General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMom Demands School Go Peanut-Free For Allergic Child
The parents of a 10-year-old boy with a very serious peanut allergy are suing Livonia Public Schools.
Kathy Williams said her son, Nick, could die if exposed to peanuts.
She told WWJ Newsradio 950?s Marie Osborne that the district has failed to protect him.
“We had asked them to go peanut and tree nut-free, and their response to us was, due to the upset in the community and the backlash from other parents, we refuse to change practices,” Williams said.
...
“‘Why should we have to do this for one child?’ ‘I don’t really care if your child dies; my child’s getting the cupcake.’ ‘Why don’t you keep him at home? He doesn’t deserve to be here,’” Williams said.
full: http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/04/24/mom-demands-school-go-peanut-free-for-allergic-child/
True that peanut allergies can be fatal. I know that one person I went to jr. high with died on vacation after graduating high school because of eating food with peanuts.
And wow, Livonia-area parents really say that kind of stuff like "I don’t really care if your child dies" or "He doesn't deserve to be here"? Seriously? Livonia is in Michigan's 11th cong. district, whose representative is a Republican and represents the 19th state house district also represented by a Republican. (Thaddeus McCotter, a Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential election who resigned over the forged petitions scandal, used to represent the US House district that included Livonia.) I wouldn't be surprised that suburban right wing parents living in the suburban outskirts of a major city would show snotty elitist me-first attitudes, but those quotes...geez it sounds like Ms. Williams may be exaggerating for dramatic effect.
Safety should come first, and while I appreciate Kathy Williams's efforts in defending her kid, this is the thing I wonder about people with peanut allergies. How can they avoid contact with peanuts in the workplace or other outside places? Is there a treatment? I hope Nick Williams avoids going to Detroit Tigers games, as you know how the song goes, "Take me out to the ball game...buy me some peanuts and cracker jacks."
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)It's her caricature of what she's encountered, not a verbatim quote of it.
Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #1)
Post removed
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)My students are not withering away.
What an outrageous comment.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)I used to be a "special ed" kid, and I certainly didn't "wither away."
elleng
(130,773 posts)'If your doctor thinks you may be at risk of a severe reaction, you'll probably need to carry injectable epinephrine with you at all times.'
http://www.peanutallergy.com/treatment.html
My daughters were summer counselors at their elementary school, and personnel were taught to use 'epi pens' for this problem.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)elleng
(130,773 posts)Squinch
(50,924 posts)But if the allergy is severe enough, the time factor of getting someone to get the pen could be problematic.
However, as I have said in other posts, I work in a number of schools, including peanut free schools. It is no big deal. It's very common, and becoming more common, and it really isn't a big deal for a school to go peanut free.
elleng
(130,773 posts)but teachers/classrooms with such allergic kids c/should figure this out.
Seems to me might be a big deal to go peanut free, if other kids bring in lunches, etc., but I take your word that it isn't a big deal. Good to hear that.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)supportive. I am sure that there are some breaches, but the policy and the precautions that the schools take make it reasonably safe for the kids. Which is all the parents are really requesting, and all the school is liable for.
Mz Pip
(27,433 posts)The school should not bare the entire responsibility for keeping this child from having an allergic attack. There are just too many variables to make this environment 100% safe.
The least they can do is allow the child to carry the medication that could safe his life if he had an attack.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)mother and go peanut free, as thousands and thousands have done already all across the country without much difficulty or fanfare.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)The ones with the kid who has the allergy? Or the parents whose children will have their peanut butter taken away from them?
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)I don't understand what the problem is.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)Enjoy your sandwiches.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Especially a food item that kids generally love. It would be a constant concern.
longship
(40,416 posts)I presume that the student has one. I also assume that the mother has taken the trouble to instruct the admins at the school on the danger and has left an epi-pen at the school just in case. Maybe with the school nurse.
There may be other solutions other than this.
What if her son were allergic to pizza? The students would starve. 
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)the pizza is made using sauce possibly contaminated with peanuts. We send lunch from home for our kid, and are grateful that her life-threatening allergy is ingestion-only.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)Are you living in one of the 5 states, or is your child too young to do this?
http://www.ehow.com/list_6776903_epipen-laws.html
Therefore, it is particularly important for a child to have access to her EpiPen at school. All but five of the 50 states have laws allowing students to carry and self-administer an EpiPen at school. Only New York, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan do not have such laws in place.
Details concerning how the EpiPen should be carried in school and who can administer it varies from state to state. In some states, all school personnel, including bus drivers, are trained in how to use an EpiPen.
strategery blunder
(4,225 posts)Michigan.
So the kid can't self-administer. Hence the problem: 1) Either the school has to drop everything for 1 kid, 2) the kid basically gets quarantined in special ed to wither away, 3) kid gets homeschooled, or 4) state law is brought in line with the 45 other states that recognize the common-sense approach to the problem, that is teaching and permitting the kid to self-treat any reaction that might occur.
In the case of allergic reactions, the kid might not have the 60-120 seconds it takes to get the epi-pen from a stored location such as the nurse's office to the kid's actual location, so while I'd prefer Option Number Four...don't ever count on the current Michigan legislature to do the right thing.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)I'm only a fifth of the way down this thread and this is the second crack I've seen about kids in "special ed to wither away."
Is this some sort of new, anti-disability right wing meme?
I know kids in special ed. Hell, I used to BE in special ed. (speech therapy for hours each week, grades 2 through 6). Those kids aren't necessarily "withering away," they're receiving extra supports without which their education would suffer. At least that's the hope. Or are you saying the whole special ed. system in Michigan sucks?
And if it's done right, kids in Special Ed aren't "quarantined." You're implying that kids with special needs are contagious? Most of the Special Ed kids I've known spent at least a part of each school day in mainstream classrooms. Again, maybe Michigan is a couple of decades behind the times, but there is such a thing as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, passed in 1975, which calls for kids with disabilities to be educated in "the least restrictive environment."
Please bear in mind we have special ed teachers, and former special ed kids, right here on DU. Hell, some of your friends might have gone through Special Ed.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)that would not be the right place.
This child needs an epi-pen, not a special curriculum.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)then the situation needs to be addressed. But to say kids "wither" in special ed. seems a bit strange to me, especially coming across two posts with this exact same wording in the space of about thirty seconds. Makes me wonder where this comes from.
An epi-pen is necessary, but it might not be sufficient. I'm allergic to bee stings, and carry epi-pens with me where ever I go once the bees are out. What I've been told is that, if stung, I need to inject myself, and I then have fifteen or so minutes to get to an ER, where I get an injection of cortisone (and more epiniphrine), and where I'm kept under observation for a couple of hours until the doctors think it's safe for me to leave. Granted, I have an especially potent allergy (the last time I was stung I nearly died), but it sounds like this kid is in roughly the same boat.
This means he might well have to use an epi-pen every day, call an ambulence every day, go to the ER every day. Doesn't sound like much of an option to me.
Also, please bear in mind that epiniphrine is a pretty potent drug. Off hand I wouldn't want to have to use it every day, especially not on a child.
I think, from just the information we have here, that this is a very tough problem, and will be difficult to resolve. Clearly, not everyone is going to be happy, no matter what the solution.
I feel bad for this kid. Life really does suck, sometimes.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)The parents don't want him to be having to use an epi-pen frequently, so they think the solution is somehow to turn the whole school into a safe bubble. I completely understand how they feel . . . but it's not that easy.
I don't think, though, the idea in the other post was that all kids in special ed wither -- I've even known an extremely gifted child who needed to be there for other reasons.
But no child who would benefit most from the regular curriculum should be parked in special ed simply because of the need for an epi-pen.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)and a peanut allergy is not a qualifying condition that would warrant special education. 
strategery blunder
(4,225 posts)I never said he was contagious, but when inhaling even a speck of peanut dust can send him into a deadly allergic reaction that can kill him before emergency services can react, he needs to be kept away from any trace of the stuff. Which basically means either quarantining the entire school so no allergens can ever enter (very impractical to say the least), or quarantining the kid within some designated allergen-free area within the school (a bit more practical, but very sad and this would serve no one's best interest).
As pmwmom said before I saw your reply, this kid does not need special ed services. He doesn't belong there, and to shoehorn him into that would likely do him a great disservice. What he needs is an epi-pen and the legal permission to carry it and use it if required in school--something he would have if he went to school in any of 45 other states. And yes, that Michigan is one of five holdouts does speak to the state legislature being "behind the times."
