# Peanut Allergies and Peanut-Free Schools



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Why is this such a controversial issue? I was just speaking with an aquaintance about this and she is INCENSED that her ds can't take a peanut butter sandwich to school because 2 children are allergic.

Honestly, if it means the difference between life and death to someone's child, I don't see the problem!

Her argument is that the only sandwich her son will supposedly eat is PB and J and that these children need to get used to living with their allergies and need to learn what is safe and what is not. I understand her frustration to a degree, but for some of these children, they don't actually even need to consume the peanuts! They have only to come into contact with them. I have a friend who had a moderate reaction when she lent her watch to a lady who'd had a PB sandwich for lunch. My friend got the watch back, played soccer and, after working up a sweat, was on her way to the ER. This is scary stuff!

I'd like to hear all your opinions and veiwpoints as well!!

Peace,

Emily


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Hrm...I'm a little worried to answer first...

I don't think public schools can or should cater to every little thing. If you have a child who has such a severe allergy (like nuts) that it could really harm their health, you need to take responsibility for taking care of your kid, making sure his/her teachers know, and raising your kid to be aware of their own issue. I don't think it helps the kid any to have public school cater to them to the point of them not having to be responsible for what they eat.

I think parents need to be more active in public schools and be more aware.

I guess if a school wants to go peanut free, thats fine but it just seems like it's a result of living in a highly litigious world, and it's not teaching anything about responsibility.


----------



## L.J. (Nov 20, 2001)

I can see both sides of the issue.

I understand that for most, it's probably not a big deal to just not have peanut butter around for the safety of those allergic. It's scary having a child with severe allergies & I can appreciate that.

However, there is also the point of the other parents. What if your kid would only eat PB & J for awhile? We've all gone through stages with our kids where they only want one thing. Does that child then have to stay home from school or go hungry because of students with allergies. That doesn't seem fair either.

And what will happen when the kids with allergies grow up & go out into the workforce. Will they have to tell their fellow employees they can't eat peanut butter? They will have to figure out a way to live in this peanut eating society as they get older too.

It's a tough question. There are lots of ways to help people heal from their allergies......would we encourage parents of kids with peanut allergies to try methods to rid them of the allergies?

My oldest had life-threatening allergies and I do understand how difficult it is.....and yet I took it as my responsibility to find out what was in food, what people were serving when they invited us over, etc. I never expected that everyone would change their lifestyles for us.
BTW, we did NAET for our son & he is no longer allergic to anything!

I hope you get some interesting comments with this post!


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

I feel like you have not much choice about attending school...you have more choice about your workplace. At most workplaces you don't have to worry about sitting ar a desk just used by someone with peanutbutter residue on their hands...many jobs you have your own desk and your own phone. Elementary school children often believe some who tells the something has no nuts in it, and don't understand about hidden nut containing foods perfectly yet, but adults have learned not to take people's word. Ideally, schools would be well supervised enough regarding hand, face and table washing and monitoring allergic children that this could be well handled. We know it's not. Many schools don't even have someone who can or will, administer epinephrine in an emergency so children are dependent on the speed of an ambulance arriving and finding their classroom. At home, the parent could give it. Or even the child themselves. But most schools won't let a child carry their own epipen. So by not having any medical staff, or allowing children to take full responsibility by carrying thier own medication, peanut elimination is the most acceptable compromise to most schools.

If you can keep the peanut allergen antibodies low, apparently, some kids will outgrow it, for others it's lifelong. I've even been told that children that will become allergic only develop the allergy the second time they are exposed to peanuts. If you delay that first or second exposure, it might mean that their allergy might not fully develop, or will be less severe and life threatening. Many families know if they have a lot of peanut allergic people in the family, it's likely. Many kids are only allergic to one nut for instance,...like only peanuts or only walnuts. I don't have an allergic child, but this is what I've been reading recently.

Not having peanut butter for 6 hours never killed a child. Having it can kill
allergic children.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

I think some of this might depend on the age of the children involved. Its one thing to expect a 10 year old to understand what they need to do for their health -- that seems completely reasonable. But I'm not sure if its a reasonable expectation for a 5 year old? Maybe the way schools handle this need to change for younger and older children -- that way the kids would be safe while they learn to manage things for themselves.

On the other hand, my kid only likes PB&J and I wouldn't even know what else to give him for lunch if he couldn't take it. Of course, some of that is my own reluctance to send stuff that might have questionable food safety without refrigeration between packing and lunch. If you won't send a meat-based sandwich, there aren't that many choices beyond PB&J for younger kids by the time you get past all the rules about not sending stuff they can't manage on their own (e.g. containers they can't open), can't be hot enough to cause burns if it spills, can't need assembly, can't.... whatever. Seems like if they have a no PB rule they should probably be certain that several other rules need to be deleted or the poor kids won't have any options at all.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I also feel that this is a tough issue.

Frankly, I think a picky eater is far less serious a condition than life or death. In other words, I'd rather some kid go hungry at lunch than my child fall into a serious anaphylactic shock.

OTOH, I think it is rather unrealistic to expect schools to conform to each and every child's issues. Ideally, every classroom and play area should have epipens at the ready, with staff trained to use them (there's nothing fancy about them). Instead, I feel that putting in a "no peanuts" policy is not only the easy way out, but it's giving a VERY false sense of security. What if a child had a PB sandwich before school? I simply cannot believe that it is possible to eliminate all peanut residue from a public place.

It is not easy finding food products that are totally peanut free or made in a peanut free factory. Placing that burden on all parents, rather than the parents of the affected children, doesn't really seem fair to me.

Mostly I think we need to figure out the cause of this peanut allergy epidemic. Peanuts have been food for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. What's going on?


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

e&a's mom - how about a chill pack in his lunch box? or another nut butter like almond?


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

My daughter has a high peanut allergy, and I have to carry around her epipen wherever we go. When I'm there, I moniter what is around her, but if I send her to school I won't be there to make sure that she isn't near peanuts! I know that some schools have Peanut Free zones, where kids with peanut allegies can eat their lunch safely. At least all schools should have that option!

This isn't an issue of just keeping kids from eating an allergen. It isn't even whether or not they touch peanuts (which can cause a reaction) but the Peanut Allergy is one of the only food allegies that is AIRBORN! So if your son won't eat anything else but PB&J (of the foods that you have tried!) and is eating it next to my daughter, and there isn't any staff to administer her Epipen, then she can DIE!

HELLOOOO! I never would think that having someone enjoy their lunch is more important than risking death!

Even most airlines have stopped serving peanuts on their flights due to the airborn nature of the Peanut allergy.

When children are older, and have the skills to know that they shouldn't eat lunch next to their best friend because her best friend is eating PB&J, then great! But in elementary school, that is very unlikely! I guess you people care more about your own kids than other children!

L.J. - what is NAET? My daughter is allergic to tons of stuff, and I've had to drastically change my diet so that my breastmilk is safe for her... I'd love to help her get rid of her allergies altogether.


----------



## Linda in OZ (Sep 14, 2003)

dreadmama what a worrying thing for you,







when my eldest was younger he suffered reactions from peanuts and prawns, we have been fortunate that he has grown out of these.
This year a boy with severe nut allergy started at our school, He is in my youngest boy's class and his mother teaches DS8. He is 5, and I think that for him to be made responsible for his own health is a hard call. He is lucky his mother is there every day. The school is trying to enforce a nut free policy. I have asked the school to maybe print in the newsletter some nut free recipies or the like to give parents some ideas on what they can pack for lunch. The kids in both my sons' classes are not at all concerned they can't have nuts, they are more concerned about this boy, which is great, it shows compassion, something that is sadly lacking in a lot of people.


----------



## L.J. (Nov 20, 2001)

There are tons of threads on NAET in the health & healing boards.

Short version: It's an allergy elimination treatment that uses accupressure points. It's completely non-invasive & safe. It uses Chinese medicine & the meridians and helps change the way your body responds to certain things.


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

"But like another poster said, what if the kid has peanut butter for breakfast and doesn't wash his/her hands? What then? "

everyone wahes hands when they get to school (an exellent idea anyway...less illness in school) or you ask parents to remember to wash hands if they have peanut products for breafast. Our preschool does both.


----------



## Evan&Anna's_Mom (Jun 12, 2003)

Clarity -- actually, I would probably start with another nut butter, if that were permitted, and I was in this situation. For me, this is a hypothetical because I've never had to face it. I have heard, though, that some schools just ban all nut products to be safe.

A chill pack just doesn't work for me -- you still can't be sure of the temp. in the lunch box and lunches just sit too long for me. This is probably the one area where I am way too anal, but I worked for a company with an e-coli outbreak and food safety training and I know exactly what an e-coli death looks like in a child. If I can't be sure the temp. of a high-risk food (any meat product) never gets above 40 degrees (or below 160) while it sits, then we don't eat it. Especially not a child who, by definition, has a lower tolerance of food-borne illness.

If this were to be a problem in my kids school, then I would follow the rules because, of course a child's life is worth more than my child's comfort. And for little kids, banning peanuts is probably the only real recourse. But I also think that as the children get older, then other options make more sense. So, its not either or but both in the long run.


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

I am so shocked that mamas on _this_ board would take a child's life so lightly!!!

My ds2 has life-threatening allergies to dairy and peanuts and possibly eggs. He also has lesser allergies to corn, fruit, soy, wheat, many veggies. We're hoping he'll outgrow some of them but it doesn't look good for the dairy and peanuts. He reacts through contact and from the air-borne proteins of his more severe allergies. There is no way on earth he's ever going to eat in a school cafeteria. We're homeschooling.

That said, he--and any other child with a severe allergy--has the legal right to a free, safe, appropriate education. The school is required by law to provide a safe environment. If a child can have an anaphalactic reaction by inhaling the air-borne protein from someone's peanut butter sandwich or by touching an invisible smear of peanut oil on a doorknob, then for gd's sake put the life of that child above your own conveniences!!! We had to entirely restructure our other kids' diets to keep our little one safe--and y'know what? they have survived w/out peanut butter. We had to get a little creative: humus, yogurt, cheese sticks, goat cheese on crackers (we don't cook with dairy anymore and the kids wash up after eating it--dairy is *not* as oily or pervasive as peanut butter), sunflower seed (not cooked in peanut oil!).

I can teach my child not to eat certain foods, but, if I send him to school, I can't control additional exposures. I can't stop him from breathing in a cafeteria where other kids are eating what amounts to an inhalant poison. Yes, it's about responsibility and I think that the schools and other parents need to stop whining and step up and take some responsibility!!! Um, it takes a village and all that jazz, right? Or is that just a nice sentiment until it gets too inconvenient and then it's every child for himself and I don't have to teach my kid to understand differences if, gosh, it means we have to change something in our own life for a few hours to accommodate someone else?!

AAAH! Ya'll just hit a nerve! But this is my child's _life_. It's great that I can homeschool, but some people just can't. And it's not fair to put a child's life in danger at school just because you don't feel like making the effort.


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

If I had a child who was so severely allergic to peanuts that exposure to a small amount of airborne peanut oil could kill her, I would either home-school her or have her in an extremely isolated special class (if one were available) and I would not take her to crowded public places in general, until the allergy became less severe or she was old enough to manage it. I consider allergies of this severity to be disabilities similar to that "boy in a bubble" immune-system disorder. Because of the popularity of peanuts, esp. as a food for children, it is very difficult to ensure a total absence of every trace of peanuts in any environment crowded with children. As sad as I would be about my child's missing out on so many social experiences, I would not be willing to take the risk.

I mean, "Peanut Free zones, where kids with peanut allegies can eat their lunch safely" aren't enough if the allergy is really severe. What if a kid who ate peanut butter for breakfast and didn't wash his hands then held hands with my child during the first morning activity, or he leaned close to whisper a secret in her ear? Unless I felt absolutely confident that school staff would be able to notice her reaction immediately and use the Epipen, I would not take the risk.

I'm allergic to dogs. During the most severe stage of my allergy, approx. age 14-21, I could not tolerate being in a room with a dog---I don't THINK it was life-threatening, but it felt like it might be, as my eyes and throat would swell to the point that I couldn't see and could barely breathe after about 5 minutes' exposure. Therefore, if I was riding a bus and a Seeing Eye Dog got on, I got off at the next stop and took the next bus. It was inconvenient, but I knew it was unreasonable to expect the school for the blind to relocate away from my bus route or the blind people to stay off the transit system just because of my allergy. Once, walking down stairs in a university building, I met an enormous poodle who was bounding up the stairs and rounded a corner suddenly and jumped on me.







Its owner, who was running about one flight behind, pulled it off and apologized profusely, and I believed her explanation that Fifi had pulled away from her accidentally. I expected (and got) forgiveness from the prof of my next class when I arrived late after washing my face, arms, and legs and taking medication. I did not expect the university to ban animals from academic buildings in order to prevent this terrifying experience from happening again.

But if I were so allergic to dogs that I could die from sitting next to someone who played w/his dog this morning and still has dog hair on his shirt, I would consider that a handicap that prevents me from going out in public. Just banning dogs in public places wouldn't be sufficient to protect me; I'd have to ban people from having any contact w/dogs anywhere without going thru a decontamination process, and that just isn't reasonable unless a significant portion of the population is allergic to dogs.


