reasons behind the violations of constitutional provisions on term limits of head of state and analyses the dynamics of the said violations in monarchies and republics as forms of government, paying attention to the criterion of greatness of authority of head of state. On the basis of the present research, the author establishes the effectiveness of direct and inverse application of the rule formulated by Charles Montesquieu (the greatness of power must be compensated by the brevity of the duration). The work confirms the research assumption that vulnerability of constitutional provisions on term limits of head of state is proportional to the greatness of power. The author proposes to address this problem of constitutional regulation by using the inverse rule to the axiom of Montesquieu (the smaller the power, the less important its duration).
The Dissertation covers the aspect of term limits of head of state and its links with the principles of national sovereignty, separation of powers and supremacy of the constitution in various forms of state government. The analysis of the concept of powers and term limits of head of state, put into the context of development of the global legal thought, uncovers progress in the scientific understanding of the concept and paves the way to the key arguments of the Paper (the right to establish term limits of authorities lies with the nation (John Locke); the term limit of authority is inversely proportional to the greatness of power (Charles Montesquieu). The study into the features and dynamics of constitutional regulation of term limits of head of state is based on the analysis of the relevant provisions in over 500 constitutions; as a result, the study establishes the development trends in the definition of term limits enshrined in the said constitutions. Another part of the study looks into the reasons behind the violations of constitutional provisions on term limits of head of state and analyses the dynamics of the said violations in monarchies and republics as forms of government, paying attention to the criterion of greatness of authority of head of state. On the basis of the present research, the author establishes the effectiveness of direct and inverse application of the rule formulated by Charles Montesquieu (the greatness of power must be compensated by the brevity of the duration). The work confirms the research assumption that vulnerability of constitutional provisions on term limits of head of state is proportional to the greatness of power. The author proposes to address this problem of constitutional regulation by using the inverse rule to the axiom of Montesquieu (the smaller the power, the less important its duration).
In this work I'm proving thesis: the Berlin's distinction between two freedoms is legitimate, because the attributes of positive or negative freedom are characteristic to the past thinkers' theoretical thought. In the first part I'm setting forth the main characteristics of Berlin's two freedoms. I'm also investingating the works of Berlin, which are investigating the problems of equality, philosophy of history, pluralism and Romanticism and Enlightenment. I maintain that Berlin is proponent of negative freedom, because the freedom of individual choice is protected in his philosophy, person is comprehended as autonomous subject. Berlin is proponent of value pluralism, he maintains that equal opportunities must be ensured for all. In the second part I'm analysing the concepts of freedom of three past thinkers, I'm arguing that these concepts of freedom have the features of negative or positive freedom. I'm settling that there are certain attitudes of negative freedom which are dominating in the theory of Locke: it is because author states that all individuals are free and can freely choose the ends of life. I attribute the works of Spinoza to the tradition of positive freedom, because author states that only mind following people can be free. I state, that the system of Hegel belongs to those theories of positive freedom, according to which person can only be free if he belongs to the political community. In the third part I'm analysing the criticism to the Berlin's freedom division. Criticism is introduced in the context of the political theories of the XXth century. There are pertinacious controversy between the proponents of negative (individualists) and positive (communals) freedom. I maintain that the division of two freedoms is criticised from the tradition of individualists or communals. Individuals maintain that individual is upper value than the community and communals maintain that individual always belong to the community. I'm investigating two well-known paradigms, which denies the Berlin's division between freedoms – the proponents of "One freedom" and the proponents of "late Republicanism". I'm arguing that the theories of late republicans doesn't introduce "the third way", whereas they stay in the tradition of negative freedom. The criticism of the proponents of "One freedom" isn't motivated, because they judge about validity of division by researching everyday relations, not the history of philosophy.
