Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe you should switch schools so your child can eat peanut butter every day. Be sure to first ask if there are any kids who are severely allergic to anything that your precious likes to eat, though.
Has it occurred to you that YOU'RE the entitled snowflake in this situation, and not the kids who find peanut butter incompatible with life? Maybe just pack something else for your kid? Is it that hard to simply avoid killing someone else's kid by giving your own child something else to eat?
It's official. You are insane. I' m killing someone else's kid by packing a peanut butter sandwich for lunch? Wow! Just wow! First off, I ever heard of this ridiculous rule until the teacher wrote s note telling me to please label on a peanut butter sandwich in the future, which I did. So, where was this problem in the past 100 years? When I grew up, everyone sat at the same table at lunch. No special tables. And we all lived. Amazing Huh?
If my kid had a Peanut allergy, I would not expect everyone else who eats peanut butter and jelly to be separated at a designated table. I would have no problem for my child to be the one who is separated. You see, you don't punish the majority for the problems of the minority. That is how sick liberals think. That is what is ruining this country.
You can't control the world. What happens when you go to a movie and someone eats peanut butter crackers? I guess you will sue them for attempted murder. The ones with the medical issues are the ones who have to take the extra precautions to keep out of harms way. It's not anyone else's concern or responsibility. That is the truth. Sorry
Trying to read through this entire thread, not done with it. I've known two families with kids who had the severe peanut allergy and neither family insisted on a peanut free school because they didn't think it was reasonable. It was explained to me by these parents that one issue was the number of foods that contain peanuts (not easily recognizable things like peanut butter). False sense of security. One mom had a kid in preschool with my kid, that child was not allergic, her younger brother was. For his class they had a peanut free table. She worried that he would be sitting there by himself all year, but other kids joined and the other parents were careful about what they sent. Very nice on the part of the kids and their parents, the mother never insisted on it. One thing I wonder about, after getting to know both of these moms who DID have children with severe peanut allergies, how many of these other parents imagine that their children are more allergic than they are?
Trying to read through this entire thread, not done with it. I've known two families with kids who had the severe peanut allergy and neither family insisted on a peanut free school because they didn't think it was reasonable. It was explained to me by these parents that one issue was the number of foods that contain peanuts (not easily recognizable things like peanut butter). False sense of security. One mom had a kid in preschool with my kid, that child was not allergic, her younger brother was. For his class they had a peanut free table. She worried that he would be sitting there by himself all year, but other kids joined and the other parents were careful about what they sent. Very nice on the part of the kids and their parents, the mother never insisted on it. One thing I wonder about, after getting to know both of these moms who DID have children with severe peanut allergies, how many of these other parents imagine that their children are more allergic than they are?
My daughter's allergist went over all of the ways contamination can occur. So in the case of shellfish, sheccant eat anything fried at a restaurant that serves fried shrimp. And he recommended not going into restaurants that focus on shellfish (like Red Lobster). We dont cook shellfish in the house if she's home and we're very careful not to contaminate anything if we cook it when she's not home. We do ask her friends' families not to cook shellfish if she's there. She used to get rashes and hives when she was younger. I don't know if she would still get them now from exposure to cooking the food in her presence, so it's possible we are over-cautious in that particular regard. When the choice is no shrimp for dinner vs. potential anaphylaxis, though, the choice seems simple.
Yes! I would in no way expect a child's parent to edit their eating habits based on my son. It requested for snack in his room (at the time) no peanuts, but that is the only place. I would never want any child or parent to feel we as parents are pushing others to do things to protect our son, as that is our job and the school's job. Not parents of some kid who doesnt know us.
My son cannot eat cake, dairy ice cream, cupcakes with dairy and when he goes to a birthday party. I would never ask or request that parent to not bring in dairy products for their kids celebration. I go to the party and make sure our son is fine and also to ease the mind of the parent. It is my job and I bring in food he can eat....such as non-dairy cake/cupcakes, soy ice cream, etc. Some parents have graciously asked us if they could make something for him and they could bring and in those cases were declined or given a recipe. But we dont expect it.
Our kids' school bans it on the classroom level, not on the whole school level.
They don't eat in the gym, art class, music, etc. They tend to have snacks in their classroom and eat in the cafeteria. There is a peanut free table available in the cafeteria. With hand washing post lunch, traces of peanut butter should not be an issue. Hand washing has many benefits. Maybe allowing more time for that that should be allowed and encouraged.
Kids aren't supposed to eat on the playground during school hours but there is a lot of food wrappers all over it so clearly people do. The playground is also open to the public during non school hours so really isn't a safe place even if the whole school had a school wide peanut ban.
