At least one previous poster has compared peanut bans to smoking bans. The comparison is not accurate, since there is no such thing as passive peanut eating. Or is there? If a kid is too young to not be able to understand why s/he can’t share food, does that make him/her a passive victim?
One could say that the kid will be rejected by his peers if s/he refuses their sandwiches. But would those same peers suddenly accept the student once the authorities banned peanuts for one kid? No. And forget anonymity - we’re talking about kids here. Kids are smart. Kids are human. They talk to each other. Word gets around. So does speculation. (And that doesn’t even get to the fact that authorities banning something makes it a cool thing to do.)
So the poor kid is caught either way. The kid has to learn to say no. Why not? We expect kids to say no to other things, don’t we? Can’t other parents be trusted to tell their kids not to give their peanut butter sandwiches to other kids? Can’t other kids be expected to listen? We’ve expected parents to talk to their kids about other life-and-death issues.
I agree that most people don’t understand that nut allergies exist (I didnt till I met someone at work with a very bad one). Education is required to tell them this. The purpose of school is education. I for one would prefer that one lesson that schools do not teach is that problems are solved by blanket rules instead of understanding.
I am allergic to peanuts – and can’t understand why if we KNOW there’s children out there who might die if they eat peanuts that this is a topic for debate. Children readily exchange food at lunch, and it’s not worth the risk. I seriously doubt an allergic child would be shunned by their peers for not eating peanuts, by the way – kids have all kinds of odd quirks when it comes to food, just as we do as adults. It will not stunt your child’s growth if they don’t take food containing peanuts to school. Hell, peanut butter isn’t even that healthy, is it? High calorie, high fat.
Seems like a bit of a strech. Kids can be mean and nasty, but I can’t really imagine someone being rejected by their peers just because he wont eat other people’s lunches.
As others have pointed out this goes beyond peanut butter, doesn’t it? Other parents shouldn’t be burdened with making sure their child’s lunch is peanut free. Peanuts, and other nuts, are used in all sorts of products. What happens if a parent unknowingly gives their kid a food product that contains a nut byproduct?
Let’s say a parent unkowningly gives his kid chips that were fried in peanut oil. Allergic boy has a reaction either because of the particles in the air, he traded a cupcake for some chips, or chip boy didn’t wash his hands well enough after class. Is the school or the parents of chip boy liable for any harm to allergic boy?
When being “deprived” of a PBJ or other peanut-laden food means having your belongings searched and the offending food taken away as if it’s evil, that’s a bad thing.
As I said in the Pit thread, I would not be a bit surprised if this triggers an eating disorder in at least one other kid. It’s draconian, and the way it’s being described, it’s treating the other students as if they are criminals. (Yes, Carnick, I saw your post, but the OP-linked article did say “confiscated”. You can’t take someone’s food away from them and expect them not to react.)
Now, I have a few questions about Epi-Pens.
—How much do they cost?
—Are they complicated to use? Do they have instructions attached to them somehow, that are easy to follow, even if you’re having a panic attack because you’ve never seen a severe allergic reaction before? (“You” meaning someone other than the person having the SAR, if they’re not in a condition to give their own shot.)
—How long does it take to recover from an allergic reaction that was severe enough to need an Epi-Pen?
I’m asking these questions because I’m sensing that this is not a matter of “Oh, just use an Epi-Pen!” With medical conditions like this, you can’t necessarily “just” do anything. I tell people that if I have a seizure, they should turn my head to the side so I won’t choke, but I don’t say “just”; I add the disclaimer that it may be a job to get hold of my head in the first place, in order to do that.
(And I also make sure to tell them that they should not, under any circumstances, try to put something in my mouth to “hold my tongue down”. If my jaw locks up on that “something”…well, if it’s a pen or pencil, I may get ink or lead poisoning. If it’s a wooden chopstick, I may get splinters in my mouth. And if it’s the other person’s finger, they may very well join Frodo in the Brotherhood of the Nine-Fingered. Don’t get anywhere near a person’s mouth while they’re having a seizure.)
I don’t know that a lot of people were saying it’s “reasonable”. I think what most are saying is that if this really IS such a matter of life-and-death for the boy, that he ought to be home-schooled (the implication being that maybe the danger has been exaggerated).
But they’re saying that because one kid can’t eat peanuts, nobody gets to eat peanuts. That would be more like saying that since the one autistic boy can’t read, that nobody gets to read.
But I think we’ve established that it’s not just “peanuty” foods. Lots of food contains peanuts, often things that we wouldn’t even suspect.