In this work I'm proving thesis: the Berlin's distinction between two freedoms is legitimate, because the attributes of positive or negative freedom are characteristic to the past thinkers' theoretical thought. In the first part I'm setting forth the main characteristics of Berlin's two freedoms. I'm also investingating the works of Berlin, which are investigating the problems of equality, philosophy of history, pluralism and Romanticism and Enlightenment. I maintain that Berlin is proponent of negative freedom, because the freedom of individual choice is protected in his philosophy, person is comprehended as autonomous subject. Berlin is proponent of value pluralism, he maintains that equal opportunities must be ensured for all. In the second part I'm analysing the concepts of freedom of three past thinkers, I'm arguing that these concepts of freedom have the features of negative or positive freedom. I'm settling that there are certain attitudes of negative freedom which are dominating in the theory of Locke: it is because author states that all individuals are free and can freely choose the ends of life. I attribute the works of Spinoza to the tradition of positive freedom, because author states that only mind following people can be free. I state, that the system of Hegel belongs to those theories of positive freedom, according to which person can only be free if he belongs to the political community. In the third part I'm analysing the criticism to the Berlin's freedom division. Criticism is introduced in the context of the political theories of the XXth century. There are pertinacious controversy between the proponents of negative (individualists) and positive (communals) freedom. I maintain that the division of two freedoms is criticised from the tradition of individualists or communals. Individuals maintain that individual is upper value than the community and communals maintain that individual always belong to the community. I'm investigating two well-known paradigms, which denies the Berlin's division between freedoms – the proponents of "One freedom" and the proponents of "late Republicanism". I'm arguing that the theories of late republicans doesn't introduce "the third way", whereas they stay in the tradition of negative freedom. The criticism of the proponents of "One freedom" isn't motivated, because they judge about validity of division by researching everyday relations, not the history of philosophy.
In this work I'm proving thesis: the Berlin's distinction between two freedoms is legitimate, because the attributes of positive or negative freedom are characteristic to the past thinkers' theoretical thought. In the first part I'm setting forth the main characteristics of Berlin's two freedoms. I'm also investingating the works of Berlin, which are investigating the problems of equality, philosophy of history, pluralism and Romanticism and Enlightenment. I maintain that Berlin is proponent of negative freedom, because the freedom of individual choice is protected in his philosophy, person is comprehended as autonomous subject. Berlin is proponent of value pluralism, he maintains that equal opportunities must be ensured for all. In the second part I'm analysing the concepts of freedom of three past thinkers, I'm arguing that these concepts of freedom have the features of negative or positive freedom. I'm settling that there are certain attitudes of negative freedom which are dominating in the theory of Locke: it is because author states that all individuals are free and can freely choose the ends of life. I attribute the works of Spinoza to the tradition of positive freedom, because author states that only mind following people can be free. I state, that the system of Hegel belongs to those theories of positive freedom, according to which person can only be free if he belongs to the political community. In the third part I'm analysing the criticism to the Berlin's freedom division. Criticism is introduced in the context of the political theories of the XXth century. There are pertinacious controversy between the proponents of negative (individualists) and positive (communals) freedom. I maintain that the division of two freedoms is criticised from the tradition of individualists or communals. Individuals maintain that individual is upper value than the community and communals maintain that individual always belong to the community. I'm investigating two well-known paradigms, which denies the Berlin's division between freedoms – the proponents of "One freedom" and the proponents of "late Republicanism". I'm arguing that the theories of late republicans doesn't introduce "the third way", whereas they stay in the tradition of negative freedom. The criticism of the proponents of "One freedom" isn't motivated, because they judge about validity of division by researching everyday relations, not the history of philosophy.