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)"wither away in special ed." in two posts within a couple of seconds.
Yeah, this is a tough situation, assuming all the information we have thus far is accurate.
As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I have a deathly allergy to bee stings. I carry epi-pens everywhere I go. Even so, the times I've been stung, an epi-pen injection was just the first part of the treatment. After that I'm supposed to get to an ER, have injections of cortisone, be monitored for a couple of hours, and only then, after I've been stable for a couple of hours, do the doctors feel it safe for me to leave. I have nearly died while being rushed to the ER, so it's a very frightening experience. And I'm an adult--I can't imagine what this must be like for a kid.
And as I also pointed out above, epinephrine is a pretty potent drug--at least that's the way I experience it. After injections I stay wired for hours (stress is probably also a factor in that). I'd hate to have to use it very often on a child.
This is a tough situation, and I don't know that there is a solution that will make everybody happy. Another poster posted a link saying that the incidence of nut allergies is rising, for whatever reason, so it sounds like more school districts will have to deal with this issue.
It must suck for this kid though, and his parents. I hope everyone can get together and reason out something that works, and gives him a chance to get a quality education on a par with everyone else in his school.
strategery blunder
(4,225 posts)I did make an unfortunate choice of words. When I said "wither away in special ed," I meant that the kid would have to be quarantined away from any possible allergen hazard--and that would of course severely impede his social development. Hence my use of the word "wither"--it would wither his social development pretty badly. Even if the school did go completely nut-free so as to share the burden, everyone would know it was because of "that kid," and bullying would almost certainly ensue.
While special ed almost certainly isn't educationally appropriate here, it's the mechanism that already exists within the system to control exposure to such hazards (afaik). None of the choices available at the parent/local level are adequate, tbh. The fix here lies with the state legislature, which needs to update the law to allow for students to carry and use epi-pens that are lawfully prescribed by a doctor.
And while epi-pens alone don't fix the problem, it's my understanding that they at least allow enough time for emergency responders to react when used properly.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)don't realize that, if their children get services, they are considered to be special ed.
I bet a lot.
Thanks for your post.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)This whole thing is absurd. We are weighing the life of one child against the ability of the others to eat peanuts.
And, just an aside, your special ed comment is ignorant.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)otherwise I might have gotten into Harvard, Oxford, and the Sorbonne, too, instead of just Yale. 
Squinch
(50,924 posts)They end up in Yale, and from there it's a slippery slope to certain perdition!
This whole thread is fascinating for it's ignorance about what goes on in schools.
I currently work in 5 schools in NYC. Peanuts are banned in all of them.
Not a big deal at all.
dsc
(52,152 posts)of course he also went to Harvard. but seriously congrats, great school.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)at that time, legacies were all but guaranteed admission.
That policy started to change in... 1968, Gee Dubya's graduation year. Coincidence? I wonder.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)That's just a revolting allegation.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I didn't know any state was stupid enough to prevent kids from having an epi-pen.
That's completely insane! This poor kid has an extreme allergy to peanuts AND tree nuts, according to the article. Even if the school bans both, those products are widely enough disseminated in a bunch of foods that there will still be contaminants in the environment. He NEEDS to have the med on him all the time. He's 10. He'll know how to use it.
That's some seriously sick law. It could take a lot longer than 2 minutes to get the meds to him. These states should be SUED. That's not equal protection of the law!
telclaven
(235 posts)My son (1st Grade) has a classmate who is deathly allergic to peanuts. His parents did a fine job educating the teachers/staff and communicating with other parents r.e. bringing treats and such. The boy is too young to carry/administer his own epi pen, so the teacher and aid have epi pens with them in the class room and are able to administer if needed.
The parents also supply paper towels and cleaning supplies, so the teachers wipe down desks, etc, after lunch and snack time, just in case.
These seem like reasonable accomodations.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)so much as a friggin' aspirin. I'll see what the particular law actually is here. Thanks!
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)I figured this out in high school. I ate pizza with bell peppers and olives on it and I barfed it up about an hour later for an "encore presentation" as they say on TV.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)from peanuts... Big HUGE difference....
Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)Because he can die from his allergy.
There are several foods I am very allergic to. I haven't died but I
have gotten quite ill and felt horrible.
Like shellfish, tomatoes and bell peppers and hot peppers.
I have to watch what I eat in restaurants.
MADem
(135,425 posts)It isn't just food ingestion, he has the "very serious" type of allergy where the teacher's moisturizer can kill him. Peanut dust, common in wallboard and kitty litter, can get him. A kid who brings in a sandwich made with bread kneaded in a factory where peanuts were processed can kill him. He's hyper allergic to everything.
The school IS accommodating him. The mother doesn't think they are doing enough. Unless they put in an airlock, make everyone shower, and issue scrubs, this kid will not be protected.
Mother needs to get him the help of an immunologist, not sue the school for not doing what she regards as "enough." And the school district needs to pay for his distance learning classes. Problem solved.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Not all pizza must have tomato....that's just an American conceit. It can have pesto, chicken and alfredo sauce, a wide variety of toppings, without a single tomato anywhere near it!
Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)But with my food allergies, I have not investigated that topic.
I LOVE Italian culture, loved Art History in college, love the language. Love Romance languages in general.
MADem
(135,425 posts)shaved parm, would do it.
If you can eat an alfredo sauce (cream based), that and some diced chicken makes a great pizza topping.
I like arugula, onion and garlic as a topper, too.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)if they try o deny other kids from eating peanut butter.
Kids LOVE peanut butter.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)So much so that our peanut-allergic child won't touch the stuff, because the smell has such bad associations for her, even though she knows it's not peanut butter.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)
Why not?
Aerows
(39,961 posts)If you can't tolerate others eating it, then you pretty much aren't prepared for normal life. School is not just for grades - it's about being around others and managing your own life in preparation for adulthood.
Allergies are just that - allergies. You have to manage them. I had them as a child but my parents didn't let me become debilitated by them. Asking a bunch of kids to go hungry because they can't eat peanut butter sandwiches in one child's presence is a bit "special snowflake princess" if you ask me.
If you want to raise a "special snowflake princess", keep them at home and school them there. That way you won't have your child exposed to peanut butter, mustard, or ideas. You know, things kids come in contact with and have their allergies provoked.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)If I were a parent at that school I'd do what I could to make it easier for that family.
If my kid loved peanut butter, he could have it for breakfast. Peanut butter is a staple but no one should have it three times a day.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)That's the question. I'd keep my child at home, and wouldn't be suing to make other kids go hungry.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)And it would be a better lunch for them than eating peanut butter every day because that was all they could afford.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Why should a child go on a low-income lunch program when their parents can provide?
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)but for low income kids that SAME lunch is subsidized or free.
My kids paid for all their lunches, but other kids had the same lunches for free. And no one knew whose parents paid because it was all on the computer.
And the menu had variety -- much better than eating a pb sandwich from home every day.
Response to pnwmom (Reply #125)
winter is coming This message was self-deleted by its author.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And makes zero distinction on income level. Kids who qualify for the free program, which is subsidized, should get the exact same, mind you balanced, school lunch. Peanut butter and jelly every day, three times a day, is hardly a balanced diet.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)My mother packed my lunch, and mind you, I live in the South, but I don't think Ham and cheese sandwiches along with an apple or a peach was bad nutrition.
I grew up 
I'm not trying to be flip, but if you are highly allergic, you need to be exposed to the allergen to build up resistance. I had severe asthma as a child.
I'm by no means an expert, just offering life experience.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)but you said that this was a poverty lunch. It's not It comes from poverty, and kids who grew up and could not qualify for the army in WW II due to severe malnutrition as children.
And you said PB and J, not ham and cheese.
Hubby takes a sandwich to work of turkey and cheese every day, with an apple...
As to allergies being overcome by exposure, as long as you do not mind risking death.
You overgrew asthma, I got it as an adult. Trust me, there are some risks I take with it, I should not, covering wild fires for example. But I am aware of what I am doing, and carry a rescue inhaler ALWAYS.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)It's a horrible condition 
.
My parents took me out of school for a year because mine was particularly vicious.
Dorian Gray
(13,479 posts)That's ridiculous. There are a million other things to eat.