As I stated previously, classroom bans are another tool schools can use. They are useful if children eat in their rooms. Less so if they eat solely in the cafeteria, as many larger elementary schools do. As for hand washing, yes everyone's should wash their hands. But not even all adults wash their hands after using the bathroom, and anyone who has spent any time with 5 yr olds knows they do not thoroughly wash their hands after they eat. Many of them are down right sticky after having peanut butter. So are school officials supposed to go from child to child inspecting their hands, watching them wash, etc?
The problem arises when those sticky handed kindergartner go to their specials and touch surfaces. Not necessarily that they eat there. The oils of nuts, unlike most other food allergens are persistent, and contain the proteins that others are allergic too. All an anaphylactic child would need to do is touch a recently touched surface and then touch their face or eyes.
Again school wide bans are just an effective tool, one of many, that can be a useful part of a schools allergen plan. And ultimately parents are not going to be able to effectively critique the implementation of those plans as they are not privy to the information that informed those choices.
Trying to read through this entire thread, not done with it. I've known two families with kids who had the severe peanut allergy and neither family insisted on a peanut free school because they didn't think it was reasonable. It was explained to me by these parents that one issue was the number of foods that contain peanuts (not easily recognizable things like peanut butter). False sense of security. One mom had a kid in preschool with my kid, that child was not allergic, her younger brother was. For his class they had a peanut free table. She worried that he would be sitting there by himself all year, but other kids joined and the other parents were careful about what they sent. Very nice on the part of the kids and their parents, the mother never insisted on it. One thing I wonder about, after getting to know both of these moms who DID have children with severe peanut allergies, how many of these other parents imagine that their children are more allergic than they are?
Just for clarity, the use of a classroom or school ban, peanut free tables, etc are parts of an allergen plan that school officials make after looking at the needs (as shown by medical evidence) of all of the allergic kids in the school. One parent does not get to decide what type of ban if any will be in place. It is unlikely that any parent, even one whose child is allergic to nuts, would know exactly who is and is not allergic besides their child, the facility issues, and a whole host of other things the school has to weigh.
As your your concern about imaginary allergies, this is why school require the child's doctors recommendations as part of the allergen plan. Unless you think the doctors are imagining the severity as well?
This horse's carcass is now just a damp spot on the ground and you gals keep on restating/rewording the same things.
School systems do NOT want the liability so they make a broader policy than seems sensible, so as to cover any and all possibilities should a lawsuit occur.
Anaphylactic reactions are likely being touted by hysterical types as far more common than they are.
I had a really, really sick kid (autoimmune disorder) who when in grammar school I could have made a fuss to be accomodated in all sorts of special ways; SHE didn't want to and I didn't want to, so we didn't. She was ONE kid why should an entire group have to shift for her.
HOWEVER, that peanut products is ONE type of food that a mother must not send to school, WHAT THE HECK IS THE BIG DEAL not to send it?
This strikes me as an argument just for the sake of arguing. Mothers protesting just for the sake of protesting, that they cannot send peanut butter, wth. SEND something else!
My kid mentioned above could only ingest med grade FORMULA for months (age 10 years) as she developed gastroparesis secondary to Crohn's; she had an NG tube, went to 3mos of 5th grade with it IN place.
Did I think the other kids shouldn't EAT around her just because she was not allowed to eat solid food?
I understand both sides of it. Just send what the kid can eat, like I had to send her with a feeding tube and backpack with feeding pump in it. No bigs.
Kids who are healthy, don't eat peanut products at school. Again no bigs.
Really. What is the big deal? I just don't get it.
Last edited by VexedAndSolitary; 07-29-2017 at 06:53 AM..
It's official. You are insane. I' m killing someone else's kid by packing a peanut butter sandwich for lunch? Wow! Just wow! First off, I ever heard of this ridiculous rule until the teacher wrote s note telling me to please label on a peanut butter sandwich in the future, which I did. So, where was this problem in the past 100 years? When I grew up, everyone sat at the same table at lunch. No special tables. And we all lived. Amazing Huh?
If my kid had a Peanut allergy, I would not expect everyone else who eats peanut butter and jelly to be separated at a designated table. I would have no problem for my child to be the one who is separated. You see, you don't punish the majority for the problems of the minority. That is how sick liberals think. That is what is ruining this country.
You can't control the world. What happens when you go to a movie and someone eats peanut butter crackers? I guess you will sue them for attempted murder. The ones with the medical issues are the ones who have to take the extra precautions to keep out of harms way. It's not anyone else's concern or responsibility. That is the truth. Sorry
You obviously haven't read the post in this thread. The incidence of food allergies has risen substantially since you (and I) were kids. So it's not the same. Are you suggesting the medical community is lying?