In this work I'm proving thesis: the Berlin's distinction between two freedoms is legitimate, because the attributes of positive or negative freedom are characteristic to the past thinkers' theoretical thought. In the first part I'm setting forth the main characteristics of Berlin's two freedoms. I'm also investingating the works of Berlin, which are investigating the problems of equality, philosophy of history, pluralism and Romanticism and Enlightenment. I maintain that Berlin is proponent of negative freedom, because the freedom of individual choice is protected in his philosophy, person is comprehended as autonomous subject. Berlin is proponent of value pluralism, he maintains that equal opportunities must be ensured for all. In the second part I'm analysing the concepts of freedom of three past thinkers, I'm arguing that these concepts of freedom have the features of negative or positive freedom. I'm settling that there are certain attitudes of negative freedom which are dominating in the theory of Locke: it is because author states that all individuals are free and can freely choose the ends of life. I attribute the works of Spinoza to the tradition of positive freedom, because author states that only mind following people can be free. I state, that the system of Hegel belongs to those theories of positive freedom, according to which person can only be free if he belongs to the political community. In the third part I'm analysing the criticism to the Berlin's freedom division. Criticism is introduced in the context of the political theories of the XXth century. There are pertinacious controversy between the proponents of negative (individualists) and positive (communals) freedom. I maintain that the division of two freedoms is criticised from the tradition of individualists or communals. Individuals maintain that individual is upper value than the community and communals maintain that individual always belong to the community. I'm investigating two well-known paradigms, which denies the Berlin's division between freedoms – the proponents of "One freedom" and the proponents of "late Republicanism". I'm arguing that the theories of late republicans doesn't introduce "the third way", whereas they stay in the tradition of negative freedom. The criticism of the proponents of "One freedom" isn't motivated, because they judge about validity of division by researching everyday relations, not the history of philosophy.
The principle of the separation of powers envisages the development of a system whereby human rights and freedom were guaranteed alongside with the effective functioning of the government. The theory had three major stages in its development. The first stage is related to J. Locke and his theory. The second is linked to the concept of C.L. Montesque. Even if it did undergo some major corrections, it is still relevant. The third stage is related to the theory of checks and balances which emerged in the USA and filled in the gaps of the previous doctrine of the separation of powers. The third stage, which started in the 20th century could be described as that of revision. It features two main aspects: (a) theory and practice of the separation of powers is revisited and assessed anew (b) in spite of their plethora, the contents of the proposed modern theories of the separation of powers cannot deny the main principles formulated before. The work of models of the separation of powers is only possible in a democratic political regime. Therefore legal writers agree that parliamentary government model working in a democracy is appropriate to tackle all the issues relevant for any model of the separation of powers. Parliamentary republic is described by the fact that there is a certain concentration of powers at the parliament. The parliamentary model, needs to be said, has a number of checks and balances to restrain the powers of the parliament. Therefore we can not agree with the argument that the dominance of parliament denies the main principles of the mentioned doctrine and with the argument that this situation needs to be rectified by amending the text of the constitution in order to get the balance of institutional powers right. The stability of the constitution is a paramount legal value in the mentioned doctrine. Therefore we challenge the proposal to reshuffle the balance of powers because of the following reasons. First, the existing government form works and practice and helps to achieve the necessary goals. Second, the correction of the government form does not guarantee that the new model will meet our goals and will be a success. If it fails, social and political instability might become quite imminent. Third, the Constitutional court may effect certain changes on the government form by official interpretation of the Constitution. If the existing model of the separation of powers is amended by way of changing the Constitution, the jurisprudence on the topic developed previously would become irrelevant and new jurisprudence, meeting the latest amendments to the text of the Constitution, would have to be developed. Fourth, constitutional conventions are able to de facto mitigate the effect of discrepancies between the balance of powers, therefore the change to the text of the Constitution would destroy the developing system of constitutional conventions. ; Straipsnio tikslas – parodyti valdžių padalijimo teorijos kilmę, jos raidą ir šiuolaikinį požiūrį į jau klasikine tapusią teoriją. Straipsnyje pabrėžiama valdžių padalijimo teorinio ir paktinio paveldo specifika. Valdžių padalijimo problematika yra reikšminga ir šių dienų Lietuvos konstitucionalizmo raidai, nes kaip tik šiuo metu yra gana daug siūlymų organizuoti referendumus, keisti konstituciją sukuriant dvejų rūmų parlamentą, plėsti prezidento galias, įvesti renkamus teisėjus. Taigi netiesiogiai pripažįstama, jog dabartinis valdžių padalijimo modelis yra negeras, nes priešingu atveju nereikėtų jo keisti. Straipsnyje ieškoma atsakymų į klausimus: koks valdžių padalijimo modelis yra geriausias?; kokie kriterijai suteikia galimybę valdžių padalijimo modelį vertinti kokybinių kriterijų lygmeniu?; ar nuolatinis valdžių padalijimo modelio tobulinimas keičiant konstitucijas nepažeidžia konstitucijos stabilumo vertybės? Straipsnio pabaigoje formuluojamos išvados. Jose atsakoma į iškeltus klausimus, apibrėžiamas dviejų siekiamybių – konstitucijos stabilumo ir valdžių padalijimo santykis
