“Everyone’s gone nuts: The exaggerated threat of food allergies”
Harper’s, March 2008
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/01/0081878
Won’t work, because the kids eating peanuts are likely to still have sufficient material spread on their hands, faces, clothes etc to be a threat to the allergic kids.
Mind you, exactly the same could happen if a kid has PB on toast in the morning, before coming to school, so the ban only reduces the risks.
If my kid were this sensitive to peanuts he’d be home schooled - case closed.
It’s the only environment I have complete control over.
No one has the right to demand the public schools make such accommodations.
Hypothetically, what happens if a kid is presented to a school who is allergic to beef proteins? So we ban beef in school? This could be endless.
It really comes down to what is a reasonable accomodation to make for the child or minority of children in a school situation. It seems like not allowing peanut products is a reasonable accomodation. There is obviously a point, though, where the changes to the behavior of others required becomes unreasonable, though I am not sure where that point is.
Let’s say one child has a similar strength allergy to wool. Would banning wool clothes be a reasonable accomodation to make to allow that child to attend that school?
It’s also interesting to consider the responsibility of a private day care or school here - I don’t have much (read any) experience with the ADA and I am not sure if it would cover this. Could a parent sue to require a private day care to enact a peanut ban? Are allergies covered by the ADA - I cannot see why not…
I don’t think anyone is demanding it - in my experience, at least, it’s something the schools have done by themselves as a preventive safety measure.
Isn’t that a slippery slope argument? It *could *be endless, if the list of things to which significant numbers of people were seriously allergic was also endless.
[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Total bans are Pretty common here in the UK - at least in infant and primary schools - in secondary schools onwards.
Really?
I honestly never heard of a total ban in any school, matter of fact I never even heard of nut allergy when I was a kid.
Is it something that’s just reared its head over the last few? years
This is where my mind was going, though with a different outcome to yours (see my previous post).
Do people have the right to demand public schools install wheelchair ramps, for example, or lifts, even if by doing so they cause minor inconvenience to the students who do not need them? If they do have that right, where is the difference here?
I’m not sure where the line would be drawn on this.
I think that this is a case of peanut allergy awareness becoming fashionable, much as autism awareness is in fashion. It probably won’t be long before we start seeing car ribbon magnets that say “Peanut allergies: Find a cure.” Probably available in light brown.
My kids’ school introduced a total ban about three years ago - as far as I know from speaking to parents of kids at other schools, that’s not unusual. I don’t think anyone asked or expected them to do it (I can find out, if you like) - I think they’re just doing it so that they’re less likely to have to deal with a medical emergency.
>No one has the right to demand the public schools make such accommodations.
I think the ADA requires facilities to make “reasonable accomodations”, and everyone has the right to demand schools obey the ADA. There would have to be a judgement that eliminating peanuts from the school was a “reasonable accomodation”, but since so many schools are doing this and still functioning, I’d bet the judgement would be (or has been) that eliminating peanuts IS reasonable.
Speaking from my own experience, just because there’s a kid with an allergy doesn’t always mean a ban. There was a girl in my class in high school who was allergic to peanuts (her mother even came in to show us how to use her EpiPen, if necessary), but a ban wasn’t introduced until our last year–apparently there was a girl about fives years younger who was also allergic, because the same ban had been introduced in my elementary school in the last couple years I was there.
It’s a pretty small accommodation for everyone else, and especially with young kids I can see a total ban being reasonable. As they get older, simple awareness should be enough.
At my school we have a latex ban. One of the students has an extreme sensitivity to it. Mylar balloons…okay. But if it’s a latex balloon delivered, it stays in the office until the end of the school day.
I understand the idea of asking the peanut-allergic person to eat separately. In grade school however, it’s important for kids to develop friends and setting the child aside is going too far. Asking everyone else to give up the yummy rich goodness of PB is un-American. I counsel a separate area where said child can eat with some friends, away from PB-philes.
While we’re on the topic, here’s a recipe. 1) Scramble egg. 2) Slather pb on two pieces of bread. 3) Assemble. When the heat of that egg hits that pb and it gets to melting, mmm boy!
That won’t be as effective, as mentioned - several times - above.
Jelly sandwich? My cousin had a mild peanut allergy as a kid (along with chocolate, it made her face breakout something fierce), and so my aunt just made her jelly sandwiches.
And a possible lawsuit no doubt should any kid suffer.
No need to look old chap, have a cuppa char instead
Understood. I guess the question is how far you go out of your way for one individual of the group? As someone else posted, what if PB is the only lunch another family can afford?
I think the more interesting argument would be lifted from the information in the Harper’s article. Most reasonable people are eager to make reasonable accomodations for those with health issues. Few of us, however, are eager to submit ourselves to an environment ruled by mass hysteria.
AKA jam butties.
The food of the poor but not as poor as the dripping sarnie kids
It is a tricky moral balance, admittedly. Sudden death on the one hand - tasty cheap sandwich fillings on the other.
Not cheap if it’s all you can afford.