While I agree with your premise and argument, the hyperbole you are using is undermining the argument all together.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)You even stated that it was.
womanofthehills
(8,668 posts)because of the aflatoxins (government regulated of course)
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)If another kid had peanut butter on his hands and left residue on a desk or chair and this son touched it, it would cause a serious reaction. She told me about her husband eating a peanut butter sandwich for lunch. And coming home after work kissed his son, the cheek and tongue swole up.
So depending on how severe this allergy, even tactile contamination could be deadly.
As kids grow, they learn to cope, but it does take time.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Squinch
(50,924 posts)him to carry an epi-pen.
So you are saying he should just tough it out?
Sounds like you don't understand what an anaphalctic allergy does.
Violet_Crumble
(35,956 posts)It's not a case of getting a rash or something, they end up going into anaphylactic shock and dying if a bystander doesn't use the epi-pen and call an ambulance immediately. I know because my niece has it. She's no 'special snowflake princess' but because her school and friends and family value her life far more than chowing down on something with peanut butter in it that she might ingest the smallest traces of, the school banned peanut butter from the canteen, and we didn't have anything with nuts in it at family gatherings. Now the 'special snowflake princess' is a teenager and able to look after herself when it comes to things like that even though she's got the double-whammy of being visually impaired and not able to see what she's about to eat, there's not the same level of stringency at family do's.
Why should kids like my niece be excluded from school just because they have a life-threatening allergy? Other parents should have at least a shred of decency and understanding and not send peanut products to school with their kids. I don't understand why some (thankfully none at my niece's school) act as though it's a gross violation of human rights for a school to request that they don't send their kids to school with peanut butter sandwiches etc.
joeunderdog
(2,563 posts)As kids get older they can only hope to limit their exposure, something that is only somewhat in their control in everyday life, whether they are "snowflake princesses" or not. Hoping a child can guess right on a life-threatening risk is just not good parenting.
No one's asking any kids to "go hungry," just to learn compassion and sensitivity to a growing problem. Maybe you could do the same.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts) pnwmom
(108,960 posts)But I do feel sorry for the affected families.
I've lived with allergies forever, and so have my kids, but we've escaped anaphylactic shock, thank goodness. I would hate to be in that family's shoes, and so I'd feel like helping them out, if I could.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)To deal with the increasing population of allergies. Yup, it is going up...this is a provable fact.
http://health.howstuffworks.com/diseases-conditions/allergies/food-allergy/peanut/peanut-allergies-increasing.htm
This is a good accommodation...hell my local unified school district has this system wide. So no peanut butter sandwiches at school lunch...
What the mother wants is a peanut and nut free school. Next time you go to the market read a few labels and notice how many staples are processed in facilities that may process nuts...it will make sense why removing the sandwiches is doable, going nut free...not so much.
And mom should get that, and equip her ten year old with an epipen. The school should understand no time for the nurse, so allow kid to carry it...period, everywhere.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Maybe not impossible, but it would be almost impossible for a school not to get any food containing peanuts.
It can be in hot dogs, chocolate, and almost any processed food. It doesn't even have to be warned about or listed in ingredients on the label if the amount is insignificant or used only as a flavoring or spice. Here's what I found that parents of a peanut-allergic child should do:
That's why the responsibility falls on parents to make sure their child doesn't eat and isn't exposed to foods with nuts or peanuts.
When reading labels, avoid these ingredients:
food additive 322 (also often listed as lecithins)
arachis (an alternative term for peanut)
hydrolyzed vegetable protein (which may be found in some cereals)
arachis oil (peanut oil)
emulsified or satay (which could mean that the food was thickened with peanuts)
natural and artificial flavoring (which could contain tree nuts and are used in many foods, including barbecue sauce, cereals, crackers, and ice cream)
Foods to avoid include:
peanut butter
mixed nuts
crushed nuts in sauces
African, Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese, Mexican, and Vietnamese dishes (which often contain peanuts or are contaminated with peanuts during meal preparation)
pesto (an Italian sauce made with nuts)
marzipan (a paste made from ground almonds and sugar)
mandelonas (peanuts soaked in almond flavoring)
health food bars
artificial nuts (which could be peanuts that have been deflavored and reflavored with a nut, such as pecan or walnut)
all cakes and pastries with unknown ingredients, particularly carrot cake, pumpkin cake or pie, and fruit and nut rolls
bouillon and Worcestershire sauce
praline and nougat
muesli and fruited breakfast cereals
vegetarian dishes
prepared salads and salad dressings
gravy
Doctors also advise peanut-allergic patients to avoid chocolate candies, unless they're absolutely certain there's no risk of cross contamination during manufacturing. Many candy companies are very aware of nut and peanut allergy issues. Some even make sure they manufacture candies that contain nuts separately from those that don't, so people with nut allergies can still enjoy their products. To be sure a candy is nut- and peanut-free, log on to the manufacturer's website or call the toll-free number listed on the package. Most companies have customer-service representatives that can answer nut and peanut allergy questions accurately.
Even nonfood items can contain ingredients that could cause a reaction in a nut- or peanut-allergic child:
Hackysacks, beanbags, and draft dodgers are sometimes filled with crushed nut shells.
Bird feed, dog food and treats, hamster food and bedding, livestock feed, some cosmetics (especially moisturizers), secondhand toys and furniture, and ant traps and mousetraps could even contain nuts or peanuts.
It's important to be vigilant about your child's food allergies, even during simple, everyday activities. Here are some basic tips allergist Sandra Gawchik, MD, gives her patients:
Avoid baked goods you didn't make yourself - anything with an unknown list of ingredients. Stay away from baking mixes, chili mixes, etc.
Be careful when eating at Asian or buffet restaurants - spoons often go in and out of various bowls that may contain nuts or seeds and could easily cross contaminate foods.
Don't be cavalier about food allergies - tell everyone who handles the food your child eats, from waiters and waitresses to chefs and bakers. If the manager or owner of a restaurant is uncomfortable about your request for peanut- or nut-free food preparation, don't eat there.
If you're unsure about whether a food or candy is nut and peanut free, log on to the manufacturer's website or call the toll-free number listed on the package. Most companies have customer service representatives that can answer nut and peanut allergy questions accurately.
Encourage people not to feed your child. Don't take food from strangers. Make your own snacks and treats to take to parties, play dates, school functions, and other outings.
Talk to the daycare supervisor or school principal before your child attends. Then talk to your child's classmates or send home a note explaining that your child has a severe allergy to peanuts or nuts. Ask parents to refrain from sending in snacks that contain peanuts. If your child's school doesn't already have one, talk to the school principal, your child's teacher, or cafeteria personnel about setting up a nut- and peanut-free table in the cafeteria.
Keep epinephrine accessible at all times - not in the glove compartment of your car, but with you because seconds count during an anaphylaxis episode. It's a good idea to also keep epinephrine in your child's classroom (not just in the nurse's office), or in your child's backpack, depending on your state's laws on carrying medicine in classrooms.
http://www.childrenscolorado.org/wellness/info/parents/30263.aspx
No school or work place or other environment could possibly protect against all these things. It looks like the parents must be the only ones to be in control of whatever the child eats, until he gets old enough to control his food himself.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)at least this one does.
a la izquierda
(11,791 posts)Peanut butter and honey sammiches. Best post-class food ever.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)is awesome, wholesome and environmentally friendly.
It's not a staple of households for nothing. God bless George Washington Carver.
womanofthehills
(8,668 posts)because it usually contains some aflatoxin. (Aflatoxin can cause liver cancer) However, (not to worry!!!) we are relying on our government to keep the levels low in peanut butter. I try to eat organic food only, however, most studies say, the more processed the peanut butter is the less aflatoxin. So Jiffy has less aflatoxin than Whole Foods peanut butter.
http://ehtrust.org/fact-sheets-facts-about-aflatoxin/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11227922
Aerows
(39,961 posts)and could give a crap about a study that tells me I'll get cancer. I'll smoke ten cigarettes and then give up running before I'll stop eating peanut butter. 
LOL. I like you, womanofthehills.
Pab Sungenis
(9,612 posts)Just peanuts, salt, locally grown honey, and peanut oil. No added preservatives, coloring, toxins, etc.
15 oz. of peanuts, 1 tsp salt, 1 tsp honey in a food processor, whip for 30 seconds, then drizzle in 3 tbsp of organic peanut oil. Whip until smooth. If you like chunky add a couple pinches of peanuts 15 seconds before you stop. Makes one pound of peanut butter.