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

Thank you Missy, for so elequently expressing what I was trying to say. Since I'm a single mother, I can't stay home and home school my daughter. However, I am going to school right now to become a preschool teacher so that next school year I can work in her preschool and we can stay together during that time. I also plan to send her to a very progressive small public elementary/junior high school in our area that has an organic food cafeteria. The school also stresses teaching children to be responsible, socially conscious citizens, so I'm sure that they will be respectful of her allergies!

But most people are not so lucky!

Most children are caring people, and I bet if you explained to your child that if they ate a peanut butter sandwich sitting next to a classmate it could kill them, they probably would choose to eat something else. That is unless they are raised to think that life is all about them and their desires!


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:

But if I were so allergic to dogs that I could die from sitting next to someone who played w/his dog this morning and still has dog hair on his shirt, I would consider that a handicap that prevents me from going out in public. Just banning dogs in public places wouldn't be sufficient to protect me; I'd have to ban people from having any contact w/dogs anywhere without going thru a decontamination process, and that just isn't reasonable unless a significant portion of the population is allergic to dogs.
We're talking about peanut butter in a public school setting. Banning peanut butter is not going to turn the world upside-down or even cause sustained trauma to anyone; the presence of it, however, could kill my child.

Yes, a severe allergy is like a disability and, in fact, is covered by the ADA. But severe peanut allergies are not nearly as rare as the "boy in the bubble" immune system disorder. And accommodating it is not nearly as difficult. Or it shouldn't be.

As I said, I do plan on homeschooling--but that is not always an option. Nor is private school. Nor is a private school always accommodating. The law requires the public school system to provide a safe environment and it is beyond selfish for parents to insist that it's "too inconvenient" or "not fair" for their children to abstain from eating pb&j for lunch. Reading labels for safe food is not that difficult. I do it everyday and our list of allegens goes way beyond peanuts. Finding alternatives to peanut butter honestly takes minimal effort.

CK'sMama--of course no one came out and said that. Then I'd really lose it.
:LOL
It was more the suggestion (and not from you!) of "gee, that's too bad but it's not *fair* if my kiddo can't have his peanut butter". It's not a balance of "fairness"; it's a life/death issue. It's not "fair" that my child has been dealt these allergies, but here we are.

Quote:

Most children are caring people, and I bet if you explained to your child that if they ate a peanut butter sandwich sitting next to a classmate it could kill them, they probably would choose to eat something else.
Dreadmama--you are so right. The objections usually come the adult, huh?


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

1-2% of children...so for every 100 kids in a school 1 or 2 will have it. Not exactly rare.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Oh my goodness!
I can't belive that YOU mamas are making the WORLD responsible for one thing about your childs health!!!!!!!!!!









It's not about not caring for another kid. If your kid and mine are friends and we invite your over for a sleepover and you say "Hey, my kid is DEALTHLY allerigic to peanuts" we'd make all sorts of accomodations. And I'd be happy to do that in my home.

But your talking public school, some with hundreds of kids in them. And make a ban on a certain food...a KID food....for two of those kids??

(BTW, all the stats I've seen have said the instance of people in the us TOTAL that have a nut allergy is 1 percent
http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/f4092.htm
And the ammount of KIDS in that population who could DIE from it CLEARLY fall into the less than half a percent of all people in the US!!!!!!! It's not a ton of kids!!!!!!)

If they said "Hey, half the kids in school will get sick if we give em milk so we're cutting milk " I'd say "Hey that sucks but oh well.".

If they tell me that ONE PERSON of the MINISCULE population of people in the US has a deathly peanut allergy and their banning peanuts in school? Gimme a break.

At that point its on the parents...I'm sorry but it is. If something could kill MY child there is just no way I'd be sending them into an uncontrolled environment like that. Who knows if little Besty is going to sneak peanut M&M's in her lunch? Or what about Joey, who just transfered midyear and doesn't know and gets a PB&J for lunch?? If something could KILL MY CHILD I'd be a HELL of a lot more responsible for them then to expect a public school to cater to my child and make them safe. *I* make that child safe, if it means private school or going down there everyday when it's mealtime...whatever it takes. I mean, jeezus...it could KILL my kid. No one loves or cares for my kid like me and no one will watch out for her like me, including her very nice school friends.

The percentage of school aged kids who have peanut allergies so severe it could KILL them is about equal to the percentage of kids who have that disease where they can't be exposed to sunlight. So....what....if one of those kids wants to come to our public school, we should expect the rest of the families to have to deal with making their kids take recess inside and read in the dark? That would be ridiculous. "Oh! But my baby could die!!" cries the mother. Then put em in a different school or bring them up to take better care of themselves.

Don't lecture me about not caring about your kid when you clearly have no regard for the HUNDREDS of other families your impacting.


----------



## corrie43 (Mar 9, 2003)

I kind of agree with the posters who think it is not fair to ban peanut butter. ALOT of kids eat PB &J for lunch. The child with an allergy should not even be in the cafeteria. There are SOOOOO many foods which contain peanut products, not just peanut butter. It would be dangerous to eat next to anyone I would think.

This is a serious question, what do you do in restaranuts, or grocery stores or ballparks?? Those places all have peanut residue, or even just out in public in general. I always see kids eating peanut butter crackers at the park and then touching the equipment.

I would not rely on other parents to send peanut free lunches, I would expect to isolate the child with the allergy to eat their lunch.

Corrie


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:

Don't lecture me about not caring about your kid when you clearly have no regard for the HUNDREDS of other families your impacting.
HELLO???Sorry you can't eat peanut butter b/c it might kill the kid next to you and you're, um, IMPACTED??? Are you for real? It's not that hard to take pb out of your life for a few hours!!

The world is not responsible for my child's health. However, if I were to send my child to PUBLIC SCHOOL, the school, by LAW, must provide a safe environment. Me, I don't trust that something won't happen; my child has too many allergies and his reaction to dairy scares me more than peanuts, so the public school system doesn't have to be responsible. But, even before these allergies hit our family, I would have been prepared to honor another child's life in his educational setting and done anything w/in my power to make it safe. I would never endanger someone else's child b/c over a little peanut butter. That's selfish and short-sighted and, for that matter, teaches the other children that their wants are more important than another child's life.


----------



## L.J. (Nov 20, 2001)

I think there are many issues concerning this and I think in the spirit of conversation, everyone was offering opinions, however, I believe that all of us, would, without objection, obstain from peanuts for the sake of another's life.

I know one of the issues for me is about safety. Let's get real, the schools cannot & do not really provide safety. Kids get beat up, killed, they get sick, they get poisoned by moulds, and all kinds of other nasty things within the school setting. Schools are not able to really provide safety to anyone.

In all fairness to many posters, alot of these moms have been showing GREAT concern saying that they feel it offers a "false sense of security". We are so worried about your little ones feeling they are safe when really they aren't. And if they are "protected" by the schools, what happens when they get on a public bus or subway and someone next to them pulls out a sandwich. I think a lot of the moms are trying to say that it could actually be more dangerous for them to let down their guard.

Another concern, is where does it stop? Do kids have to have a health check at the door and anyone showing any signs of illness must be forced home because any kids with compromised immune systems coud die from a basic case of the flu? Do kids have to stop playing outside because there are lots of kids allergic to bee stings and if they are outside, it's a possibility?There are lots of kids with different health issues. Who gets special treatment & who doesn't?

The final concern for me is that even though 1-2% is a lot of kids, it is a small percentage. I get a little nervous when very small percentages of the population are able to decide what the majority cannot do.

As a mom who lived with a son life-threatening allergies, I again say, that I can feel for other moms in this situation. It is not fair that their kids have to live on alert. It is not fair that many places are not safe. It is reality. And while I do not expect that a 5 year old should be responsible for knowing, I do expect the parents need to be. It requires special attention for the parents. I never once expected people to totally change their lives so my son wouldn't die from eating something. I took that upon myself as my responsibility as his mother.

Having said that, I would not send PB & J to school with my son -- out of the respect for the lives of others!


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

corrie43--what restaurants?









I haven't eaten in a restaurant since ds2 was dxed, a little over a year ago. I'm nursing, so all of his allergens are eliminated from my diet.

Playgrounds are out. Shopping carts are out. (right now he stays in the sling at all times in public) When he get older, everything will get wiped down with disinfectant. But, a public school is different. Schooling, in some form, is not an optional activity. Keeping a child out of the cafeteria is one solution, but 1. the legalities are questionable (socialization and all that...) and 2. it really doesn't keep the rest of the school safe. Peanut residue travels. It clings.

Peanut allergies are not going anywhere. The numbers are rising. Quickly. Probably because we, society, eats so much of the stuff. At least that's one theory. It's not an allergy that is typically outgrown. And yeah, it freaks me out that my baby is so vulnerable. But people like dreadmama should be able to send her child to school w/out fighting other parents for that right.


----------



## Ceili (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:

Peanut residue travels. It clings.
Yes it does. And I think what alot of the other women on this thread have said about a false sense of security rings true because of this.

What if the children have peanut butter for breakfast. They could wash their hands when the got school as someone else said. Even with the handwashing, it could be on their clothes before they even get to school. 5 and 6 year olds are not the neatest when eating. My baby cousin loves peanut butter on toast for breakfast. She frequently ate it in the car on the way to school. We washed her hands with wetwipes when she was done, but still Peanut residue travels. It clings.

Diabetic children have to be careful about what they eat but we don't remove sugar from schools (not such a bad idea really). Not quite the same since sugar isn't airborn, but still...


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

*With the utmost of respect* I think that some of you ladies are lacking perspective. This is not about a child becoming ill, this is about a child potentially DYING! This is a lifethreatening thing that can be virtually resolved by eliminating ONE thing from our children's diet for a minute period of time.

We are NONE of us safe from accidents. I could walk out of my house tomorrow and be hit by a bus (which would be a miracle as my house is NOT on a bus route, but it could happen!







) but this possibility can be greatly decreased by looking both ways before I cross.

I understand that it is not feasible to eliminate PB completely from a childs diet, nor is it desirable, but if you could lessen another child's chance of DYING by 75% simply by sending your child to school with a cheese sandwich, *WHY WOULDN'T YOU?*

Yes, children need to learn to take responsibility for themselves and for their allergies, but it is NOT feasible for a five year old to be able to read every label or to refuse that cholcolate chip cookie another child offers them. And isolating these children from public events is just plain cruel! *What if this were your child?* Think about that for a moment! IT's one minisule thing. Don't take peanuts to school.

WE don't allow children to go to school with knives or cudgels because they cause injury to children. Why are peanuts different?


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

I just wanted to add this:

A diabetic child is not going to go into anaphylactic shock that could potentially kill her in a matter of MINUTES by coming into contact with 10 micrograms (that's 1000 000 of a gram)of sugar. A child with a milk allergy or sensitivity is not going to die under the same circumstances. At the risk of sounding dramatic *this means the diffference between life and death for these children*

Teaching our children to wash their hands with soap for 2-3 minutes before school and eliminating peanuts for 6 holurs of a childs life, 5 days a week does not seem unreasonable for me.


----------



## L.J. (Nov 20, 2001)

I think everyone has commented that they would not send their kids to school with PB&J at the risk of another child. No one here wants a child to die.

Maybe instead of all this arguing about the issue, our time & energy could be better spent encouraging more research into solutions & pushing for government funding for non-medical methods of allergy treatment that can reduce the severity of symptoms if not completely eliminate the allergy completely.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

I'm honestly sick of this "SOMEONE COULD DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" freak out.

The percentage of children in the US who could DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! from peanuts IS MINUSCULE!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are far more other things that afflict children on a greater scale that we DONT do a thing for because we expect their parents to care for them.

These kids are more likely to be struck by lighntning at recess...so what ...ban recess????








:

Put it in perspective...it's not about peanuts for the school its about protecting less than one percent of the ENTIRE UNITED STATES POPULATION because you think we should.

Bah.

Like I said, I'll do my part if your kid is in my class or comes to my home, I'm more than happy to not let MY kid eat peanuts around your kid. That doesn't gaurantee anyting, it doesn't make your kid safe, and it's insane to insist that the world comply with your completely and totally rare circumstance.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I agree with L.J.

Nobody here has said that they are against "peanut free" zones.

I just think alot of us wonder how effective that strategy is and how practical a solution it is. NOT because we think having PB&J for lunch is some sort of constitutional right, but because we think it may not really be effective.

My heart goes out to parents with allergic kids. I'm actually quite upset that epipens are NOT allowed in school. These ARE the lifesavers - banning peanuts and hoping for the best is not.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

anothermama,

You are competely entitled to your opinion, and I competely respect it.

However, the percentage of children who could die is NOT minisule,( 1.5 million american adults and children IMO is not minisule http://allergies.about.com/cs/about/a/blfaan071003a.htm) and even if it was, with respect, why would it matter? It's still someone's baby.