School is not like other environments. You are not legally and constitutionally entitled to go to the movies or park or theater, etc. You are legally and constitutionally entitled to a free education.
Again, go back and read. I have to say, that I am really shocked and saddened that you are so uncaring towards kids who have life-threatening conditions. Even sadder is that you are teaching your children that their wants (because no one NEEDS to eat a PB & J at school) trumps another child's safety.
As I stated previously, classroom bans are another tool schools can use. They are useful if children eat in their rooms. Less so if they eat solely in the cafeteria, as many larger elementary schools do. As for hand washing, yes everyone's should wash their hands. But not even all adults wash their hands after using the bathroom, and anyone who has spent any time with 5 yr olds knows they do not thoroughly wash their hands after they eat. Many of them are down right sticky after having peanut butter. So are school officials supposed to go from child to child inspecting their hands, watching them wash, etc?
I'm not talking about washing hands after going to the bathroom although I do wish more people would do this, I'm talking about having kids wash their hands after they eat lunch. I have a five year old and she's actually very good at washing her hands thoroughly. With a person monitoring the hand washing, it's not super difficult to direct them to do a thorough job. Not only would this reduce the likelihood of a cross contamination exposure, it would reduce the spread of illness in schools and that benefist everyone, kids, staff, even parents.
I have a good friend who has a daughter with a severe peanut allergy. Hand washing post lunch was the biggest thing that she wanted to happen at her kid's school along with other measures such as parent and staff education on severe food allergies. The school refused because hand washing takes too much time. She pulled her daughter out.
Quote:
The problem arises when those sticky handed kindergartner go to their specials and touch surfaces. Not necessarily that they eat there. The oils of nuts, unlike most other food allergens are persistent, and contain the proteins that others are allergic too. All an anaphylactic child would need to do is touch a recently touched surface and then touch their face or eyes.
I understand this and even posted such prior. It poses a tiny risk but still a risk. With supervised hand washing, the risk could be cut to almost nothing. There is no way to reduce all risk however, especially with playgrounds open to the public after hours as well as people not reading food labels and sending foods that actually do contain peanuts to school wither their kids. Unless the schools are checking labels on everything and banning food without labels, there is no way to eliminate nuts. There's also nothing stopping a kid from eating a peanut butter sandwich in the car on the way to school and coming in with sticky hands and even crumbs on his or her shirt.
Quote:
Again school wide bans are just an effective tool, one of many, that can be a useful part of a schools allergen plan. And ultimately parents are not going to be able to effectively critique the implementation of those plans as they are not privy to the information that informed those choices.
They are one tool that schools can choose to use but certainly there are other reasonable ways to greatly reduce the risk.
Organizations like the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology do not recommend schools instituting bans on peanut butter and other products which may contain peanuts. They believe it creates a false sense of security for those with allergies. They also believe that banning these products does a disservice to children with allergies because it doesn't teach kids to be responsible for themselves.
Personally, I know children who have moderate to severe environmental allergies which include things like perfume and hairspray. These children must sit in classrooms with teachers and students who wear both of these things on a daily basis. One child in particular has such bad allergies that he receives weekly allergy shots and takes Zyrtec every day with Benadryl as needed. Where are the bans on perfumes, body sprays, hairsprays, fresh flowers, etc.?
Another example would be other food allergies such as shellfish, milk, egg, soy (which ironically is mentioned as a good alternative to peanut butter lovers) and wheat. Still others have allergies to things like strawberries, tomatoes and apples. Shall we ban all of these as well?
Lastly, I know many people with moderate to severe allergies to pollen, grass, trees, bees and wasps. Should we ban all children from being outside so those with allergies do not have to suffer while their schoolmates enjoy time outside?
I am sympathetic to the plight of parents who have to deal with children's allergies. It really stinks and its a crap card to be dealt. But I don't understand why we are not teaching children how to deal with their own medical issues when, at some point, they will be in a world where these things are simply not controllable. One last thing...I have a friend whose daughter is 24 years old. She has a severe peanut allergy. She always carries an EpiPen with her and has been taught from a young age how to protect herself and be educated on what she is ingesting. Her mother (my friend) is against such food bans because she feels it can be dangerous for children not to understand how important it is to be one's own advocate when it comes to dealing with one's health.
All of your comments are relevant when you are not worried about your own child and for older children who have learned to manage their allergies.
But, IMO What seems to be being overlooked is that elementary school aged children range from 5-12. Your example of a 24 year old has no relevance to young children. I think making a young child responsible for managing an allergy to a food is risky, especially when some children's allergic reactions can kill them.
It may not be convenient, but the risk is too great to ignore.
I would surmise that banning reduces the schools liability.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