Healthier and cheaper than store-bought.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I love peanut butter. I'll try your recipe out
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Soy milk, peanut butter, banana, and a scoop of chocolate flavored protein powder.
The peanut butter is chunky of course. I get from Costco in two massive containers.
Ever tried almond butter? Even better!
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I'll have to try almond butter.
I ONLY like freshly ground PB. Glad to meet another enthusiast.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Not a peep of a complaint.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)But I'm sure millions of children still go to school with PB&J sandwiches from home. The mother in the story wants the entire school to be peanut free. Also, a lot of tasty things like some cakes and cupcakes are cooked with peanut oil.
I couldn't imagine denying PB&J sandwiches to children. It was a childhood staple for us when I grew up
Squinch
(50,924 posts)If you did, you would see that it's a reasonable request by the mother. Especially given that the state doesn't allow the child to carry the epi pen.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Seems rather unreasonable to me.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)I don't even understand why this is a question.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Last edited Fri Apr 26, 2013, 07:02 PM - Edit history (1)
the peculiarities of a very small minority.
Persons who are allergic to common, staple foodstuffs need to make other arrangements, not the remaining 99.9%.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Keep the kid at home. I stayed out of school for a year due to asthma. This is no different.
It is insane to think that everyone can reorder their life around one kid in a public setting. You are asking parents to not pack a lunch, not let their kids have snacks and essentially raise someone else's child because you can't keep them at home.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)And the fact that Universal Precautions are used in all schools because of a very small percentage of HIV positive students.
And the balloon bans that some schools institute because of a few childrens' anaphalactic allergies to latex.
Or is it that those things are not really a big deal, and they don't bother you at all?
Personally, I don't find them much of a problem. And as I have said, for the many, many peanut-free schools I have encountered, going peanut free is not much of a problem either.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)(especially when there are hundreds of other spaces) to a staple foodstuff is kind of stupid.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)tabasco
(22,974 posts)and there is no right to attend a peanut-free school.
Let's see how much more ridiculous you can get.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)And again I will say: schools do this all the time. It isn't a big deal. I'm not the one being ridiculous.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)What's the solution?
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Eggs pretty much never, and milk anaphalaxys is extremely rare.
Peanuts are another story.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)What is the acceptable number of deaths from milk and egg allergies before we make schools milk and egg free?
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Here are some excerpts:
"Allergy to peanuts affects 1.3% of the general population"
British Medical Journal 1996;313:518-521.)
AND
"As many as one-third of peanut-sensitive patients have severe reactions, such as fatal and near-fatal anaphylaxis." ("Anaphylactic deaths in asthmatic patients," Allergy Proc., 1989)
What is YOUR acceptable number of deaths from peanuts before we make schools peanut free?
And is it only deaths we can count? Cause I'm guessing the hospitalizations from serious reactions are just fine with those arguing against this.
But in the end, this argument is moot, because it is already being done all over the country, without any difficulty, even without your approval.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)More people died from lawn mower accidents in 2005 than peanut allergy.
When someone dies in the US, his death certificate data is pumped into a massive database and indexed according to the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes of Death (ICD-10), a standardized system developed by the World Health Organization. ICD-9, the previous standard, did not have a code for food allergy deaths, but now we have solid data for almost ten years. The underlying number of food allergy deaths according to ICD-10 codes isn't publicly available in CDC databases because it is so small--statistically insignificant, according to the CDC. A call to the CDC press office revealed that the number of deaths from food allergies, as collected from 2.5 million death certificates across the country, is miniscule. Only eleven people died from food allergies in 2005, the last year for which we have data available. More people died from lawnmower accidents.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meredith-broussard/food-allergy-deaths-less_b_151462.html
http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/foodallergies/
You want all schools in the USA to ban a staple food item because of 10 deaths per year. Once again I ask you, if one child dies every year from milk allergy, should we ban all dairy products from US schools? Please answer the question.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)tabasco
(22,974 posts)[font size=6]Only eleven people died from food allergies in 2005
Source: Centers For Disease Control[/font]
Squinch
(50,924 posts)saying the information comes from the CDC. The CDC link says nothing about numbers of deaths from peanut allergies.
I'll stick with the information from the British Medical Journal, the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and Allergy and Asthma Proceedings Journal.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)It really isn't a big deal.
(I work in multiple peanut-free schools right now.)
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)I guess we also need to address the issue of why these kinds of allergies are becoming more common.
I get the feeling that hyper-cleanliness, overuse of antibiotics and people just being too careful in general contributes to this. Sometimes when your exposed to a lot of crap, it strengthens the immune system. Perhaps you could be allergic to something at first, but then you keep trying it in small amounts and the allergy goes away.
I don't really know though. Just throwin' stuff against the wall
Squinch
(50,924 posts)I'm only half kidding with that, though I feel like I should be wearing a tin hat when I say it.
I do know they have been messing with putting Brazil nut proteins into soybeans, and that hybrid strain has "escaped" the lab and is now not controllable. So I wonder if there isn't some mutation due to experimentation with peanuts that makes them a more common allergen.
I agree about building an immune system, but I don't think exposure therapy has been effective in ahaphalactic allergies.
joeunderdog
(2,563 posts)In most cases anyway. I did just see mixed nuts in first class on a flight coming out of a foreign country.
There are no reported deaths from not having them either.
MADem
(135,425 posts)They mixed 'em up with pretzels, but there were peanuts in there as well.
I am afraid your facts on that issue are out of order, frankly. http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/04/21/on-airplanes-the-law-sides-with-peanuts/
MineralMan
(146,262 posts)Frontier, Delta, and Sun Country. I didn't eat them. I buy food at the airport and eat it while everyone else is waiting for the "snack" cart. I see lots of others doing the same. There's nothing really worth eating on planes in coach any longer. On a recent trip, I bought a very nice bento box for lunch. Yum!
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)I'm fine with the school not serving food with peanuts in it to accommodate the family but the idea that other parents would be told what food they can and can't pack it in their child's lunches is over the top IMO.
StarlightGold
(365 posts)I do feel very sorry for the kid, because it is hard to live with. but, to expect the entire school and their families to re-arrange their routines for him is crazy. He and his mom just have to accept the fact that there are some things he can't do or be a part of.
Those other families are also vulnerable for lawsuits if someone comes to school, after coming into contact with peanuts AT HOME. I would NEVER burden others like that because of MY limitations.
Unfortunately, his peanut allergy is his cross to bear in life.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)other families were vulnerable for lawsuits if someone came to school after contact with peanuts. Where are you seeing that?
StarlightGold
(365 posts)this article...I'm saying that lawsuits will happen and destroy people's lives if they happen to come in contact with nut products at home and then "contaminate" school equipment. The allergic child comes into contact with said equipment, and, presto...a vicious lawsuit against the poor person because they had the audacity to have peanut products in their OWN HOME.
It is NOT far fetched for this to happen, and we shouldn't be giving parents of allergy kids any opening for it. That's when others have to remind them that there are limits to what their kids can do and they just have to live with that. 100 percent normalcy is simply not in the cards.
MADem
(135,425 posts)She wants the SCHOOL to aver that they can control the environment, when they just cannot do that.
Her kid is not just allergic to peanuts he eats, he's allergic to "peanut dust"--which can be found in wallboard. He's allergic to peanut oils, which can be found in make-up, moisturizers, soaps, etc.
He has a "very serious" allergy. The school can't protect him, and she wants the school to declare that they can. And she's pissed because they won't lie to her and declare themselves liable when (not if, when) he comes in contact with a peanut product either on the skin of another child, or carried as dust in the air.