Quote:

*Like I said, I'll do my part if your kid is in my class or comes to my home, I'm more than happy to not let MY kid eat peanuts around your kid. That doesn't gaurantee anyting, it doesn't make your kid safe...*

I totally agree with you here, but like I said, none of us are guarenteed that our children will come home safe each day. Nothing we can do will make our kids "safe". IT's just one simple thing to comply with a request that lowers the chance a child could have a serious anaphylatic rxn. We put our children in car and booster seats when we travel to protect them against the rare case that we may become involved in a traffic accident. WE make them wear helmets when they ride their bikes when there is no guarentee that either of these devices will save their lives! I just don't see how the peanut thing is any different. JMO

Anaphylaxis is a horrible thing to witness and an awful (and preventable) way to die. I don't wish that on ANYONE, least of all a child. I don't much care about the precentages and it's all well and good to suggest that research and treatment are needed, but what do we do in the interim? We can't be with our children 24/7. It's not possible for most probably isn't terribly good for our mental health







. This is just one little thing that potentially eases the minds of some parents who would be in a state of perpetual worry (some of us are anyway







)otherwise. Decreases it to just 'occasional worry' if you will.

I also totally agree that 'peanut free zones' are not a permanent solution, but combined with education, it definately reduces the chances that a child will have a fatal rxn while in school, away from his/her parents.

P.S. Most of the schools in my area do allow epi-pens. They just have to be in a sealed bag and given to the teacher or person on charge of the classroom. Epi-pens only buy a bit of time tho. They're not a cure for the reaction if it is a severe one.


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

Our childcare centre is a peanut-free zone. The little fella with the allergy has ended up in hospital with it, & fortunately was okay. My kids know he has an allergy, & that he gets very sick if they have pb on their clothes or skin. They respect that.

I have fed them pb for lunch before going in for the afternoon session. We just wash hands and faces (& hair sometimes!) with soap & have a total change of clothes before we go. This method is okay by the kindy & by the parents. It's no big deal for us, but it's a huge deal for the allergic boy if we're not careful.

If our public school had a no peanut policy I would totally respect that. It's life threatening, this allergy, so what's the big deal for me to make a few changes? But then again, I guess we have Vegemite here in Aus, so we have more options ........it's all about being creative with your kids lunches anyway.....& i've never known a child who would starve themselves because they will only eat one thing & they can't have it (other than the ones who have food issues, of course). Kids will, ultimately, eat what you feed them, IMO.


----------



## Avima (Oct 16, 2003)

I want to say that almond butter and jelly is yummy and perhaps can be used as a suitable alternative.
If my child were allergic, I would want her school to do everything in their power to make sure my child was safe. If it were another child in her school, I wouldn't want to risk the life of that child, no matter how miniscule the possibility of a fatal reaction. So I would comply. JMO.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

*sigh*

Look, I want you all to know I *AM* thinking about this in a "What if it were my kid " kind of way, and thats what just baffles me.

If it were my kid, you can sure as heck bet that by the time she went to public school she would understand the gravity of the situation as best a 5 year old could. And I'm sure that I'd talk to her teachers to let them know.....but I wonder what the modivation for making the school have RULE is? It seems like just a reason to be able to sue if you don't protect your kid well enough.

I would feel RUDE going to a public school and demanding a schoolwide policy for my child who is less than half a percent of the national population. When my dd was small, she didn't have dairy and I provided EVERYTHING for her day care that I PAID for. And on the occasion that she did get dairy, well, I understand how hard it is on the day care. If I wanted it stricter, I should have not put her in day care. I feel way to large a responsibility to my child to let someone else be the keeper of her safety. People slip up all the time.

And, it's not about the peanuts...it's about the principle. (I can't belive I just said that...







: )

You HAVE TO acknowledge that there are MANY MANY things out there that can kill kids...that DO kill kids at a significantly higher percentage than peanuts do....and we don't tell schools to make policies for them, do we?

The nature of public school is scary. If you ask for that, I can only imagine what other parents would ask for. Their kid has seasonal allergies so no recess.....someones aunt got struck by lighning so no going outside ever.....my daughter has insanely fair skin and burns easily so the school must purchase sunblock for every kid every year.

And where I went to school was kinda...well...trashy. I can just see parents and kids DELIBERATELY bringing the forbidden fruit to school.

If it were my kid...I would feel to great a responsibility to her to just say "Someone else deal with it!" and try to make it everyone elses issue. It's not. It's ours and our families.

And...come on....lets be real. While I don't expect public schools to bow down to these policies, I'm sure that if you took your kid to their first day of kindergarten and explained things to the teacher, he or she would probably try to look after you kid as best they could and make other kids aware. People *do* care, but you can't force them to.


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:

While I don't expect public schools to bow down to these policies, I'm sure that if you took your kid to their first day of kindergarten and explained things to the teacher, he or she would probably try to look after you kid as best they could and make other kids aware.
It's not bowing down to policies--it is the law. Parents do have the option, the right, to sit down with school administrators and teachers and write a plan enforcable by law.

I'm not expecting the school to be able to keep my child safe; hence, our decision to homeschool. But, I will fight for the right of any other peanut-allergic child to attend school with a minimum of worry. The epi-pen is not the end-all, be-all solution; it's part of a larger solution and banning peanuts is a huge part of that, also. It all adds up to a safer environment in a situation that, again, is not optional. It's not like going to the playground or the movies or a restaurant.

Quote:

I'm honestly sick of this "SOMEONE COULD DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" freak out.
That's a truly compassionate statement.

pumpkinhead, thank you, thank you, thank you for your comments! I'm glad there is someone out there who doesn't *have* to deal with this who gets it!!!


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

anothermama,

I totally respect what you're saying and I understand. The thing is that I respectfully don't undertand is why you would choose to make this issue about the 'principle of the matter' when it's really about the life of some one's child? It's not about the ability to sue either! It's about protecting our children, BOTTOM LINE.

I agree that perhaps this isn't a high school issue, but an elementary school is different. No five year old can be held solely responsible for their health and well being! If this were so, we'd be paying their university tuition already







. The can only comprehend just so much at that age.

There ARE many many things out there that can kill and harm our kids, but not all of them are as preventable as this. And schools DO make rules to guard against these things. Granted, these rules are not foolproof and (At the risk of sounding like a broken record







) NOTHING will guarentee that our children will live to ripe old ages, but if you can reduce the risk with a rule, I say, WHY NOT? Are kids allowed to take knives to school? No. Are kids permitted by law to ride outside a car seat before a certian age? No.

Again, I have to add that 1.5 million people is not a miniscule percentage and diary allergies don't tend to cause fatal anaphylaxis.

I do understand where you are coming from and that are trying to see this from a 'what if this were my kid' perspective. Why would any parent want to deprive their child of something just because *one* child is allergic? Why, when you had to go to such great lengths to ensure that your child did not get dairy should another child have the right to have their school free of the offending food item? I do understand, I just disagree.

I think this is prob an 'agree to disagree' situation.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Missy

Quote:

I'm not expecting the school to be able to keep my child safe...
I agree, Mama! It's up to parents to make our schools safe environments for our children (to the best of our abilities). You can bet your button hooks that it wasn't the school boards who came up with 'peanut free zones'. I hope that when the time comes I'll be able to homeschool, but it may not be feasible. In that event, I can only hope that I will be able to obtain an education for my child in the safest environment possible.










Peace Mamas


----------



## calgal007 (Nov 20, 2001)

I'm coming in late to this thread. I have an eleven year old son who has a life-threatening allergy to peanuts. Reading the comments from some of the posters on this thread has me shaking my head in dismay.

The thing about a peanut allergy is this: the child who is allergic will die, with a swollen face and choking to death, in front of all those children in the school in a worst-case scenario. That is the truth about peanut allergy.

A peanut-free lunch area, with all children washing their hands after lunch has kept my ds alive for all of his school career.

When he was very young, his pre-school asked parents to not send peanut products in the lunches/snacks. Nobody forced anyone to comply, but all the parents did. I guess we've been lucky, because apparently not everyone feels that accomodating a life-threatening allergy is important, if it inconveniences them.

Jesus Christ, we're talking about kids lives here. Not some made-up ailment that all the parents of peanut allergic children are doing to inconvenience the parents of classmates.


----------



## shelbean91 (May 11, 2002)

Quote:

I would feel RUDE going to a public school and demanding a schoolwide policy for my child
At one point, I'm sure parents felt rude demanding ramps be put in the schools to accomodate wheelchairs- what is the percentage of people that use wheelchairs?

A peanut allergy is considered a disability, and by law, the schools have to do EVERYTHING THEY CAN to accomodate that allergy. (Also, if an adult has that serious of an allergy, the ADA would legally protect a ban on peanuts in the workplace, if necessary.) No, they can't control what was eaten before school, or if someone sneaks something in, but if a letter is sent home to explain the situation, the teachers and aides can confiscate anything they may find.

No one is saying just randomly ban peanut butter from every school (that would be a bother and inconvenient), but if a child with this allergy is known to be in the school, they need to do what they can to avoid triggering that allergy, including banning peanut butter. I personally would prefer a letter explaining that 'little Johnny' is deathly allergic, so please don't send peanut butter, than a letter after the fact explaining that little Johnny was hosptialized or died b/c I didn't know better and sent pb&j for lunch.


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

Okay, so I'm know I'm jumping in late here, but I think this (and correct me if I'm wrong) boils down to a deeper issue. Should schools go the extra step to accomodate children with disabilities? ( And yes,I believe a peanut allergy that severe, is definitely a disability)
Absofrigginlutly!!!!!!! Let's not beat around the bush here. If this was a kid with CP, or autism and the school didn't want to allow that child in the classroom, because they would "affect" the other children's learning, or not allow a child with Down's Syndrome to play on the base ball team because they might not "win"??? People on these boards would be outraged!! Should the public school system go the extra mile to accomodate a child with special needs? Of course. I can't believe anyone would even question that. All children deserve an equal (although sometimes not the greatest) chance to have an education within the public school system. That's why we live in America!! Come on people!

I'll admit, when I first heard about banning peanuts in public schools, I rolled my eyes a little. I thought, "Crap, what am I going to do with all my WIC approved peanut butter?"But after hearing about how dangerous the allergy actually is, I am totally in agreement that they should be banned. Do I think that will neccessarily keep the child safe? Possibly, maybe not. Do I think all teachers should be trained in how to administer an epipen and have one in every class room? Yes. Banning peanuts is just one small step in keeping *a child* safe. Why is it just the parents job? It's society's job to keep our children safe. It's *everyone's * job. I'm sure you'd feel that way if it was your child.

I'm sorry if I sound mean, or bitter. I'm just so sick and tired of this sentiment we Americans have, in general, about people with disabilities. It's like, oh we accept them, let them have all the same rights as us ---but as soon as it starts to affect us, or we have to change anything in our perfect little lives it's not ok. Send them to a "special" school.
Wake up you guys. It's a freakin' *peanut*.

Stepping off my soapbox now....


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

I have to agree with L.J.

Quote:

Another concern, is where does it stop? Do kids have to have a health check at the door and anyone showing any signs of illness must be forced home because any kids with compromised immune systems coud die from a basic case of the flu? Do kids have to stop playing outside because there are lots of kids allergic to bee stings and if they are outside, it's a possibility?There are lots of kids with different health issues. Who gets special treatment & who doesn't?
I don't think this is about the inconvenience of pb&j sandwiches. Nearly everone here, including myself, would absolutely not send their kid to school with peanut butter if they knew there was an allergic kid at their school. But who defines what a 'safe' environment is? My stepmother has an extreme allergy to poison oak, and can die from it. She was on an airplane one time and they had to make an emergency landing because she started to go into shock from a developing poison oak rash. So what do I do if my kid has that allergy? Do we do poison oak checks at the door?

I must agree about the false sense of security as well. If my child could DIE, if this is as serious as you say, which I'm sure it is, then how could I possibly trust 30+ kids, their parents, stepparents, babysitters, teachers, substitute teachers, bus drivers, crossing guards, and playground supervisors to all keep my child safe from an airborne peanut residue? Sure, I can send my child to school with a cheese sandwich, but what if they stop at the corner store and buy peanut m&ms? What if the school bus driver doesn't realize that her bread has peanuts in it? What if the substitute teacher didn't realize that cooking her stir fry in peanut oil was a problem? I mean, the list is is just too long for me to trust my child's life to a school policy.

If my child went to a school that had such a policy, I would certainly not complain, and would do my absolute best to comply. But I sure would be nervous for that kid, because most people, although caring and compassionate, are not that aware of their foods and what the ingredients are.


----------



## shelbean91 (May 11, 2002)

Quote:

Should schools go the extra step to accomodate children with disabilities?
It's not a should they accomodate or shouldn't they, legally, they are OBLIGATED to accomodate. If they don't, they will be sued, and they will LOSE. There have been laws on the books about accomodating children with disablities since the mid 70s, and the laws have evolved over the years. An allergy that could cause that severe of a reaction, even if for only one person in the whole United States, would be a covered disability, and have to be accomodated.


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

Some of the comments I've read here have me confused...
Here is my perspective:

Asking a child to be vaccinated (and thereby taking possibly dangerous substances into that child's body) to avoid spreading diseases to already vaccinated children is: 1. oxymoronic since those children are already vaccinated, they supposedly don't need to worry about catching those diseases! 2. is completely different than asking people to not send a potentially deadly substance purposefully to school, when there are hundreds of other possible substitutions!