A lot of you are presenting what in my mind is a false dichotomy, i.e. “if you don’t ban peanuts, the boy will die”. When you put it like that, of course it sounds very selfish to want to let your kids eat peanuts. I’m just skeptical that that’s really the situation.
That analogy is a little skewed. We’re not talking about a countrywide ban of peanuts; this is just one class, in one school, with one special circumstance. Also, it’s just applying to lunch hour. The children can all go home or outside class to eat their peanuts.
It’s not like public schools are a champion of personal freedoms. Children are basically treated like partial citizens. Things are banned all the time because of a few bad apples. I remember when I was in 6th grade and they banned Pogs (remember those?) because some kids were using them for gambling. If you were caught with Pogs, they were confiscated without question. It pissed me off, but for better or worse that’s the way things are handled in public schools. Gameboys, cell phones, certain reading material, “weapons” (metal food utensils), and other such items have had similar treatment - they’re taken away from everyone to stop the few people that might abuse them. The student run “press” is heavily monitored (I was on the high school newspaper, don’t get me started on that), since freedom of speech is highly negotiable. Yeah, it bites the big one, and I’m all for radical public school overhauling, but that’s another subject for another thread. Why are some you now just reacting and crying oppression when it comes to something as frivolous as one certain type of food product, and something serious as a life threatening illness?
P.S. What exactly is an epi-pen?
P.P.S. You can pry my Pogs from my cold dead hand.
No idea on cost, but since it’s a prescription item, I’m sure it’s covered by prescription plans.
It’s a pre-loaded device with a spring-mounted needle. You pull back on a cap and jam it against the thigh of the person having the attack. It injects the epinepherine instantly. Then you call 911. It’s just a stop-gap until trained medical help gets there. I use a similar device for my migraine meds. It’s quite easy to use. I’ve also been trained to use one at the nursery school where I teach.
It should (I assume) take effect rather quicky, but we’ve been instructed to use it and call 911. The person still has to go to the hospital.
I thought they still gave peanuts on planes. Or is this me being inobservant again? Have peanuts been classified as lethal weapons? (How to kill someone with a peanut : hold them tight and stuff nuts down their nose…)
Peanut allergies have been around a long time - my mother was born in the 1930s and was very allergic to peanuts (and a couple of other things as well). I don’t know if the incidence is rising, if people in general have become more aware of the problem, or if more sufferers are now surviving their early years to the point where the cause of their illness is identified.
Epi-pens are quite expensive (approx $100 - $150 I believe) and have a limited shelf life, about a year from date of manufacture.
I believe that peanut oil is unlikely to be an allergen - little of the protein is maintained into the oil. Peanuts (which can find their way into a sand-pit) and peanut butter are far more problematic. Particularly PB, which is sticky, and liable to be transferred from little hands to unexpected surfaces. I think the analogy with smoking is apt. Passive smoking= PB transfer to unexpected surfaces.
Six-seven year olds can help monitor their own food input, especially if the outcome is important to them. The kid down the road is allergic to peanuts. He’s 7, and the first time he ate at my place he carefully asked if any of the food might contain nuts as he was allergic.
So some kids are so picky that they’ll only eat PB for lunch? For the sake of their health, they need to lose the PB and get a more varied diet!
But even if one is so selfish that one’s own child’s convenience (“Wanna PB and J sandwich! Wanna, wanna, wanna!”) seems more important than another child’s life, just how will that child feel about realising that they have caused another child’s death?
Sure the allergy is rare, but gee, it is so easy to accommodate it. Seems really mean spirited not to try.
I don’t believe anyone has been entirely against accomodating the allergy. No one has said that there shouldn’t be a separate table or room for either the PB eaters or the peanut allergic allergic. No one has expressed an objection to enforced handwashing after lunch. The question is how far should the school go in accomodating the allergy, if in fact the child is really that allergic. And that’s a real question in my mind. If the child is endangered by another child having peanut butter in a separate room who washes his hands immediately after eating, then the child is also endangered by a child who has peanut butter for breakfast and doesn’t wash his hands after eating. And the school can’t control that. Banning PB is an overreaction if the child isn’t really that allergic, and not sufficient if he is.
This is really making an assumption. My daughter will pretty much only eat PB for lunch at school. Not because she doesn’t have a varied diet, but because most of the other foods she likes are not practical to pack in a lunch for school.
That’s funny, USAirways is one of the airlines I fly most frequently with, and I have never gotten nuts of any kind from them. Only pretzels. I wonder if it varies with which airports you are flying out of?