Aim of the study. To evaluate the results of the state food safety and hygiene control during 2015 – 2019 years, to evaluate the organization of nutrition and to find out the parents' attitude about the nutrition organization in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. Objectives. 1. To evaluate the results of the state food safety and hygiene control during 2015 – 2019 years (identify the most common violations, preventive measures, sanctions) in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. 2. To analyze managers' attitudes towards nutrition organization and emerging issues in different children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. 3. To find out the parents' attitude about the organization of nutrition in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. Methods. Three different research methods were used: 1. The data in the Food Information System (FIS) were analyzed and processed in Excel in order to evaluate the results of state food safety and hygiene control. 14 institutions were evaluated. 2. A semi-structured interview was used to find out the views of the managers, the interview was transcribed and analyzed by the content method. 11 managers participated in the survey. 3. Parents' attitudes were examined in anonymous questionnaires and processed using SPSS and Excel. 893 questionnaires were distributed, 546 were filled in, response rate 61.21 %. Results. During 2015 – 2019 years 75 state food control inspections were carried out, most of which (89.3%) were planned, received 7 complaints, of which 3 (42.3%) were confirmed, imposed 11 sanctions – 8 administrative penalties and 3 "Decisions to ban products", received 51 "Deficiency plan" and 62 information that the instructions have already been executed, identified 257 violations, of which were most often recorded self-monitoring, product safety, hygiene and traceability, and 7 hygiene of premises and equipment violations in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. It was found that from the studied 12 children's educational institutions 4 of them buy the service and 8 of them organize nutrition independently. The nature of the nutrition organization does not affect the quality of the food. When food is imported from another corps, raises the problem that sometimes food is not aesthetic. When legislative changed most of the children stopped eating some of the dishes. Children's fasting is determined by habits formed in the family. It was determined that the two most difficult stages of nutrition organization are menu preparation and public procurement. Managers are in constant communication with their staff and the parents of the children they solve the problems that arise, educational activities with children are carried out in all institutions. Kindergarten managers need more funding from the municipality and additional staff to improve the nutrition organization process. Most of the respondents knew who provides food in the educational institution, however, No.7 institutions even 62.5 %. respondents indicated that meals were provided by the institution itself, although the service was purchased. The majority (93.4 %) of the surveyed respondents trust the nutrition organizers, but a statistically significant difference was observed, however, a statistically significant difference was observed that greater distrust of catering organizers is when catering is organized by a private company or person (χ2=21,716, lls=2, p<0,05). Respondents get most of their knowledge about nutrition from educators. Respondents said menus always hang in cloakroom, they read them. The menus need to be changed as not all meals are eaten by children. Not all parents knew if the institution was involved in EU-sponsored programs. Conclusion. 1. During 2015 – 2019 years 75 state food control inspections were carried out, received 7 complaints, imposed 11 sanctions, identified 257 violations. 2. Educational activities with children are held in all institutions. This encourages children to eat healthier. Parents are introduced to the problems of organizing nutrition as meetings are held. If the food is imported from another corps it is difficult to maintain the aesthetics of the food. Legislative changes have become a challenge for some institutions, because after the changes, the children stopped eating some of the dishes. Two most difficult stages of nutrition organization are menu preparation and public procurement. 3. The majority of respondents knew who provides meals in educational institutions and part of them trust the nutrition organizers. Parents get the most knowledge from educators. The menus always hang in the locker room, but the menus needed to be changed because the parents wanted a more varied and aesthetically pleasing food, and the children should get fruit, vegetables and fish more often.