If my child is sick, she should stay home from school so as not to spread the disease, regardless if there are other children with compromised immune systems or not, it is just common decency. If this is a surprise, then no wonder students and teachers stay sick throughout the school year... your kids are spreading sickness around and around! If the sick kids stayed home, then children would have much fewer incidents of illness in each year.

If a child is allergic to bee stings, then he/she can stay inside for recess if necessary, which would not impact the other children.

If a child has severe light sensitivity, accomodations that a school and students would have to make are too numerous to compare with simply not eating PB&J.

Of course parents and children with severe Peanut allergies need to be responsible for their own health, no one said differently. I think you guys are too addicted to your peanuts... and your theories.

It sounds like some of you just like a good old theoretical debate. Enjoy. I'm going to bed.

I'm so glad that I live near a socially conscious public elementary/junior high school that values people and promotes healthy positive action towards a better world. Maybe the kids in my 'soon to be' daughter's school will be able to work on a campaign for a school project to help spread awareness to this problem.

good night.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dreadmama_
*

I'm so glad that I live near a socially conscious public elementary/junior high school that values people and promotes healthy positive action towards a better world. Maybe the kids in my 'soon to be' daughter's school will be able to work on a campaign for a school project to help spread awareness to this problem.

good night.







*
Lucky for you!!

I feel lucky too....come September I'll be sending my kid to a school that is not only socially conscious and values people and promotes healty positive action BUT they have good common sense, too!!!!

There must be some pretty good public schools out there....


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

I checked out the link that anothermama provided (thank you for that). Although you don't feel that 1% of Americans is significant, the authors of the study stated otherwise:

"This study is a milestone in the understanding of food allergy," said Anne Munoz-Furlong, founder of The Food Allergy Network. "For years, reporters and others have wondered how many people are affected by these potentially life-threatening food allergies. Many believed it was only a small portion of the population that was affected, and therefore no one should care."

"This study indicates that peanut and tree nut allergy involves a significant number of people. Peanut and tree nuts are the leading cause of severe or fatal food-allergic reactions."


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

Quote:

It's not a should they accomodate or shouldn't they, legally, they are OBLIGATED to accomodate.
Hmm..maybe you mistook what I was saying. What I was referring to when I said "should" was to what the deeper issue of the discussion was. Here's my original quote:

Quote:

Okay, so I'm know I'm jumping in late here, but I think this (and correct me if I'm wrong) boils down to a deeper issue. Should schools go the extra step to accomodate children with disabilities? ( And yes,I believe a peanut allergy that severe, is definitely a disability)
That was my original quote. Of course, schools are obligated by law, as they well should be. I'm not sure, did you think I was disagreeing with you? Because what I meant to say is: We are obligated to accomodate anyone with disabilities BY LAW and I'm not sure why there is even a debate as to why or why not we should be.

Ok, I don't think I'm making sense. shelbean, I hope you took no offense to what I wrote. I thought we were on the same page?


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

If anyone is interested, they may want to read this:

http://www.allergicchild.com/ and go to Peanut.


----------



## corrie43 (Mar 9, 2003)

As I read more, I'm tending to change my opinion. I was for not banning PB, but I am changing my mind in favor now.

It's not that hard to make something else for lunch, and it may even encourage healthy eating. I would hope the school took the time to prepare a long letter with recipes and lists of alternatives. I did not realize how severe a peanut allergy is, and that it is considered a disability.

I guess I was most concerned about the false sense of safety a peanut free school would provide. You know someone will bring in something with peanuts by accident. Someone mentioned peanut M&Ms. I feel bad for any parent who has to deal with this scary reality. My heart goes out to you and your children.

Corrie


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

My dd's ps classroom is peanut free. Not because there is a child in it with a peanut allergy, but because there is a child in a different first grade class who has one, and because they mix up the classes every year, they want the entire population of the now first graders to always be dealing with this.

I am squarely in the camp of people who think this is totally unreasonable and is foisting off responsibility on the other parents. If it were a matter of not sending in peanuts or peanut butter, I would be fine with it. It is not.

We get sent home these lengthy booklets every year, listing the acceptable and unacceptable foods. Everything must be processed in a nut-free facility and cannot be made with peanut oil or certain other generic oils. We are supposed to only buy certain brands of everything from cookies to crackers to breads to cereals, etc. We are supposed to scan labels of everything for certain ingredients, many of which do not sound anything like nuts.

This is, well, nuts. I just don't have 8 hours a week to spend reading labels in the grocery store. Dd also sometimes goes to school from my ILs house and they shouldn't have to do this, either. I cook with peanut oil for cultural reasons. I try to be careful, but I'm going to continue cooking with it in my own home.

To top it all off, while they do have a peanut free table in the cafeteria, guess what said cafeteria has on the menu every single day of the year? Yup, PB&J.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by corrie43_
As I read more, I'm tending to change my opinion...
I must say, pumpkinhead has written some very good posts as have many on both "sides" (though I'm not feeling as though we are all horribly divided on it in the first place). I, too, feel as though I'm understanding a bit more of "the other side" of this argument now.

Please keep up with the respectful posts, ladies! This is such an important issue and I feel we can learn alot from each other, if we stay cool!









Quote:

I guess I was most concerned about the false sense of safety a peanut free school would provide. You know someone will bring in something with peanuts by accident. Someone mentioned peanut M&Ms. I feel bad for any parent who has to deal with this scary reality. My heart goes out to you and your children.
ITA. I cannot imagine what it must be like to drop your kid off at school every day wondering if *this* will be the day your child ends up in emergency. My heart goes out to you, too.


----------



## NoraJadesMama (Aug 16, 2003)

Wow, I have to say I am pretty freaked out by this thread. I think all of the arguments have been made, and I won't repeat them. One of my best friends has a peanut allergic baby. I can only imagine how much terror and care goes into each day for her. If she were to send him to public school, as undoubtedly most parents do whether their child has a disability or not, I see how incredibly many hazzards and obstacles she would face. And perhaps the biggest one, and the most painful, is the defensiveness/ resistance / lack of compassion on the part of some other parents. And I think of her little son with a life threatening disability facing all these dangers and angers at 5.









Thank goodness my friend is planning on homeschooling, even though the family doesn't have much financial margin--but I shudder to think of a peanut allergic child without that safety net. It seems so obvious that ALL possible measures need to be taken to keep these children safe--ala ADA--the least of which would be banning peanuts, hand-washing, whatever it takes. The fact that the child would still be vulnerable makes this concerns MORE relevant, not less.

My heart goes out to all the moms on this thread who know this particular terror. What a lesson in courage.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Yeah, CK'smama, Piglet68 and everyone esle. ITA and can appreciate that some people and schools take it way to far. It seems there's always someone who has to go that route in life, doesn't it?







This really doesn't have to be an "all or nothing" situation. It's not really that difficult to read a label to see if the product 'may contain traces of nuts'. IT's usually in bold letters, in an easy to see spot. Don't most of us already read the ingredients lists of the things we buy our children as snacks? I know I do!

Most of the schools that are in my area (that I know of) do this only if there is an afflicted child and limit the rules to handwashing and no peanuts, PB or things containing traces of nuts. My child isn't school aged but I belong to a local Mama's group and have babysat many of their kids, including a peanut allergic child.

I'm gonna post a personal story, and my intent is not to be dramatic. I just want everybody who isn't aware of what anaphylaxsis does to the body to understand what this does to a child. It isn't easy for me to relive this, but I feel I should:

I watched this little boy, the child of a friend from my mom's group, almost die because he ate a chocolate popscicle (c'mon! A friggin popscicle!!) that was processed in the same facility as peanut products! It was actually on the label, just in very small letters. It wasn't on any of the other flavours labels which is why the Mama never thought to look. Turns out that these particular popscicles (evern tho they are the same brand) are processed in another facility. We had to call the company to find this info out. I watched his poor Mama jab 3 epi-pens, with needles as long as my index finger, into this child and pour Benadryl down his throat before the paramedics arrived. The sheer terror on this child's face made me shake. This was not the end of it either! He spent two days in the hospital hooked up to every manner of tube before being released. I know that none of the Mama's who have posted here would wish this on a child, EVER!

So, I do understand that you can be as careful as possible and accidents still do happen. But imagine what would happen if we didn't even make an effort of any kind? I can tell you that the Mama I talked about earlier is never free from worry. She can't homeschool her child (long story there) and the school he goes to is peanut free and allows epi pens, but she still lives in fear that she'll get a call at work someday telling her that her son has been rushed to the ER.

It's for this reason as well, that I understand how you could get carried away. I'm not advocating that avenue, but when it's your child, it doesn't matter! Your own child is NOT a statistic! Don't we all overreact when it comes to the safety of our children? Heck, if I could wrap my kid in kevlar and bubble wrap when I send him out to play, I prob would :LOL. We just can't do that, so we over react in other ways, don't we?

The point of all of this rambling is this: When you get a letter from a school asking you to refrain from sending peanuts etc. to school with your child, instead of immediately seeing red and getting angry on your child's behalf, I urge you to imagine the fear that these parents experience every day and feel compassion. It's perfectly fine to gently suggest that certian measures are excessive (like looking for words you can't even pronounce on a cereal box etc.) but try to put aside your anger and have a gentler approach.


----------



## shelbean91 (May 11, 2002)

Mamamaya- we are on the same page. I completely agree with you and was just trying to reiterate what you said while bumping it up a bit. Sorry if I wasn't clear.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

Don't most of us already read the ingredients lists of the things we buy our children as snacks?
I do. And I'm sure many of the mom's here do. But most people I know IRL do not read labels.

Like I said before, I would be more than happy to cooperate if my child were to attend a peanut free school. But if my son were the one with the peanut allergy, a school policy would not be enough to make me feel safe sending him there. There are just too many ways that someone can slip up.


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:

It's not really that difficult to read a label to see if the product 'may contain traces of nuts'. IT's usually in bold letters, in an easy to see spot. Don't most of us already read the ingredients lists of the things we buy our children as snacks?
Yeah, WE do. We are people who are concerned about nutrition, we are people who are aware that such information is available on labels, and we are people who find reading easy (here we are reading discussion boards) which means we are able to read those warnings.

I don't have the stats at my fingertips, but an astoundingly large percentage of American adults CANNOT READ well enough to read product labels---it's over 10%. A much larger group of people never read food labels because they "don't have time" or "it's not important." This includes many, many parents. Several times a year, I'll be reading food labels in the supermarket when somebody asks me what I'm doing, and when I explain, about 1/3 of the time their reaction is, "I didn't know that stuff was on there!"







: I'm always hearing things like, "Really, Nutri-Grain bars contain 6 different kinds of sweetener? I never looked at the ingredients. My kids love those, and I thought they were healthy because of the name." I do my best to spread awareness. But given the widespread ignorance and lack of concern about what's in food, I can't trust the general population to protect someone with a severe food allergy even if they want to.

If 5 children in a school of 500 have a life-threatening allergy, I think the school should accomodate that by providing a closed area for those kids with their own restroom, drinking fountain, etc. Their allergic trigger is a nutritious, affordable, convenient, appealing food for the other 495 kids. The restrictions necessary to ensure a safe environment in the entire building are, as EFmom explained, so elaborate that they are burdensome for the other families and extremely likely to be violated even if people are trying to comply. The consequences of even one violation are too dire to risk it. A smaller area and a smaller group of kids can be more easily controlled for their safety.


----------



## ameliabedelia (Sep 24, 2002)

I used to work in an elementary school where there was a 3rd grade girl who was severlly allergic to peanuts and other nuts and another kindergarten boy who also was This girl was highly allergic and the boy was fairly allergic. The school did take precautions with her, but the whole school wasn't peanut free.

Every teacher in the school was given a page with her picture and what the symptoms were, how to recognize if she was having an an allergic reaction, what to do about it, how to use the epipen etc. These pages had to be posted in the classroom and notice given to a substitute teacher if there was one.

The cafeteria had one peanut-free table where anyone sitting at that table had their lunch checked for peanuts, and their lunch had to be okayed for them to sit there. No one with peanuts was ever allowed to sit at that table and the boy and girl only sat at that table. The other parents of the other kids in their classes were made aware of this so that they would know if their child was friends with the allergic child and wanted to sit with them at lunch, they had to only eat certain approved foods. The parents of the kids in those classes knew that only certain approved foods would be allowed to be brought in for treats. After lunch and snack, any child in those children's classes who had eaten anything with peanuts in it, had to wash their hands carefully.

The girl and boy were allowed to carry their own water bottle around and taught to never drink out of the water fountain. They used a special bathroom and were taught to not use the regular bathroom. They also didn't open doors and and tried to touch as little as possible. The teacher took certain precautions with the classroom materials so that no peanut residue touched the crayons, paper, etc. Mostly, by making sure their hands were washed, etc.

Pretty much every teacher was made aware of those precautions which needed to be taken, and the parents of their classmates and friends were also made aware. However, other than that, people were allowed to eat peanuts and bring them to school. The entire school wasn't peanut free.

So, I don't think it is an all or none thing. Schools can definitely take precautions to accomodate those with peanut allergies but this doesn't involve banning peanuts from everyone in the entire school.