The school district needs to pay for distance learning for this kid as a consequence of his disability, or the mother needs to get the child to an allergist for the new protocol that cures over 2/3rd of kids of their peanut allergies.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)When reading labels, avoid these ingredients:
food additive 322 (also often listed as lecithins)
arachis (an alternative term for peanut)
hydrolyzed vegetable protein (which may be found in some cereals)
arachis oil (peanut oil)
emulsified or satay (which could mean that the food was thickened with peanuts)
natural and artificial flavoring (which could contain tree nuts and are used in many foods, including barbecue sauce, cereals, crackers, and ice cream)
Foods to avoid include:
peanut butter
mixed nuts
crushed nuts in sauces
African, Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese, Mexican, and Vietnamese dishes (which often contain peanuts or are contaminated with peanuts during meal preparation)
pesto (an Italian sauce made with nuts)
marzipan (a paste made from ground almonds and sugar)
mandelonas (peanuts soaked in almond flavoring)
health food bars
artificial nuts (which could be peanuts that have been deflavored and reflavored with a nut, such as pecan or walnut)
all cakes and pastries with unknown ingredients, particularly carrot cake, pumpkin cake or pie, and fruit and nut rolls
bouillon and Worcestershire sauce
praline and nougat
muesli and fruited breakfast cereals
vegetarian dishes
prepared salads and salad dressings
gravy
Doctors also advise peanut-allergic patients to avoid chocolate candies, unless they're absolutely certain there's no risk of cross contamination during manufacturing. Many candy companies are very aware of nut and peanut allergy issues. Some even make sure they manufacture candies that contain nuts separately from those that don't, so people with nut allergies can still enjoy their products. To be sure a candy is nut- and peanut-free, log on to the manufacturer's website or call the toll-free number listed on the package. Most companies have customer-service representatives that can answer nut and peanut allergy questions accurately.
Even nonfood items can contain ingredients that could cause a reaction in a nut- or peanut-allergic child:
Hackysacks, beanbags, and draft dodgers are sometimes filled with crushed nut shells.
Bird feed, dog food and treats, hamster food and bedding, livestock feed, some cosmetics (especially moisturizers), secondhand toys and furniture, and ant traps and mousetraps could even contain nuts or peanuts.
It's important to be vigilant about your child's food allergies, even during simple, everyday activities. Here are some basic tips allergist Sandra Gawchik, MD, gives her patients:
Avoid baked goods you didn't make yourself - anything with an unknown list of ingredients. Stay away from baking mixes, chili mixes, etc.
Be careful when eating at Asian or buffet restaurants - spoons often go in and out of various bowls that may contain nuts or seeds and could easily cross contaminate foods.
Don't be cavalier about food allergies - tell everyone who handles the food your child eats, from waiters and waitresses to chefs and bakers. If the manager or owner of a restaurant is uncomfortable about your request for peanut- or nut-free food preparation, don't eat there.
If you're unsure about whether a food or candy is nut and peanut free, log on to the manufacturer's website or call the toll-free number listed on the package. Most companies have customer service representatives that can answer nut and peanut allergy questions accurately.
Encourage people not to feed your child. Don't take food from strangers. Make your own snacks and treats to take to parties, play dates, school functions, and other outings.
Talk to the daycare supervisor or school principal before your child attends. Then talk to your child's classmates or send home a note explaining that your child has a severe allergy to peanuts or nuts. Ask parents to refrain from sending in snacks that contain peanuts. If your child's school doesn't already have one, talk to the school principal, your child's teacher, or cafeteria personnel about setting up a nut- and peanut-free table in the cafeteria.
Keep epinephrine accessible at all times - not in the glove compartment of your car, but with you because seconds count during an anaphylaxis episode. It's a good idea to also keep epinephrine in your child's classroom (not just in the nurse's office), or in your child's backpack, depending on your state's laws on carrying medicine in classrooms.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Peanut oil has a higher burning temperature, so it is popular in many fried snacks.
The only thing I'd add to that guidance is to enroll the child in one of the new desensitization protocols that are becoming standard (and qualify for insurance coverage) to get rid of the allergy. It works in at least 2/3 of the cases.
They are also experimenting with giving sufferers an immunosuppressant to speed up the desensitization process; that hasn't reached the mainstream yet but it shows great promise. For now, though, the "slowly increasing challenge" protocol is the best place to start.
Many kids who are suffering in this manner don't have to--they just need to get to the doctor and endure a long course of appointments over several months, and then they can eat whatever they'd like.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)They also have--still under trial--a protocol where they give the sufferers immunosuppressants and then attack the allergic reactions more vigorously with a faster challenge protocol. They can desensitize the person faster that way. That approach is still under study, but the slow process is available now (and insurance pays) and it works for many.
It's the first thing I'd think to do if I had a kid in this "very serious" situation.
I've had one family member with this kind of nut allergy, but it was a "food" (ingestion) allergy, not a contact one. Watch what you eat, carry your epi-pen. Mysteriously, and without any medical intervention, he just....outgrew it. Oddest thing...!
Tien1985
(920 posts)Where children have peanut allergies. The comments are not exaggerated. Look up a few articles about similar and read the comments.
Most of the time an epi pen will do it, but that's for emergencies. Some peanut allergies are so severe a child can have a reaction by the airborne particles of nuts.
The other parents are being ridiculous. My 9 yr old loves peanut butter. If explained to him, he would not be so nasty as to think having it is more important than another kid at school getting sick from it.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)Some schools have an allergy-free table where kids can bring friends who also pack an allergy-free lunch. When a student has a VERY severe allergy the student's classmates have to all wash their hands after lunch. While it may be an inconvenience to wash up before AND after lunch but it's a "reasonable accommodation". Going completely allergy-free is impossible. Kids can have peanut butter with their breakfast at home, not wash, and contaminate shared items in the classroom. Many schools have already adopted a no sharing food rule which helps too.
(not picking on you specifically - just looking for a place to insert a comment)
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)to put a childs life in jeopardy for the sake of a sandwich seems a tad selfish imho. After eating a PB&J kids will very likely have peanut residue on their hands and touch all sorts of things. Even tactile contamination can be deadly for extreme allergies.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)Some kids are so allergic that peanut MOLECULES can trigger a reaction. Weigh this: people get to eat peanut butter on one side, and a child dying on the other. It's a no-brainer.
Pab Sungenis
(9,612 posts)then drastic steps need to be taken.
If the allergy is ingestion only then the steps being asked for are unreasonable.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Not to peanut butter, anyway.
Casual skin contact or inhalation of peanut butter fumes is reported and feared to cause allergic reactions in highly sensitive children with peanut allergy but has not been systematically studied.
OBJECTIVE:
We sought to determine the clinical relevance of exposure to peanut butter by means of inhalation and skin contact in children with peanut allergy.
METHODS:
Children with significant peanut allergy (recent peanut-specific IgE antibody concentration >50 kIU/L or evidence of peanut-specific IgE antibody and one of the following: clinical anaphylaxis, a reported inhalation-contact reaction, or positive double-blind, placebo-controlled oral challenge result to peanut) underwent double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized exposures to peanut butter by means of contact with intact skin (0.2 mL pressed flat for 1 minute) and inhalation (surface area of 6.3 square inches 12 inches from the face for 10 minutes). Placebo challenges were performed by using soy butter mixed with histamine (contact), and scent was masked with soy butter, tuna, and mint (inhalation).
RESULTS:
Thirty children underwent the challenges (median age, 7.7 years; median peanut IgE level, >100 kIU/L; 13 with prior history of contact and 11 with inhalation reactions). None experienced a systemic or respiratory reaction. Erythema (3 subjects), pruritus without erythema (5 subjects), and wheal-and-flare reactions (2 subjects) developed only at the site of skin contact with peanut butter. From this number of participants, it can be stated with 96% confidence that at least 90% of highly sensitive children with peanut allergy would not experience a systemic-respiratory reaction from casual exposure to peanut butter.
CONCLUSIONS:
Casual exposure to peanut butter is unlikely to elicit significant allergic reactions. The results cannot be generalized to larger exposures or to contact with peanut in other forms (flour and roasted peanuts).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12847496
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Maybe this kid is part of the 10% or less who are reactive to casual contact.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)Sorry, but if its THAT extreme then home schooling is the only safe alternative. You can't ban classmates from having nuts with breakfast and getting on the bus with all their allergen molecules.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)A true peanut free enviroment would be horrendously expensive and may be impossible.
unblock
(52,126 posts)it's not at all expensive, it just takes some thought and selectivity.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)which happen to be peanut free.
It is not a big deal, and it is already done in many, many schools all across the country.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Will find peanuts... or food that has been processed in machinery that has processed food with peanuts.
Kind of kike the term organic... there are several definitions of what is called organic.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)to be working. If the school didn't make the effort, and peanuts were in every lunchbox, that wouldn't be the case.
pansypoo53219
(20,959 posts)
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Is it okay for me to call another woman hysterical in this case? She sounds like an insufferable person, unbearable to be around.