Aim of the study. To evaluate the results of the state food safety and hygiene control during 2015 – 2019 years, to evaluate the organization of nutrition and to find out the parents' attitude about the nutrition organization in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. Objectives. 1. To evaluate the results of the state food safety and hygiene control during 2015 – 2019 years (identify the most common violations, preventive measures, sanctions) in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. 2. To analyze managers' attitudes towards nutrition organization and emerging issues in different children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. 3. To find out the parents' attitude about the organization of nutrition in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. Methods. Three different research methods were used: 1. The data in the Food Information System (FIS) were analyzed and processed in Excel in order to evaluate the results of state food safety and hygiene control. 14 institutions were evaluated. 2. A semi-structured interview was used to find out the views of the managers, the interview was transcribed and analyzed by the content method. 11 managers participated in the survey. 3. Parents' attitudes were examined in anonymous questionnaires and processed using SPSS and Excel. 893 questionnaires were distributed, 546 were filled in, response rate 61.21 %. Results. During 2015 – 2019 years 75 state food control inspections were carried out, most of which (89.3%) were planned, received 7 complaints, of which 3 (42.3%) were confirmed, imposed 11 sanctions – 8 administrative penalties and 3 "Decisions to ban products", received 51 "Deficiency plan" and 62 information that the instructions have already been executed, identified 257 violations, of which were most often recorded self-monitoring, product safety, hygiene and traceability, and 7 hygiene of premises and equipment violations in children's educational institutions that organize nutrition for preschool children in Kaišiadorys. It was found that from the studied 12 children's educational institutions 4 of them buy the service and 8 of them organize nutrition independently. The nature of the nutrition organization does not affect the quality of the food. When food is imported from another corps, raises the problem that sometimes food is not aesthetic. When legislative changed most of the children stopped eating some of the dishes. Children's fasting is determined by habits formed in the family. It was determined that the two most difficult stages of nutrition organization are menu preparation and public procurement. Managers are in constant communication with their staff and the parents of the children they solve the problems that arise, educational activities with children are carried out in all institutions. Kindergarten managers need more funding from the municipality and additional staff to improve the nutrition organization process. Most of the respondents knew who provides food in the educational institution, however, No.7 institutions even 62.5 %. respondents indicated that meals were provided by the institution itself, although the service was purchased. The majority (93.4 %) of the surveyed respondents trust the nutrition organizers, but a statistically significant difference was observed, however, a statistically significant difference was observed that greater distrust of catering organizers is when catering is organized by a private company or person (χ2=21,716, lls=2, p<0,05). Respondents get most of their knowledge about nutrition from educators. Respondents said menus always hang in cloakroom, they read them. The menus need to be changed as not all meals are eaten by children. Not all parents knew if the institution was involved in EU-sponsored programs. Conclusion. 1. During 2015 – 2019 years 75 state food control inspections were carried out, received 7 complaints, imposed 11 sanctions, identified 257 violations. 2. Educational activities with children are held in all institutions. This encourages children to eat healthier. Parents are introduced to the problems of organizing nutrition as meetings are held. If the food is imported from another corps it is difficult to maintain the aesthetics of the food. Legislative changes have become a challenge for some institutions, because after the changes, the children stopped eating some of the dishes. Two most difficult stages of nutrition organization are menu preparation and public procurement. 3. The majority of respondents knew who provides meals in educational institutions and part of them trust the nutrition organizers. Parents get the most knowledge from educators. The menus always hang in the locker room, but the menus needed to be changed because the parents wanted a more varied and aesthetically pleasing food, and the children should get fruit, vegetables and fish more often.