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:

I understand that it is not feasible to eliminate PB completely from a childs diet, nor is it desirable, but if you could lessen another child's chance of DYING by 75% simply by sending your child to school with a cheese sandwich, WHY WOULDN'T YOU?
Thank you.

PB&J is cheap, convenient, and nutritious. So, if you really think about it, are a lot of other foods. Removing peanut butter and other obvious products is not that hard (forget even the "may contain..." statement. Leave that bothersome phrase up to me, the mama, if you must. Most "may contain..." products aren't swimming in peanut dust so inhaling it isn't generally a problem; my child just shouldn't consume it). Don't pack the stuff for lunch; don't send p-nut butter cookies or reese's in for class parties. Just be respectful of another child's life and a mama's fears. I would love it if people actually cared enough to make the efforts suggested in EFmom's post--do I really believe, especially now, that most parents are willing to put themselves out that much for my child? Heck no. Obviously, it's just too much trouble.

Some _real_ numbers? Peanut allergy in *children* is up from .6% in 1997 to 1.2% now. That has doubled in six years. That is, as someone else said, one child out of every 100. That is a serious concern. Also, a peanut allergy is not like other allergies. You can't predict severity based on previous reactions or RAST (allergy test) numbers. Anyone with a peanut allergy is vulnerable to an anaphalactic response with the next exposure.

Quote:

If 5 children in a school of 500 have a life-threatening allergy, I think the school should accomodate that by providing a closed area for those kids with their own restroom, drinking fountain, etc
Hmmm...what does this remind me of?

shelbean91, pumpkinhead, mamamaya, NoraJadesMama--








Thank you!!


----------



## calgal007 (Nov 20, 2001)

Stonehenge: what foods are a problem for your child?


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Thank you Stonehenge. That is what I was trying to say, but you did a much better job.


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:

I don't know what this reminds you of, but if you are implying the segregation of Jews by the Nazis or the internment of Japanese Americans by the US gov't or any other heinous and disgusting maltreatment of humans throughout history, then you need a serious, SERIOUS reality check.
Actually, I was just trying to picture the signs that would be posted. Sadly, I think several other mamas on this thread need a serious reality check. I hope to gd none of you ever have a child with *deathly* food allergies because, let me assure you, it's terribly _inconvenent_. Stonehenge, you should realize that. I assume that you plan on homeschooling, yes? But, what about those parents who simply can't? It is the school's *legal* responsibility to work with that parent to create a safe learning environment and, if banning peanuts keeps thing that much safer, then why not?! *Nothing* is 100% effective. But every little effort adds up! P-nut-free zones are one way, a small step. Banning p-nuts simply brings it up a level, lessens chances of exposure even more.

Quote:

And btw, while schools are under legal obligation to educate any and every child, they don't have to do it in the schoolhouse from 8:30 am to 3:00 pm. Sending a tutor to the child's home qualifies as a safe and *appropriate* education.
But, in order to justify the expense, it has to be something beyond a p-nut allergy. It's called least restrictive environment and, if the child can *learn* in the school building, accommodations must be made.


----------



## calgal007 (Nov 20, 2001)

Quote:

I hope to gd none of you ever have a child with deathly food allergies because, let me assure you, it's terribly inconvenent.
You said it, Missy. It's terribly inconvenient to drive seventy miles an hour to the hospital while simultaneously stabbing your two-year-old in the thigh with an automatic injector of Epi Pen Jr.

Apparently, though, it's nothing like the inconvenience of not being able to pack peanut butter sandwiches when that's *all* a child will eat. . .


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by calgal007_
*You said it, Missy. It's terribly inconvenient to drive seventy miles an hour to the hospital while simultaneously stabbing your two-year-old in the thigh with an automatic injector of Epi Pen Jr.

Apparently, though, it's nothing like the inconvenience of not being able to pack peanut butter sandwiches when that's *all* a child will eat. . .







*








:

DAMN STRAIGHT!!!!!!!!!
If it were MY kid, it would be inconvenient for me....inconvenient in TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR MY CHILD MYSELF for something most parents don't have to deal with.

It would be a HUGE inconvenience for my family, I'm sure. One that I would never in a million years feel the right to shoulder on ANYONE but me and my husband. My children = my responsibility.

The notion of feeling like schools are LEGALLY required to bow down to my every whim for everything I want for my kid makes me ill.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

Apparently, though, it's nothing like the inconvenience of not being able to pack peanut butter sandwiches when that's *all* a child will eat. . .
I assume you are referring to the OP's friend, because not a single person here has said that they don't think peanuts should be banned because it is inconvenient for them to make something other than PB&J. In fact, I think every poster here has said that they would willingly comply with a peanut free school policy, but that they think it is problematic because it puts the responsiblity of a child's safety onto every other parent, child, caregiver, maintenance worker, etc., and because they feel that it isn't effective enough given the severity of the situation.


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

What are you really saying?









Quote:

The notion of feeling like schools are LEGALLY required to bow down to my every whim for everything I want for my kid makes me ill.
WOW, every [email protected]#! I'm not even touching that one.

Quote:

they think it is problematic because it puts the responsiblity of a child's safety onto every other parent, child, caregiver, maintenance worker, etc., and because they feel that it isn't effective enough given the severity of the situation.
So, what are you all really saying? That because of the severity, children with Peanut Allergies should not go to school? The only alternative is homeschooling, which takes having a partner working to pay the bills to do. I wish I could homeschool (I was planning to homeschool) until my husband turned back to his alcoholic ways and tried to kill me and harass me, pay no child support... So I have to do this all by myself. I HAVE TO WORK!

You are missing the point. Having schools make it a safe environment doesn't take away from the precautions that each family of Peanut Allergy kids have to take. Obviously we're not shirking our responsibilities. We're just saying that our society needs to also take responsibabity to make the school environment safe for everyone!

A lot of your arguements sound familiar to those about oil! Americans are so dependant on harmful substances and refuse to find alternatives because they are addicted to the ease of it.
More and more people are becoming allergic to Peanuts, we still don't know why. In the years to come, it will be interesting to see how this issue plays out, because the more children are exposed to peanuts, the more allergies will develop!


----------



## Moon (Nov 25, 2001)

My ten yo dd goes to a small private school. There are twenty kids in her combined 4-5-6 grade class that eat together.

SHE is careful about checking labels "so Cody doesn't get sick".

It's a nice lesson in empathy and it broke the "I will only eat pb" trend.

We go with it, cause it's the responsible and caring thing to do.

However....on one occasion I was not responsible for making her lunch...she got snowed in at Grandmum's and her aunt made her lunch. She's ten. She got snowed in with her cousins, and was excited. She didn't remind her aunt and frankly, neither did I. My sister sent in a granola bar that had been processed in a facility which also processed peanuts.

When Maeve (dd) got to school, she read the label and asked her teacher to throw it away. She's an extraordinary little kid, really.

It's easy...SO EASY....for a mixup to occur. I don't care what you (generic you) say about whether or not it's anyone's legal responsibility to provide a safe enviroment, if my kid could die over an easy mistake, I'm not going to rely on ANYONE but myself and my family. If that means taking a hit in my way of life (by having to stay home to homeschool or whatever), thats what I would do.

I mean, I wouldn't throw my kid in a shark pool and say, statistically, his chances of getting bitten are less than 1%, so it's just nifty he's learning to swim.

I just can't fathom the naivete that would trust a public school to be able to enforce a peanut free (and not just peanuts, but the products made in same facilities, yadda yadda yadda) zone. I just don't get that. I don't even trust them to TEACH, and that's what they're supposed to be doing.

If my kid were that sensitive, there's no way in h*ll that kid would be walking into a public school. Spare me the ADA thing, ok? I believe in it, I'll support it, I'm not saying accomodations shouldn't be made, but when it comes right down to it. ....ugh. The thought of putting my kid's life into the hands of hundreds of other families is just ......incomprehensible.


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

Many of the posters said that they would all homeschool, and implied that I'm a bad mom if I have to send my child with Peanut allergies to public school! Like I don't freakin care and worry about it like [email protected]#[email protected] I resent people of privilege acting like some of us have choices about schooling our children. You are all right, it does suck to have to worry about sending our kids to public school... some of us don't have a choice! Maybe you could be more empathetic to our situation instead of complaining that we are making your life more inconvenient. I know it isn't the end all be all solution, obviously we have to take precautions every minute of the day. But when we HAVE NO CHOICE but to send our kids to public school, then we could breath easier knowing that precautions are being taken in the school as well.

Also, no one ever said that it would be business as usual! No one ever said that by banning peanuts, parents and children wouldn't take every other precautions regarding keeping the children with allergies safe! You are making assumptions! It is not an either or thing, it is both and thinking.








:


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Quote:

Someone, somewhere along the line, is going to slip, and it's NOT going to be because they are not compassionate or don't want to be inconvenienced (and to suggest so is just plain mean).
Did you get a chance to read my story about my friends kid from Mum's group? Well *ALL* slip up! Every one of us makes boneheaded mistakes in our parenting at one time or another, and unless your name is Jesus Christ, we're all gonna continue to make mistakes. That isn't the point!!! Peanut free zones/schools are not a solution to the problem! They are a precaution taken to reduce the risk of a fatal reaction for a *CHILD* , not a number nor a statistic, A CHILD.

If you put your child in a moving vehicle, you are putting her in harms way. If you let your child ride a bicycle in the street, you are putting her at risk. If you take your child TO ANY public place, allergies or no, you are putting her at risk of kidnapping, violence and the stupidity or ineptness of other people. *Yes, we all take precautions when performing these activities with our children, but we still do them!!* So how canb you say that homeschooling our children with severe disabilities is the answer and please don't inconvenience me or my child? With respect,let the *parents* of the afflicted child worry about whether or not peanut free schools are effective! All you need to do is to nix the nuts.


----------



## Missy (Oct 22, 2002)

dreadmama--you are a terrific mama!!









I know some people, for whatever the reason, don't have a choice and I'm so glad that you found "a socially conscious public elementary/junior high school that values people and promotes healthy positive action towards a better world" with the _common sense and decency_ to work with you in keeping your child safe. PM me if you want to talk.

Me, I'm slinking off now. I don't have time to argue with people who have no intention of listening.







I'm too busy protecting my little one from the peanut-totin', milk-guzzlin' folks in the world.

See ya'!!!


----------



## Moon (Nov 25, 2001)

I'm sorry if you felt like I was saying your were a bad parent for sending your kid to public school.

I wasn't.

But I still think that people make choices based on what's important to them, and in your shoes, I would make other choices.
That's not to say I would necessarily be right and you wrong, ok?

Just different.

FWIW, I'm very lucky now, I have the most amazing, caring, generous man on the planet finacing my kid's school. But for the previous 6 years, I cleaned the school at night to be able to keep her in it by working off my tuition. She slept on the kindergarten cots whilst I did it.

So yeah, I get how hard the choices are.

There's no way anyone with a concience could send their kid to school with pb knowing they were going to sit down next to a kid whom the pb could kill.

But some people aren't careful, some kids live lives that are inconsistent, some parents may not care or understand, whatever, and if it's THAT deadly, I'm sorry, it's a no brainer for ME.


----------



## beanma (Jan 6, 2002)

wow, what an interesting discussion. i have a friend (grown up :LOL ) who has life-threatening peanut allergies and a buncha other ones, too. she grew up taking cream cheese and jelly sandwiches to school.

seems like a lot of folks who responded to this thread have been coming from the "if it was my child" perspective -- y'know either, "i couldn't count on the school to keep her safe", or "you better believe i'd want the school to do all they could".

how about the "what if it was your child's school perspective"? for everyone who sends their kids to public school or will when your kids are school age, if you got a notice today that said effective tomorrow all peanut products would be banned how would you feel about that? that's really what i took the OP to be about.

i guess for me, it would depend on how far they took it. i certainly wouldn't mind giving up PB&Js since DD1 doesn't like them anyway. i could see where it would be a pain to read every label before you packed a lunch, but since i read that other poster's story about the chocolate popscicle i don't think i'd have a problem with it. i mean, it's not like we couldn't eat it anywhere else. it's just a matter of not packing that granola bar like moon said. no, i would not be upset if my DDs' schools banned peanut products. i don't think it would solve the problem of any potential peanut exposure to an allergic child, but it would be a step in the right direction. i also don't have a problem with my DDs' schools banning soda machines :fire or guns or knives or cigarettes. i'm sure some kids will still sneak cigarettes in the bathrooms, but banning them at least keeps the exposure down. now, i know that guns and knives are healthy nutritious snacks for 95% of the school population, so that's a very flawed analogy, but...

gotta run...


----------



## dreadmama (Jan 8, 2004)

Quote:

I cleaned the school at night to be able to keep her in it by working off my tuition. She slept on the kindergarten cots whilst I did it.
Does your child have peanut allergies too? I don't understand why it is better for a private school to ban peanuts over a public school? And there would be the same inconsistancies with a private school as with public schools (parents bringing or sending products with peanuts, etc.). How does me working as a janitor in a private school to fund my child's education help the situation? How does it change anything if it is a private school... unless it is a private school solely for children with peanut allergies. If it is, please tell me where it is, I'm interested.

If the private school isn't devoted to children with Peanut Allergies, then it is the same difference as going to a public school, only more expensive.