Ilsa
(61,690 posts)Signs should be placed on the classroom door, and parents of other children in her class should be made aware of it. They should asked to avoid PB as a lunch or snack, and request that if their kid eats PB for breakfast, they brush their teeth before school.
The allergic child should be seated as far away as possible from any child whose main source of protein at lunch is PB.
The nurse should have an epi-pen, and the child should have one on her backpack.
The school can make adjustments for her allergy, but shouldn't have to ban PB. What would they do if a kid had a corn allergy? Ban all corn products?
LostOne4Ever
(9,286 posts)My first reaction to this was a knee jerk-
"WHAT! they are going to deprive the school for this one kid's over protective mom. JUST MAKE THE KID A SPECIAL LUNCH WITH STERILE UTENSILS AND LET EVERYONE BE HAPPY!"
Then I started reading the comments both here and in that article. I still think the kids mom is being over protective, but if the kids allergies are so bad that the DUST from peanuts can cause a reaction then I would probably be over protective in her place as well. The kid simply interacting with anyone who was in the cafeteria, long after lunch is over, could possibly cause a reaction if this is right.
In the end, IF HIS ALLERGY REALLY IS THAT BAD (where simple DUST can cause a reaction), then its a kid's LIFE versus losing baked good/snacks. Sorry, but a child's life is more important than the rest of the school getting a cupcake. If the other parents can't or wont see that, then they are some pretty selfish people. 
However, if this is just a crazy mother trying to take away all nut based foods based on an allergy that is NO WHERE NEAR AS BAD as she is making it sound (lets say its just from his eating nuts), then she needs to calm down.
Either way, it sounds like the school has been negligent in protecting this kid. Especially if the bullies are taking his medicine away. 
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Contact allergies are the devil. I hate to say it, but while this child is young this isn't the safest setting.
Peanuts and peanut products are all over.
Most kids with peanut allergies are protected if they just don't ingest any, but other parents wouldn't even know many of the products that their kids might eat that contain peanuts.
Also to control this sort of allergy (lessen its severity) it's important that the child have absolutely no exposure.
FedUpWithIt All
(4,442 posts)If the allergy is that severe, a school wide ban wouldn't even prevent possible contact unless each child's lunch was inspected daily. Peanuts, other tree nuts and their oils can be found in just about everything.
I would think that the parents would seek to avoid any and all what if's if the allergy was so severe that having nuts on premises could be life threatening.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)because with that many kids/people there is bound to be some incident, such as someone brings some snack that they aren't aware has tree nuts in it, or someone has peanut butter on their clothing from eating a sandwich at home ... something like that. There is no way they can control for every scenario, so if the boy's life really is at that great of risk, he probably shouldn't be exposed to potential threats every day. It's too bad, but I wouldn't send my kid if I thought there was a good chance s/he could die from inadvertent exposure.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Is from constant low level exposure.
The tree-nut thing is what worried me. To control that you need to avoid the whole spectrum, including their oils, and those are in so many baked products that it seems impossible with a contact allergy. Maybe it's a low-level reaction, but boy this seems dangerous.
I have severe allergies, and certain ones are hard to control, plus if you do a bad job controlling exposure they become worse. So I am speaking from personal experience. I do a very good job with mine, but it takes a lot of work and effort. For instance, I hate to eat in any restaurant because I can never tell.
I developed an allergy to soy, and that's been the worst of all.
If this were my kid, I'd bite the bullet and get the school to pay for home tutors for a while.
haele
(12,640 posts)Most kids with a peanut allergy do not have the same allergic reaction to tree nuts (if they have an allergy to tree nuts at all), and vice versa. And peanut allergies are triggered differently in people; some are allergic to the oil, some are allergic to the legume component, or a trace mineral within the peanut.
Because food products containing peanuts and food products containing tree nuts are often processed in the same location, many people suffering from peanuts think they are also allergic to tree nuts due to cross-contamination in the processing area.
Like my mother, I'm allergic to shellfish, but for a while, thought I was allergic to seafood in general because of cross contamination at resturants where I was exposed to it. (She never got over the cross-contamination issue and doesn't like any fish other than tuna fish, for some reason.)
That being said, if a kid is that allergic, they don't need to be around other kids - who might unthinkingly bring in a butterfinger candy bar or left-over pad thai or chicken fried in peanut oil as part of lunch and set off a fatal reaction. It's not just banning candy bars, peanut-butter cookies or a PB&J sandwich - there's a wide range of products where it isn't obvious there is some form of peanut (either oil or the nut itself) associated with it.
It's sad that the child can't participate with the other children, but if the allergy is that bad, there isn't a way to force the entire town to go entirely peanut free in their own homes and workplaces - pretty much the only way one can ensure that that kid isn't inadvertantly exposed if they're in a place they can't carry their epi-pen and/or an inhailer on them at all times.
If my kid was that allergic, I'd either homeschool or find one of those "self-paced" charter schools where the schedule is only a few hours classroom a week, class size is very limited and class area can be completely controlled for my child's allergy. Perhaps get together with other parents with children who have that allergy?
Haele
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Maybe the fear is cross-contamination, but according to the article, the mother wants tree nuts banned from school also.
I have to agree, if the boy already has severe contact allergies to both PB and tree nuts, there's no way to make the school safe for him.
Other than Xithras' approach, but apparently the mother isn't that certain of her son's ability to handle himself, or the allergies are extremely severe.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)My child would be home schooled until such a time their allergy was controlled enough that casual contact would not cause a problem. Expecting the rest of the world to use the same caution that you would is just not something I would be willing to do.
vankuria
(904 posts)A completely peanut free environment? Even if the school banned peanut products from being served in school lunches, how could they control what kids bring into the school in their bag lunches from home? Would they be checking everyone's lunch bags? Seems like an impossible situation to fully control.
Cairycat
(1,704 posts)Some people only get the reaction from eating peanuts. Others have more severe allergies and can get the reaction from touching surfaces with traces of peanut, or breathing in air that has peanut particles in it.
In the elementary school where I work, we had a student in the latter category, so our building is peanut free. Students and staff are not allowed to bring in food with peanuts in it.
Many parents complained, and had to figure other things out for their kids to eat. But you know what? It didn't kill them. Every child in this country has a right to a public education and to be safe while obtaining that education. Kids without peanut allergies could still eat peanut products - just not at school. Accommodating the allergic kid may seem difficult at first, but like many things, once you become accustomed to taking that factor into consideration, it isn't that big a deal.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)learn something about community. In your life you must sometimes make compromises for the good of the whole.
On the Other Hand--this child could come into contact with peanuts anywhere else they go. So really the problem is how does the kid cope with that?
Distressing situation. No right or wrong.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Actually going tree-nut free is almost impossible in a public institution. This is the banned list:
http://www.kidswithfoodallergies.org/resourcespre.php?id=60
Not even coconut.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Kid should be homeschooled. There is no reason or justification in expecting the school district to ban peanuts from school for ONE kid.
Cairycat
(1,704 posts)that some children simply are not entitled to receive a public education? The child cannot help being severely allergic, but other people can make adjustments in their behavior. I was saying I've seen it done, and it really wasn't that onerous.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)but expecting that EVERY OTHER CHILD IN THE SCHOOL should be denied peanuts or peanut products to accomodate ONE child is unreasonable.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)Empathy, awareness of maybe killing other people by the actions you take... Any sense of helping someone with a disability.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)life isn't fair.
sometimes you just have to suck it up and get tough.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)Gotcha.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)Neoma
(10,039 posts)Never even listen to that song? Geez.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)not everything in life is a pop culture reference.
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)datasuspect
(26,591 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Be rather idiotic (at best) to predicate school policy on "life isn't fair..." But then again, there are a lot of idiots out there who often believe their individual desires outweigh the health of someone else.
Kinda makes one wonder why smoking is banned in so many schools... people should just have to, as you so eloquently state, 'suck it up'. (Insert distinction lacking a difference here...)
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)LeftishBrit
(41,203 posts)I am certainly not one of those who seek to exclude all competitive games from school; BUT treating the whole of life as a competitive game, is not the way to go. Life isn't fair, and maybe never will be completely so, but an important aim in life is precisely to make it fairer - whether by political action (surely the main point of voting for Democrats or for left-of-centre parties in other countries is to establish a fairer social and economic system?); science (e.g. establishing cures for diseases); or just general consideration for other people (driving with attention and within the speed limit; not being too noisy at night; etc.)
joeunderdog
(2,563 posts)I think this stuff is what is supposed to separate us from the animals, isn't it?
alp227
(32,006 posts)Sheesh, am I still on DU right now? 