So the only other alternative is homeschooling, which I've already discussed.

This is a no brainer for me!


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

I think......I'm shocked, actually, that some folks seem to feel that their children are their only responsibility. It's the same as if you were walking along a street & saw a child step out into the road- you'd grab that kid off the road, wouldn't you? Would you stop if someone were lying passed out on the footpath? Or saw a road accident? I don't quite have the words to say it well......what has society come to when it's all about looking out for number one- yourself & yours? I'm sure a lot of you don't see your lives like that, but that's the way it looks to me, reading this. There's a big difference between being libertarian & being selfish. Wow- my heart goes out to all those folks who are dealing with these alergies on a daily basis, all those people who are looking for a village & finding themselves outside a gated community.......


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

I don't quite have the words to say it well......what has society come to when it's all about looking out for number one- yourself & yours?
Geez, is there one person here who has said that they would not comply wholeheartedly if their school was to ban peanuts? Every parent here has said that they would do whatever they could to keep the other child safe. Is anyone hearing that?

It's just that some of us don't see the position of banning peanut products schoolwide as the right solution. Every single person here has said that they would NOT send their child to school with peanuts if they knew there was an allergic child at the school.

So can we stop with the line of how selfish and insensitive and uncaring we are? Some don't feel it is their responsibility, some don't feel that it is effective, some don't feel that it is the the place of the public school system to make such a policy, but regardless, WE WOULD ALL DO WHAT YOU ARE ASKING IF YOUR KID WAS IN OUR KID'S SCHOOL - WE WOULD NOT SEND OUR KID TO SCHOOL WITH PEANUT PRODUCTS!!!


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

oh good grief people.

aussiemum: there is a HUGE HUGE difference between a child running out into the street and me stopping him because there is no one else around and a child about to run out into the street with his mom right there and his mom saying to her friend "oh don't worry...someone will stop him".

I've said before....it's not that I *personally* don't care about anyone elses kid....when will you hear that? I'd bend over BACKWARDS to accomodate a child in my home with those kind of allergies.

And you may want to ignore the statistics but they HAVE to be taken into consideration. I'm sorry, but they do. And you have to acknowledge that your child is a SMALL minority. It doesn't matter WHAT the inconvenience is, when one person with one really rare, odd thing requires that an ENTIRE institution change JUST FOR HIM...thats not ok. The precident it sets for our kids is that every stinkin little special need they have should be catered to at any expense, that our kids don't have to take responsibility for their own actions and health, and it sets a standard of litigiousness that we do NOT need raised in this country.

Again..I've asked...whats the modivation? Do you want to be able to sue your school when they mess up? No? Then why make the rule? Because there is no other reason to in a socially conscious, forward thinking area.

Someone brought up a good point...the schools POV. Having worked in an elementary school for years, I think of it the same way.

Making the rule, by default, makes it MANDITORY that the burden falls on other parents and the schools. You really want to FORCE people to care about your kid? When you try to force people into anything, it usually backfires.

I would never try to force someone to care about my kid and I would never force the responsibility of my child on anyone else.


----------



## calgal007 (Nov 20, 2001)

We had an incident where a child shoved an open bag of nuts in to my peanut allergic son's face just "to see what would happen". That's the type of thing that can kill a peanut allergic child and it took only seconds for it to happen.


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

My kids don't have a peanut allergy, thank goodness, they just go to kindy with a kid who does. And I'm saying it's not a big deal to respect that- it's really truly not. And i'm sorry, but some posts are coming across as selfish, IMO, whether or not the poster intended them that way.

Anothermama, if a child ran out into a street & his mum was right there, would you let him get hit by a car because it's the mum's responsibility to look out for him? That's a rhetorical question, btw.....

Some folks do not have the option to homeschool. Some folks don't want to homeschool. They have a right to have their child safe in a public school, IMO.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I'm closing this thread....just temporarily, to let everybody cool off a bit.

Everybody take a deeeeep breath, and "ooooohhhmmmm".


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Sorry ladies, the thread is now open...

Also, I had to remove the thread referring to this one being closed. That's a no-no!







In the future, please address such requests or questions to me personally by PM.









Now, let's talk PEANUTS!


----------



## calgal007 (Nov 20, 2001)

I don't think there's much left to talk about, frankly. We mothers on this board who have children with life-threatening peanut allergies are coming from a place that nobody else understands.

The mothers who give lip service to abiding by school requests to eliminate peanuts, but then undercut that by making sure how well we parents of children with allergies know the level of 1. inconvenience we've caused and 2. how we're making society in general responsible for our children's safety so that we may enjoy a false sense of security.

I'm outtie. I don't want to hang with this type of unkindness and I don't understand the rightousness; like our kids are somehow less because there's a relatively small percentage of them.

Shame on some of you.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

The mothers who give lip service to abiding by school requests to eliminate peanuts
Whatever. I don't know how much clearer I can state that I would do whatever I possibly could to make sure my child did not bring any peanut products in their school. Lip service is saying you will do something and then not doing it.

The parents of peanut allergic children themselves have said they feel inconvenienced by having to take precautions. But I'm somehow selfish and inconsiderate because I might also feel inconvenienced while taking the same precautions? Talk about not listening to another's position.


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

there was a thread? Gosh, I was tickled to see something locked for a bit rather than removed...I so prefer that.

I just feel like life for anyone is not perfectly safe...we get into cars even though they are not perfectly safe. We do inconvenient things to make them a little safer. Peanut limitations are not perfect, but they decrease the risk and allows a child who wants a regular school education to get one. Their whole life will have some risk to it, this is an easy step that makes things just a little easier and little safer for them to have a more normal life. So I really don't understand why people would not want to bother if it's not 100% effective, or assume a parent would not want to weigh risk vs benefit...andthat for some children getting to do normal child things is worth some risk.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

anothermama,

With respect, I have to disagree with you here:

Quote:

It doesn't matter WHAT the inconvenience is, when one person with one really rare, odd thing requires that an ENTIRE institution change
JUST FOR HIM...thats not ok.
Do we not cater to minorities everyday in our lives? Do store and schools not have wheelchair access ramps? Do our payphones not have volume controls for the hearing impaired? Do our elevators not have brail beside the number keys? Most schools have to install elevators and ramps if there is just one child who requires them. Perhaps all of these things do not inconvenience us per se, but they do inconvenience us in that they utilize funds from our taxpayer dollars. They are also cases of entire institutions catering to minorities.

Please know, I am not trying to annoy you here. Just trying to maintain an intelligent debate.

*calgal007*

Quote:

We mothers on this board who have children with life-threatening peanut allergies are coming from a place that nobody else understands.
I'm pretty sure there are a few Mamas who have posted on this thread who don't have children with life threatening allergies who *GET* where you are coming from. I respect that you can't really understand a situation fully until you are forced to live with it. However, I think I have made it pretty clear from what I have posted here that I'm sympathetic and appreciative of what you ladies are going thru as have a few others.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

P.S. Thanks Piglet68 for just locking the thread temporarily instead of removing it! I'm with Clarity in that I appreciate that







.


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

I also agree that nobody here has said they wouldn't comply with the peanut-free policy, so I fail to see how that is "paying lip service." I did say that I would continue cooking with peanut oil in my own home for food we consume there. I do not send anything that has been cooked in the oil to school with dd, and I do wash my hands.

Complying with my dd's school's policy is not "an easy step." It is a very time consuming step. I must shop armed with the school's list of acceptable foods and I must read every stupid label of everything, even if it is something I've bought before, because the school's instructions say that manufacturers change ingredients and processing methods, which is probably true.

It is also a step that costs me money, as many of the brands that the school recommends cost more than the brands of things I normally buy. It doesn't cost a huge amount and I can afford it, but I'm sure there are others in the school for whom it is an issue.

Quite frankly, I worry about litigation. Suppose, despite my spending extra hours in the grocery store, I manage to send in peanut contaminants. I have a very definite feeling that if it were traced to me, I would have a lawsuit on my hands.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by aussiemum_
*
Anothermama, if a child ran out into a street & his mum was right there, would you let him get hit by a car because it's the mum's responsibility to look out for him? That's a rhetorical question, btw.....

Some folks do not have the option to homeschool. Some folks don't want to homeschool. They have a right to have their child safe in a public school, IMO.*

I'm not saying I wouldn't do anything...but really...put yourself in the situation.......I've seen stuff like this on these boards even.
A mom stands right next to you and does something like that.....lets her kid run into a street with trafic or leaves a small toddler in a grocery cart and walks away. In REALITY you'd really question what to do....I've seen many moms come on boards like this and say things like "I felt like I should do something, but I didn't want to butt in cause his mom was standing right there" or something like that.

I *do* feel a sense of responsibility towards others. I cannot STAND being in a restaurant or public place where someone is letting a baby CIO because I just ITCH to pick that baby up. BUT...not my child, not my parenting choice if that parent is right there and able to take care of their child themselves.

As with this....sure I feel a sense of responsibility...as I've said, I'd probably bend over backwards if it was a friend of my DD's or something. However, FORCING responsibility for your child onto another is wrong, even if they are good caring people. Thats all I mean.

And, to be honest...aren't rich. I'm not "privaleged" like some people in this thread have implied. But you know what? If my kid had something that COULD KILL HIM like this? Well, it would be a consideration...a LARGE consideration of mine...that maybe I should sacrafice more for this child...maybe I needed to either send him to private school or whatnot. Or I'd probably fight like the dickens to get him in a charter school with teeny classes or get him a private tutor from the public school.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by oceanbaby_
*Whatever. I don't know how much clearer I can state that I would do whatever I possibly could to make sure my child did not bring any peanut products in their school. Lip service is saying you will do something and then not doing it.

The parents of peanut allergic children themselves have said they feel inconvenienced by having to take precautions. But I'm somehow selfish and inconsiderate because I might also feel inconvenienced while taking the same precautions? Talk about not listening to another's position.*
ocean...
FWIW, I hear ya loud and clear.







I hear exactly what you are saying and I think you've really really made some wonderful points.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by pumpkinhead_
*anothermama,

Do we not cater to minorities everyday in our lives? Do store and schools not have wheelchair access ramps? Do our payphones not have volume controls for the hearing impaired? Do our elevators not have brail beside the number keys? Most schools have to install elevators and ramps if there is just one child who requires them. Perhaps all of these things do not inconvenience us per se, but they do inconvenience us in that they utilize funds from our taxpayer dollars. They are also cases of entire institutions catering to minorities.

Please know, I am not trying to annoy you here. Just trying to maintain an intelligent debate.

*
One difference: life threatening. And since when did allergies become a disability? (Seriously...many moms here are comparing...I wasn't aware I become disabled every spring...).

The school putting in a one time fix...an access ramp...doesn't really mean a thing to me and it isn't putting ANY responsibility on anyone. It solves a problem. Little Joey can't get into his class? BOOM! Ramp in, problem solved.

AND.....(I know this cause I came from one) in schools where they can't for whatever reason, the schools are allowed to make reasonable adjustments, such as has been mentioned, givng the kid a tutor in another accessible room.

AND......what I started with...if Little Joey doesn't get into his class that day, it's not gonna kill him.

We're talking life threatening. Just as schools with severely Bee allerigic children do not cut recess, why should schools with severely nut allergic children start cutting things? It's not something that can be fixed at the school level anyhow and in creating a rule to try to alleviate the parents responsibility, you automatically make EVERYONE in that community shoulder the responsibility, if they want to or not. And the problem is still there. It's not like doing this will make the allergy go away. It will still be there AND NOW the parents can SUE if they want to. Yucky.


----------



## grisandole (Jan 11, 2002)

Coming to this late









Okay, first, of course I would comply with a "peanut free zone". I do think that asking parents to not pack lunches w/peanut products isn't a hardship. However, there are alot of things processed in plants that process peanuts, and if the allergic child is so sensitive that they can't be exposed to those foods as well, then I think there needs to be another solution; as I don't think parents, grandparents, caregivers, kids, etc. are going to go the extra mile 100% off the time, like EFmom does. Not because they don't care, but because of human error. So, in that case, I don't think a regular public school setting, even peanut free, is safe for a child that allergic. I think the child should get a home tutor (provided by the public school); or a private room and one on one teacher at the school; as that will be a much better guarantee that the child isn't going to be exposed to peanut residue.

My .02

Kristi


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

I've looked at about a dozen school handbook in the last 3 weeks. Many of them forbid peanut-containing product, but none went so far as "may contain trace amounts of peanuts" product. So I would say that level is quite a bit farther than most schools are, unless it's for in-class snacks and party foods that the child would be closer to or be allowed to consume. In our preschool, the allergic child's mom packs separate snacks, and does all-class snack more often, but no in school food can overtly nut-containing. The theory is that "trace amounts" are only a major concern if the child is touching or eating them since it's a minute quantity. Combined of course with table and hand washing.

Some label reading is just to catch the obvious -like snickers bars have nuts. people forget. But to the extent of listings brands, etc. Most school policy I've looked at (mostly private and two public elementary) are nowhere near that far. One preschool did remind people that the Nature Valley oats and honey granola bars have nuts, but another flavor is ok or something like that that's easy to miss if you don't read labels.


----------



## shelbean91 (May 11, 2002)

When an allergy is life threatening, it is very well a disability. This isn't just stuffy noses, runny eyes, sinus headaches- this is hospitalization or death, within a very short amount of time. I don't think anyone is saying peanut free is solving the problem, nor is it giving parents peace of mind because they know that any day there could be an innocent mistake.

Yes, it is putting some responsiblities on others, but if you don't want to change your lifestyle and accept the responsiblity to accomodate the needs of the highly allergic student, pull your own child out of school and homeschool- that's your right. Putting out a letter to keep peanuts out of school isn't accomodating a 'whim' of the child and parent, it is helping reduce the chance of death.

Putting your child in a carseat isn't going to guarantee they will survive a crash, but it will greatly increase their chances. Just like removing peanuts won't guarantee an allergic reation won't happen, but it will greatly reduce the chances.


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

Quote:

One difference: life threatening. And since when did allergies become a disability?
Wow. That's not even up for discussion. A peanut allergy that severe (which is a little different than hay fever, I might add) is clearly listed by the ADA as a disability.

This is what I don't understand. There seems to be a group within this discussion that thinks peanut allergy children should be homeschooled, tutored, private schooled, whatever...I'm just wondering, how do you feel about allowing other children with disablilitie into the classroom? Do you feel they should be homeschooled as well?

The second thing I don't understand is if you don't feel the allergy is a disability, why should the child be homeschooled? Obviously they can still function at the level of all the other children. They are still learning, playing and interacting the same. I don't understand this reasoning for homeschooling. Plenty of children with peanut allergies go to public school--and are fine, as long as the school complies with certain things....What's such a big deal about that?

Yes, of course everyone agrees that if a school went peanut free, that they would comply with it. I don't think that that's what people on the other fence are getting so upset about. I thinkl what's happening here is that there is a deeper dynamic at play here about children with disablilites---and where they belong. Why should someone who is a little different have to stay home, or go to private school??? That's just not fair.

I'd like you to think about this. Our children learn their prejudices from us. If they hear and see you undercutting someone's disability (like saying it doesn't exist), or saying that a child with an allergy should be homeschooled, what would your child think?
How would they interact with a disabled person next time one came around?

I believe that having schools change their policies to make it safer for allergic children benefits all. It allows the peanut alergic child to socialize in a school setting with his/her peers, and it teaches all the other children a huge lesson, in giving, compassion, and *acceptance*. I have to say, I'm a little surprised at the tone this thread has taken, especially at Mothering. Disabled people are still one of the most underpriveleged people in our country. And yes, thinking their disability is not a disability is a form of prejudice. Just something to think about.

Glad this thread is back


----------



## grisandole (Jan 11, 2002)

Just want to clarify; I only think a child should be taught privately if they have so severe of an allergy that even products containing trace peanut residue (like peanuts are processed in the same plant but not actually in the product) will kill them. And I feel this way for the child's safety, not for convience of other children.

Kristi


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

grisandole,

You've just described a huge percentage of those who are peanut allergic. This thing about this allergy is that those who have it react with moderate to severe anaphylaxsis upon even minute exposure. These children do just fine, for the most part, in peanut free classrooms/zones.

No one can prevent accidents! NO ONE! But accidents happen to all of us regardless of the most careful planning. I don't think children should be isolated from their peers just becaause an accident *could* happen. If this were so, we'd never let any of our children do anything ever! It's like saying : I'm not going to let little jenny go to the play ground every because the possibility that she might fall off the monkey bars is too great.


----------



## grisandole (Jan 11, 2002)

I think it's a pretty big risk to be in a public school setting if a child is that allergic. Really. Because that's an awful lot of trust to put into so many people......What if, despite a mamas best efforts, her kid snuck some peanut butter on the way to school, and she didn't know; and didn't wash his hands.......then what?

I'm just saying that the kids should have other options, for their safety. I wouldn't send my kid to public school if they were that allergic.

And you can't have it both ways, you can's say "Everything must change for my child, it's safety, a life or death situation" and then say "well, nothings 100%, my kid shouldn't be excluded" ????

I just see potentially dying from a whiff of something produced in a facility that also processes peanuts, as a very serious allergy. And why gamble with that childs life by expsoing them to hundereds of people who may not have been careful enough?

About the "right" to an education, sure everyone has that right. But I don't see why having a teacher come to the house, where it's safe and the parent can monitor the situation, is a bad thing???

Kristi


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

A tutor for the child would be wonderful, in a perfect world. But what if the parent can't stay home, or what if the child doesn't want to be homeschooled?? I see your reasoning in this, and I even agree with you a little. If that is what works for a family, then fine. But its not fair for everyone.


----------



## grisandole (Jan 11, 2002)

Well, a teacher isn't the same as homeschool. And just because the child doesn't want it, doesn't mean they should go to a potentially deadly environment.

As for working; presumably, if the parent is working, they are paying for child care, so why can't they continue to pay for child care once the child is of school age? Like once the teacher leaves, the child care provider comes over? And the teacher would be paid by the school district, so no extra money needed there.

I homeschooled and worked; I had an excellent nanny who did some of the hs stuff with ds1, and then when I got home I did some with him, too. It can be done.

Kristi


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

That would be a great solution, if that's what the family wanted.

Just to add, I was "homeschooled", or whatever you wanted to call it by a district teacher. She only visited about once a week, for about three hours. That left a lot of time home alone for me. (I was in highschool)

I also, think that it might be hard for a lower income family to afford a full time nanny. That's what you'd need, because I don't think a child care center would accept a school age child full time. And a nanny is ALOT more pricey than a child care center -and maybe not even subsidized.

I'm starting to get tired of arguing...I feel this conversation is going nowhere. See ya all,


----------



## Moon (Nov 25, 2001)

Quote:

_Originally posted by dreadmama_
*I don't understand why it is better for a private school to ban peanuts over a public school? And there would be the same inconsistancies with a private school as with public schools (parents bringing or sending products with peanuts, etc.).
This is a no brainer for me!








*

I pm-ed you my answer to this, but for the sake of answering questions in the thread, I will reiterate here.

Both my kid's schools are tiny, and intensely community oriented. The one she went to for the first 6 years was completely parent run. We did *everything* So my prejudice is, and I didn't realize it till you pointed it out, that private schools were going to be smaller, and more understanding, and the parents there were going to be slightly more careful because they *know* you.

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. The schools my kids went to/are currently attending are pretty unique, and I WOULD feel safe, having explained face to face with intensely AP type parents of all 6 kids in her class.

Sorry. I let my prejudice for small school co-ops show there. That's why it was a no brainer for me. I guess if you choose a huge, normal private school there wouldn't be any difference.

And I truly do not wish to argue with you, upset you, or imply that you are a bad parent, but I couldn't do it.

Edited to add: The parents of the allergic child in my dd's class sent home PAGES of lists of things that couldn't go into the classroom. And I do mean PAGES. I was overwhelmed when I got the thing and found half of my persnickety ten year old's diet on there.

Of course we use the guide, who wouldn't? But I have to tell you, it makes me *really* nervous. If he could really pop his clogs cause my kid's eating a granola bar that might have peanut dust in it cause the other granola bars made in the same facility have peanut dust in them.....that's WAY too much responsibility for me to have to assume.

I'm not callous. I'm not a horrible person. I'm scared to death for your (generic you) kid.

Use the car analogy. I would be the mother watching YOU to make sure YOU are watching the child., and I'm also the one who puts herself between your kid and the road without saying a word. I do it, but man......

Ok, I'm shutting up now. Blast me if you have to.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by shelbean91_
*When an allergy is life threatening, it is very well a disability. This isn't just stuffy noses, runny eyes, sinus headaches- this is hospitalization or death, within a very short amount of time. I don't think anyone is saying peanut free is solving the problem, nor is it giving parents peace of mind because they know that any day there could be an innocent mistake.

Yes, it is putting some responsiblities on others, but if you don't want to change your lifestyle and accept the responsiblity to accomodate the needs of the highly allergic student, pull your own child out of school and homeschool- that's your right. Putting out a letter to keep peanuts out of school isn't accomodating a 'whim' of the child and parent, it is helping reduce the chance of death.

Putting your child in a carseat isn't going to guarantee they will survive a crash, but it will greatly increase their chances. Just like removing peanuts won't guarantee an allergic reation won't happen, but it will greatly reduce the chances.*
I don't understand WHY its a disability....there are lots of other allergies than can cause hospitilization. It's catering to a really small minority. Period. It's forcing responsibility and NOT NOT NOT solving an issue. Period.

Putting my child in a carseat is my choice. I'm not asking the Department of Transportation to provide me a carseat for my child. I do it, I pay for it. My responsibility.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by mamamaya_
*

This is what I don't understand. There seems to be a group within this discussion that thinks peanut allergy children should be homeschooled, tutored, private schooled, whatever...I'm just wondering, how do you feel about allowing other children with disablilitie into the classroom? Do you feel they should be homeschooled as well?

The second thing I don't understand is if you don't feel the allergy is a disability, why should the child be homeschooled?

I don't think that that's what people on the other fence are
getting so upset about. I thinkl what's happening here is that there is a deeper dynamic at play here about children with disablilites---and where they belong. Why should someone who is a little different have to stay home, or go to private school???

Glad this thread is back







*

Ew ew ew ew ew.
Yuck yuck yuck!!!!!!!!! Coming from the perspective being a minority AND having a disability...ew.......I'm really really offended that you tried to play this card. I have a very very yucky feeling about this....

So...back up your statements..........where in any part of this thread does anyone say "These kids should be homeschooled.". I can't find it. I know *I* said that even if I couldn't afford it, which I can't, it would make me think about doing it for MY kid.

I don't care where anyone goes to school. I don't see anyone, in fact, saying otherwise.

Ugh. Thats all I'm going to say because I'm very very very upset that someone tried to throw around the discrimination card.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by pumpkinhead_
*grisandole,

You've just described a huge percentage of those who are peanut allergic. This thing about this allergy is that those who have it react with moderate to severe anaphylaxsis upon even minute exposure. These children do just fine, for the most part, in peanut free classrooms/zones.

No one can prevent accidents! NO ONE! But accidents happen to all of us regardless of the most careful planning. I don't think children should be isolated from their peers just becaause an accident *could* happen. If this were so, we'd never let any of our children do anything ever! It's like saying : I'm not going to let little jenny go to the play ground every because the possibility that she might fall off the monkey bars is too great.*

Your SOOO right! And making a RULE about it in public schools is ALSO like saying "We can't let the kids play on the monkey bars...they might get hurt" or "We can't let them play outside...they'll get struck by lightning". Just as parents have to weight the risks for their families, they have to do it when picking schools and sending their kids to school. And if you have a peanut allergic child, you have to weigh that risk in sending your child to school...........but it's not fair to force that descion on others.


----------



## faeriedreams (Feb 16, 2003)

A child at my brother's school died from a allergic peanut reaction a few years ago. Apparently, a child who ate lunch before him had a peanut butter sandwich, and the leftover residue caused his allergic reaction. At the time, the school did not have a peanut free policy...they have since switched to being peanut free. I think that most of the families are more than happy to deal with the minor inconvenience to protect other potentially allergic children at the school.

At my daughter's kindergarden, there is also a policy to protect the allergic children. Snacks and birthday treats must be free of peanuts, dairy, and egg (which several children are allergic to). Homemade birthday treats are not allowed. Personally, I really do not mind this policy at all...the teachers provide a list of acceptable snacks, and include many more whole foods (fruits, veggies, etc). In fact, I like that all the children are able to participate and nobody feels left out. It creates a feeling of community in the classroom.
Christy


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

Quote:

I don't understand WHY its a disability....there are lots of other allergies than can cause hospitilization. It's catering to a really small minority. Period. It's forcing responsibility and NOT NOT NOT solving an issue. Period.
"In both the ADA and Section 504, a person with a disability is described as someone who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, or is regarded as having such impairments. Breathing, eating, working and going to school are "major life activities." Asthma and allergies are still considered disabilities under the ADA, even if symptoms are controlled by medication."

"
The second issue is whether allergies to peanut butter are disabilities within the definitions of applicable federal law. Under the current interpretations of federal law, including the Supreme Court's decision in Abbott v. Bragdon, which applies the definition of disability broadly to cover a woman who was HIV positive but asymptomatic (see Bragdon v. Abbott -- Supreme Court Decision Addresses Application of Americans with Disabilities Act to Individuals with HIV <980626Bragdon.html>, Bragdon -- The Unanswered Questions <../../HealthLawNews/09-1998.html>, and 118 S.Ct. 1206 (1998)), the courts are likely to find that at least those individuals with severe reactions to peanuts are substantially limited in the major life activity of breathing. It is less clear whether individuals with moderate reactions would be covered. The courts have distinguished between degrees of limitation in cases involving depression, mobility, and other impairments, so it is not impossible to imagine a program challenging the coverage of discrimination law to at least some individuals, although to do so might not be wise from a public relations perspective. "

"Federal discrimination law -- i.e., the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Air Carrier Access Act -- require covered programs to not discriminate against otherwise qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of their disability. More importantly for the purposes of peanut cases, these laws require reasonable accommodation. Reasonable accommodations are those that are not unduly burdensome either administratively or financially. "


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

thanks


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

I think my DD's preschool has a very fair policy. No peanut butter, period. But as far as items with the possibility of trace peanut dust - there is no exclusion unless it will be a "class snack".