Squinch
(50,924 posts)datasuspect
(26,591 posts)every school has contingencies for allergy kids.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Are you happy now?
But seriously, I bet you never expected these responses, did you?
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Because that's the American way.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Suck it up and get tough!
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)and very unreasonable. This isn't like saying "my child is in a wheelchair and the school doesn't have disabled access". Putting in wheelchair ramps and handrails doesn't inconvenience anyone; banning peanuts for one child who has a nut allergy does.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)Put him/her in another part of the cafeteria and give him/her nut free food in one form or another...
Besides that point, why are there nut products in like pizza anyways? I mean, they can't gaurentee at least one thing in the cafeteria that is nut free? That seems absurd by itself.
LeftishBrit
(41,203 posts)why organizations often refuse to do so.Which is wrong of course.
I don't think that a total ban on peanuts is necessarily the answer: closer supervision, and a main lunch-room that is only used for the purpose (so that children are unlikely to come across peanuts away from lunchtime) might be better. The allergic child, along with any others who have special dietary needs, might eat separately or go home to eat if they live nearby.Or one could provide school dinners without peanuts for most children, and those with packed lunches containing peanuts might eat separately. Etc. However, all such arrangements are likely to require more staff and/or accommodation, which is again potentially expensive.
I think the term 'allergy' can be misleading here, though technically correct, because allergies so often mean that you sneeze, or get a rash, or feel sick - all of which are unpleasant, but not life-threatening. Peanut allergies can be more like the sort of reactions some people have to bee stings: they can actually kill you. I'm obviously not recommending banning either peanuts or bees; but some sort of adaptations do need to be made to those with life-threatening allergies.
unblock
(52,126 posts)compared to effectively banning any students with life-threatening allergies from school.
others are being deprived of *absolutely nothing* they are merely being inconvenienced. they can still have nuts in their diet, just not in school. it's merely a convenience issue for everyone else, a life-and-death issue for those with allergies.
it's comparable to banning smoking around someone who needs an oxygen tank. you can smoke, just do it some other place, some other time.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)the only accommodation this kid needs: to bring his own lunch and eat in a separate room and have school staff who are aware of his allergy, know the signs of anaphylactic shock, and know how to administer epinephrine. That's it. She has the choice to homeschool if she wishes in Michigan; she apparently chose not to exercise that option and instead send her child into an environment where he may be exposed to peanuts. I'm sorry, but expecting that peanuts and peanut products be banned from an entire school because of one child is insane and unreasonable.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)approach is kind of crazy.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Expecting however many children to not ever bring in peanuts? Their parents to make sure nothing they have for lunch (if they bring their own) ever has peanuts? The school to ensure that nothing from the cafeteria contains nuts (even if it means a separate supply chain for this school from every other school in the system)? It is neither minor, nor reasonable.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)As I said, I've been doing it for a while now, and it really is no biggie. This has become a common condition, and there are alternatives available. While it may have been a challenge twenty years ago, the vendors who service schools are all familiar with the requirement - and for those who "love" peanut butter (and there are children out there with sensory issues who live off of the stuff), there are alternatives that are similar in price, taste nearly identical, and function the same way.
While I enjoy peanut flavored snacks at home, I am not going to have my children be responsible for the death of a classmate over a peanut butter sandwich, when I can slather bread with "sun butter" (made with sesame seeds) for the same price and the same time investment.
Nor do I want some child to never be allowed to have the social interaction that goes with lunch time with their peers (or be locked away with children who actually *are* special needs) because of it.
If you currently have children in the school system, please share your own personal experiences. If you don't, and are just getting your outrage meter up for something you really have no experience with - including checking off the box that says "nut free" when placing an order from a lunch vendor - then you really don't have any experience with modern day school issues.
This one is minor, especially when *reasonable* people work together.
These types of problems are simply going to continue increasing until we solve them, so until that happens, since it is in the public's best interest to have an educated population, the parents of America who don't want to explain that sharing their peanut candy killed their friend, and that is why everyone is sad/attending a funeral can figure it out.
Keeping children safe and alive trumps money issues.
I am struggling not to find your attitude as offensive as the idiots who don't like "government regulation" interfering because it "costs money" and then get all shocked when their fertilizer plants explode, or their garment factories collapse.
One death or many - the goal is to get everyone educated and to adulthood in a safe manner.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)All the people who work in peanut-free schools, and actually know what they are talking about, are saying, "this really isn't a big deal." And yet other posters are insisting it's the end of the world.
I wonder what that's about.
LeftishBrit
(41,203 posts)For example, dress codes and sometimes uniforms. These mean that children cannot always wear what they want; it sometimes means that their parents have to buy more clothes if they cannot use hand-me-downs from siblings and cousins who attend other schools; etc.
What about all the rules and regulations about what games children are and aren't allowed to play in the playground, which are often based on fears about possibly being sued if an accident did occur?
For that matter, what about all the restrictions that are put on one just by living near to others - for example about noise?
I have seen primary schools that were peanut-free because of children's allergies, and it didn't cause big problems. Admittedly, in the UK, peanut products are possibly not as much a part of children's staple diet as in the USA, where I understand that peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are a common popular and relatively affordable option. But, while there may be arguments about how restrictive one can and should be about what children bring in for packed lunches, I do not think it is at all unreasonable to expect schools to provide school dinners that do not include nut products - especially as there are quite a number of children, who, though they are not life-threateninglyallergic, have milder allergies and intolerances to nuts; so it's not really 'for one child'. In fact, in most schools that I have seen, nut products are not a common part of school dinners anyway, whether or not a school is a 'peanut-free zone'.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)What does that have to do with this? Wheelchair access is reasonable and fair. Separate lunch facilities or provision of a separate room where they can eat the peanut-free lunch they've brought from home is a perfectly reasonable accomodation for children with severe allergies. Training of school staff in the use of an epi-pen and recognising the signs of anaphylactic shock is also reasonable. Demanding that your child's school be a peanut-free zone because they have an allergy is not reasonable.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)My tour guide yesterday at college campus lost us on purpose even. I guess just don't give me the wheelchair argument, I'm in no mood for it.
But as I said elsewhere, I think the problem is that schools usually have crappy food to begin with and that needs to change. Hospitals accommodate diets. I would think a school system run by the government could do the same thing someday. Healthy food, better paid teachers, better exercise programs...
I agree with you on some points now that I've given it more thought. If the kid is allergic to airborne peanut smells or whatever, that's child endangerment to be in areas with possible peanut contamination. So this comes down to eating peanut contaminated foods. But the real issue is: exactly what resources and how much money does the mother have? Can she feed her child well in the first place? Is she the working poor? Because those things inhibit the mother from homeschooling, getting a teacher at home or anything else that would help for that matter. If she is in this situation, then this is really is a case of how can the school feed her child.
Erose999
(5,624 posts)person with special needs a special meal and leave it at that.
I enjoy both nuts and gluten. I live on PB&J because its cheap protein.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Is set for special diets...and peanut butter sandwiches are hardly a staple in a hospital
Erose999
(5,624 posts)in a regular meal and you can still get peanuts from the vending machines.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Just pointing this has happened, and the thread has good reasons.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The school has a responsibility, and the other parents should have enough empathy, to accommodate this disability.
It's worse than nonexistent wheelchair access actually, since the school's failure to act won't simply inconvenience the student but may cost him his life.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)"failure to act may cost him his life". Wow, hyperbole much? Separate school lunch facilities, fine. School staff trained to recognise the signs of anaphylactic shock and to administer an epi-pen, fine. "Peanut free zone"? Ridiculous and unneccessary.
alp227
(32,006 posts)"My kid can't eat peanut butter sandwiches at school because of one kid who says they kill him!" #FirstWorldProblems
Pisces
(5,599 posts)the best air filtration system etc. and go to crazy lengths to make sure that nothing with peanuts is ever brought into the school. The problem for a school that accomodates this child is now opening themselves up to legal action if some other
kid ever brings in a product with tree nuts or where tree nuts were processed.