In other words, the kids can't have pb but the parents don't have to search labels unless they are bringing a snack for the entire class. The allergic kids are expected to not share lunches. The school has given us a list of "approved" snacks if you need to bring something for the entire class.

I think the thing that gets to people is not the exclusion of peanut butter - it's the exclusion of everything that might contain peanut traces (at least that's what would get to me).


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by anothermama_
*Oh my goodness!
I can't belive that YOU mamas are making the WORLD responsible for one thing about your childs health!!!!!!!!!!









(BTW, all the stats I've seen have said the instance of people in the us TOTAL that have a nut allergy is 1 percent
http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/f4092.htm
And the ammount of KIDS in that population who could DIE from it CLEARLY fall into the less than half a percent of all people in the US!!!!!!! It's not a ton of kids!!!!!!)
*
It's not the whole world, it's the public school system, which by law is supposed to accomodate all children. And I'm really curious about the statistics. I teach a sunday school class of 14 kindergarten children and two of them have life threatening peanut allergies.

I'm really surprised at the "that's not fair" attitude. We're not talking about something that's uncomfortable or unpleasant, (like not having your favorite lunch and choosing not to eat anything else), we're talking about a life and death situation. Come off it! It's not fair that I can't drive 150 miles and hour on the highway, but I don't sit and whine about it, because the roads have to accomodate other people too. Lots of things aren't fair, and we all deal with them every day. I think it's a good lesson for kids to learn: sometimes we can't get what we want, because there are other people in this world to consider. Your child's right to eat a peanut butter sandwich ends with my child's right to go to school and come home *alive* at the end of the day.


----------



## oceanbaby (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

Your child's right to eat a peanut butter sandwich ends with my child's right to go to school and come home alive at the end of the day.
At the risk of being totally misunderstood, I respectfully disagree with this. It is definitely more important that your child come home alive than my child eat a peanut butter sandwich, but my child's rights do not end because of your child's special needs.

Please remember that during this entire discussion I have said that I would happily comply with a peanut free policy in any school that my child attended. I personally wouldn't send my child to school if it put his life at risk, but that's not my decision to make for your child.

But I think the attitude that your kid's rights are more important than another kid's rights is what pisses people off. Absolutely it is important that we do what we can to accommodate as many special needs people as we can. But let's not take it to the other extreme - it doesn't mean that the rights of a special needs person are more important than the rights of any other person.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by oceanbaby_
*At the risk of being totally misunderstood, I respectfully disagree with this. It is definitely more important that your child come home alive than my child eat a peanut butter sandwich, but my child's rights do not end because of your child's special needs.

Please remember that during this entire discussion I have said that I would happily comply with a peanut free policy in any school that my child attended. I personally wouldn't send my child to school if it put his life at risk, but that's not my decision to make for your child.

But I think the attitude that your kid's rights are more important than another kid's rights is what pisses people off. Absolutely it is important that we do what we can to accommodate as many special needs people as we can. But let's not take it to the other extreme - it doesn't mean that the rights of a special needs person are more important than the rights of any other person.*
I wouldn't say I"m pissed off so much as...mind boggled.

I made a couple points that none of the peanut free advocates have addressed...

It's more than a disability..its life threatening. Fine. I get that. The policy doesn't solve anything and all it does it make it so that you can sue. And that boggles me. It's like saying you don't have to be responsible for your kid and if they die you can sue the school. Because...really....what else is the point of making a school wide policy to apply to one person in a hundred?

It boggles my mind because the more life threatening it is, the more I see it as something that is more of a burden and responsibility for me and my family. If my kid was wheelchair bound...well, there are fixes for that, and my kid wont die without a ramp.

It's a HUGE responsibility, being responsible for someones LIFE. Thats HUGE!!! And it's one thing to say to the parents of a school "You're responsible for helping my child get educated" because, yeah, thats what school is for. But to say "You're ALSO responsible for keeping my kid ALIVE". Holy moly!! I would NEVER presume to push that on anyone else. I think, on a community level, it's just plain rude and inconsiderate and on a larger scale...holy cow I'd NEVER trust an institution with that responsiblity of my child!!! Schools are gonna cover the basics and do what they can...but extremes like this can't be covered with legislation. It's like saying the victims of Columbine can sue the school for not keeping THEIR kids alive.

I think whatever the condition is, the MORE severe your childs condition is, the LESS responsibility others have for it. Sure, it must be very VERY hard for the parents. Just like it's hard for parents of kids with lukemia or kids with mental disabilities...but it's one of those things you take on when you have a kid...some kids will have extreme health problems and you have to deal with them...not make other people deal with them.


----------



## Cloverlove (Jan 2, 2003)

Wow- what a thread!

Sort-of







T

I wonder if *any of us* should be eating peanuts? I just wanted to mention aflatoxins.

Quote:

Aflatoxin is also recognized as a potent carcinogen that causes liver cancer in laboratory animals.

Quote:

According to a Consumers Union study done a few years ago, eating peanut butter that contains an average level of only two parts per billion of aflatoxin once every 10 days would present a cancer risk of seven in one million. Small as that may seem, it's higher than the estimated risk of cancer from most pesticides. And that's if you can restrict your children's peanut butter consumption to once every 10 days!
There is life after peanut butter!


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

given the link we're learning about with consumption in pregnancy and nursirsing, creating more highly nut-allergic children, I certainly don't think it should be in WIC. Perhaps the prevelance in govt food programs, given to the highest-at-risk for allergies people, could explain some of what we're seeing. Some enormous number of mothera and children get WIC. But then WIC gives tuna too, also not the best form of protein for pregnancy, nusring and little ones. How about some beans!


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Clarity_
*given the link we're learning about with consumption in pregnancy and nursirsing, creating more highly nut-allergic children, I certainly don't think it should be in WIC. Perhaps the prevelance in govt food programs, given to the highest-at-risk for allergies people, could explain some of what we're seeing. Some enormous number of mothera and children get WIC. But then WIC gives tuna too, also not the best form of protein for pregnancy, nusring and little ones. How about some beans!*
WIC usually gives out vouchers for dry beans.


----------



## eilonwy (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by anothermama_
*
I think whatever the condition is, the MORE severe your childs condition is, the LESS responsibility others have for it. Sure, it must be very VERY hard for the parents. Just like it's hard for parents of kids with lukemia or kids with mental disabilities...but it's one of those things you take on when you have a kid...some kids will have extreme health problems and you have to deal with them...not make other people deal with them.*
That would be true, if we weren't talking about something which, by law, people are required to do. If there was no compulsory school attendance law, this wouldn't be an issue. If every mother was a SAHM, this wouldn't be an issue. Then you would be correct, and responsibility for keeping my kid alive would fall solely on me. But it doesn't. If I'm a single mother who has to work outside of the home, and my child is too young to stay home by themselves all day and homeschool in the evenings and on weekends, what are my alternatives? I have to send them to school. The law says that my child must be educated, I can't keep them in daycare all day (even if I could afford it). In order for a child with a life threatening allergy to go to school, the school has to make reasonable accomodations. It's perfectly reasonable to ask other kids not to bring peanut butter to school if it might kill my child, just like it's perfectly reasonable to ask kids not to bring guns to school.

Or should we let them do that too, because it infringes on their right to bear arms?

The columbine analogy is a good one. There was a reason the parent's didn't sue: because the school had a policy that guns were not permitted. It doesn't mean that parents were not responsible for teaching their kids gun safety and first aid, but it does mean that the school is doing what it can to keep the kids safe. If the school had a policy of letting students bring guns to school, then they would absolutely be liable if a student got shot. If the school has metal detectors, it doesn't mean your child is perfectly safe, but it does mean that the school is doing everything they can to accomodate the saftey of it's students.

The peanut free policy *does* do something. First, it makes other parents aware of the issue. Secondly, it allows parents to feel more confident about sending their children to school. No parent of a child with a life-threatening allergy is going to say "Oh, the school is supposed to be peanut free, so I won't send Jimmy with his epi-pen." No parent has said "I'm going to sue the school if a single kid sneaks a peanut butter sandwich in and kills my child." The policy means that other parents know that this is an issue. It only puts *some* of the responsibility on those other parents. The same degree of responsibility that a gun owner has for not killing people with his firearm.

Without those policies, without those laws, it wouldn't be remotely safe to do *anything*. Yes, people will break the laws, and accidents will happen, but that doesn't mean that the laws serve no purpose. I really don't see what you mean by that.

Oh, and WIC does let you get dry beans instead of peanut butter. I gave up peanut butter in my third trimester because I was concerned about him developing such an allergy. I also gave up shellfish and cow's milk, which was a pain in the neck but, IMO, well worth the effort.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

one thing i don't get: people have been eating peanuts for thousands of years and until recently all were breastfeeding. i don't buy it as the reason for this epidemic. its just one more slight against breastfeeding. there's something else going on, IMO.


----------



## Clarity (Nov 19, 2001)

true, it's very likely to be more complex...but peanuts...weren't they originally an african food? and only recently did europeans eat them? I don't know when asians started. but like with lactose intolerance maybe there's a genetic difference with nut tolerance. And when we did become a more broadly peanut-eating country, breastfeeding was decreasing. So I don't know. I don't think it's a slight against bf at all...since the allergy if it's going to develop is more likely from direct consumption. So not nursing just to hand your toddler a peanut butter cracker is worse. They're just finding prenatal and BF exposure does also count as a sensitizing exposure, which they weren't aware of before. They're really only warning off moms who have a nut allergy tendency in their family, and encouraging people not to feel nut products to very young children, since kids with allergy tendencies might not develop as serious a reaction if exposure is delayed until they're older.

YAY on WIC! I thought you got equal parts of each, and if you passed on one or two you just got less.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

I don't think this has got anything to do with breastfeeding and everything to do with our way of life nowadays. We are raising our kids in increasingly sterile environments and introducing them to processed foods at earlier and earlier ages. It's pretty scary how many food items /may contain traces of peanuts or other nuts'. All of these products that are mass produced tend to be processed in plants that are processing multiple things. It wasn't until relatively recently that it's been required by law to indicate this on the label (if the plant processing the food also processes peanuts or other nuts). It's entirely possible that the frickin' baby cereal we thought was so safe and healthy could have contained traces of nuts without our knowledge.

We (I don't mean us at MDC per se, more so the general population at large) also tend to give into our Grandmothers etc. too often and introduce solids before many of our babes are ready for them. As their little intestines aren't completely sealed, it allows bigger protiens to cross into the blood and the immune system encounters them before it should, leading to all manner of allergies and sensitivities.

The sterility issue...honestly, how are our children going to develop healthy immune systems if we're continually 'lysolling' the crap out of everything they come into contact with? If we're not exposed to pathogens, our immune systems cannot develop properly. Plain and simple. So of course, when we actually come into contact with an allergen, our body is gonna overreact. Also, this makes it difficult (esp for a formula fed babe) to obtain a healthy intestinal flora.

I think this is a complex issue and hinges on more than one thing, but I don't believe that BF'ing is one of them. JMO.


----------



## Moon (Nov 25, 2001)

I was telling dp about this thread, and he says, that he thinks it's a possibility that the change in how we grow peanuts that causes the problem. You know, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.

Just a thought.


----------



## calgal007 (Nov 20, 2001)

Or perhaps in earlier days, children didn't survive their allergic reaction, and thus were statistically eliminated.


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

Oops, sorry, that was me being naughty (again.....sigh) Piglet. Forgot about the PM thing.....

It seems to me that many posters here are concerned about the threat of legal action if something hypothetically happens & they are found to be the parent who sent the peanut product to school. That's sad, for a lot of reasons & I'm not really sure what you folks can do about that.....Perhaps that's why it doesn't seem to be such a big deal with me (P-nut free schools), cuz I'm fairly certain that no Aussie parent is going to try & take revenge on me if something terrible happens to their kid. Now living with my own conscience, that's another story......

So, now my question is, is it the inconvenience of finding alternative foods for school that worries people, or is it the fear of legal action that is the bigger concern?

Just another culturally confused missive from the other side of the planet......


----------



## EFmom (Mar 16, 2002)

It's not an either/or issue for me. It's both. It's the huge inconvenience for me and for everyone else who sends dd with food to school. I also suspect that people who would expect every other family in the school to go to these lengths with their shopping might also be people who are litigious.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

aussiemum....as someone else who is not a native American, I too find the litigousness (sp?) of this society to be extreme compared to my own (Canada). On the one hand, I read anothermama's posts about fear of being sued and think "that's nuts!" but then I think about the sorts of cases I read about in the states and think...ya know..maybe she's not that far off....

But honestly....no, I don't think any mother who fears for her child's life every time they go off to school has a court-case agenda in her back pocket. Maybe that makes me naive...I don't know.


----------



## 3_opihi (Jan 10, 2003)

And just when you though this thread was finally over....

I was reading around in some other forums (who shall remain nameless) and I came across this link.

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/bioeme.html

It just reminded me of peanut allergies.


----------