The child should eat at an allergy free table and bring their own lunch from home. They should be taught to never eat anything that is not given to them by their parents. The child should also carry an epi-pen at all times. Suing the school is not the answer.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)consequence in schools all over the country.
I work in multiple schools. This is done all the time. It's no big deal.
Pisces
(5,599 posts)that was processed where nuts are processed. You can not tell me that this kid doesn't go to restaurants, malls, stores,
parks etc where people have peanuts or peanut products. I think if your kid is deathly allergic you teach the kid how
to avoid all foods not deemed safe by a parent. It is too much responsibility for every family to be cognizant of what they
are buying.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Squinch
(50,924 posts)Often their outbursts are disturbing to the other children in the class.
How about a child with cerebral palsy, who is only able to express himself extremely slowly, and not very clearly, and takes up a lot of class time? That is inconvenient to the other children too.
How about a child with spina bifida who requires that an elevator be built into the school to accommodate his wheelchair? That is inconvenient and expensive.
How about a child who is HIV positive? Everyone in all the school systems has to learn and use universal precautions because there are children who have HIV. That's kind of a pain.
How about a slow learner? That is very annoying to the smarter children.
Schools accommodate all kinds of things.
Children not eating peanuts is an inconvenience. An anaphalactic child ingesting peanuts could lead to his death, and his state does not allow him to carry the antidote.
This shouldn't even be an issue.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 27, 2013, 10:14 AM - Edit history (1)
You put in an elevator because the Americans With Disabilities Act tells you that you have to put one in, so that parents, grandparents, teachers and students with mobility issues can have access.
What a canard.
The actions of the other children in their homes (having peanut butter for BREAKFAST, for example) will not kill the HIV positive child, or the "slow learner," (who will have an IEP and be helped by being given extra schooling), or the kid with CP, or the kid with Tourette's. All of your examples are children with special needs who will have an individualized plan to accommodate their particular issues. They won't get killed by peanut butter.
However, if the janitor has a peanut butter cookie at home, and the dust from that cookie can "potentially" kill a kid (as this mother claims) than it is far less onerous and far less "expensive and inconvenient" to simply pay for a distance-learning plan for the child, in order that he not be killed by "stray peanut dust."
The issue here is school and taxpayer liability, and the inability of the school to be able to positively, without any exception, enforce the conduct of students and visitors.
The mother needs to take the kid to an allergist/immunologist, and attempt to have the kid desensitized. Or coddle the kid for the rest of his (miserable--and it will be miserable) life.
Last edited Fri Apr 26, 2013, 10:12 PM - Edit history (1)
First, no one is telling the other children or custodians not to have peanuts at home. No one is saying anything about stray peanut dust. Speaking of canards.
Second, it's called and IEP.
Third, if the child's allergy is that severe, desensitization is probably not going to solve the problem
Fourth, thousands of schools go peanut free every year. My work takes me to 5 such sites this year. It is not a big deal. Everyone here who has no idea of what goes on in schools, and who are vehemently arguing against the workability of something that is done all the time without any particular fanfare or difficulty, needs to stop.
MADem
(135,425 posts)This woman is suing because nothing the school does is "good enough." She's suing the school because state law doesn't let her kid have his epi-pen (go after the state, not the school), and she's suing the school because she doesn't think the accommodations they have made for the kid are "good enough." She is also calling the PTA a bunch of child killers. She's being an ASSHOLE. She doesn't want compromise or cooperation--she wants a fight and a payday, it would appear. The school is in a position where they cannot respond to her trashing of them in the media, because they are under the "We Don't Talk About Ongoing Litigation" gag rule common in public service.
You are not an immunologist--apparently, though, immunologists say that this brand new protocol, just out of clinical trial and into practice in medical centers around the country, works VERY well for people with SEVERE allergies. It takes a long time, though, so she needs to get cracking. Four months of treatment is a "short course" so if she wants little Nicky to be ready to go for the next year, she needs to start now.
This kid is apparently SOOOOOOOOOO sensitive that "peanut dust" will fuck him up. If one of his classmates, or the school janitor, or one of the teachers, has --at home, for breakfast--peanut flavored crackers, a candy bar, a handful of peanuts, or even a piece of toast from bread made in a factory where peanuts are processed, then those children or school employees could very well bring "peanut dust" into the environment from their homes, on their clothes. Then little Nicky could breathe it in and....DIE!!!!!
Sorry--I don't think this woman's motives are pure. She wants to put the school in a position where they've "agreed" that there will be NO peanuts ever in the school, and then hold them liable when the kid manages to find some peanut dust flying off the scarf of his teacher or in food he shares with some other kid whose mother didn't read the label. So yeah, it's NOT a big deal, because it's not going to happen-- there's no way ANY environment can be truly "peanut free" and anyone who thinks a decree will make is so is the one who isn't thinking clearly.
Let the kid sit at the peanut free table, don't rely on the school to stop the kid from eating food he shouldn't (parental education), don't try and fail to force parents to be obsessive label-readers if that's not their thing, and don't try to hold the school liable for something the kid is old enough to understand how to manage on his own. And get the law changed--call that state legislator that represents Ms. Williams, and get the Michigan law changed so little Nicky can carry his epi-pen. And get Nicky desensitized. THAT will solve the problem once and for all, and Nicky will be grateful for not being treated like a "different" kid for once in his life.
Of course, that ruins the whole Muchausens-By-Proxy thing for folks who like that kind of stuff. And I think Ms. Williams is a fan.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)reasonable people isn't really an issue at all.
Enjoy!
MADem
(135,425 posts)but thanks for your 'attention'.....I guess. You might want to check yourself for dramatic tendencies, doncha know....
The discussion isn't moot just because you say it is...but, whatever. And reasonable people can--and do--appear on both sides of this issue.
backatcha, I suppose. We're well into "agree to disagree" territory already, here, I'm quite sure.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)If the school had a ban then the kid may trust that all the food is safe and let his/her guard down. It's better to have an allergy free table where the student can bring friends alongng that also pack allergy free and have all the students in contact with hyper allergic student wash their hands regularly. THAT is a reasonable accommodation.
Also, there are strawberry allergies, seafood allergies, corn allergies...
Why do only the kids allergic to peanuts and tree nuts get a special school-wide ban?
Squinch
(50,924 posts)An allergy free policy gives a reasonably safe environment for the kid and increases awareness, and works nicely.
But let's all keep running around with our hair on fire arguing that it can't be done and it shouldn't done and "my peanut butter rights!"
MADem
(135,425 posts)The PA taxpayers paid, for years, for his kids to be homeschooled in VA.
The child can't help being allergic, but that's not a reason to turn a school into a sterile operating theater, either. People encounter peanut products everywhere--the only way to protect a severely allergic child is to require everyone entering the school to shower and change into scrubs, so that no peanut dust enters the establishment on their clothing.
It's an impossible request. Let mom keep the kid in a safe "controlled environment" for which she has responsibility and authority--her HOME.
Or go to a doctor and give desensitization a try:
http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/health/treating-peanut-allergies-in-kids#.UXrJIrWG2So
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.
Here, an example
http://www.kgi.edu/Documents/Courier_peanut_Schmid%20(2).pdf
Doing this is not hard or onerous.
Going peanut and nut free can be harder...and in that case mom should equip kid with epipen.
But seriously, this is actually a small, but growing trend.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)the school district more. It would, after all, have to provide a comparable education, which would mean teachers in each speciality going out to the kid's home every day to bring him up to speed on every subject. Unless you're saying the parents should do it. Parents CAN provide homeschooling if they want, but every kid is entitled to a public school education, ever since the IDEA (then known as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act) was passed in 1975.
But this is a tough problem, no way around it. I hope some safe and reasonable accommodation can be provided, for the sake of the kid who, after all, has no control over his allergies, his mother, or school policy.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)what happens to these individuals once they're out of K-12 school. I doubt employers are going to take extraordinary measures to accommodate his/her allergies. What about college? What about social situations? I wonder how many people would be willing to sterilize their environment in order to be able to host this individual.
Cairycat
(1,704 posts)they shouldn't make the accommodations now to allow the child to attend school? The school's job is giving kids that early education, that's all they need to be concerned about. Later in life will be up to the child.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Talk about putting words in my mouth! 
TimberValley
(318 posts)LeftishBrit
(41,203 posts)that (a) adults normally eat in a 'tidier' way than small children and don't spread their food all over every available surface or go around with food all over themselves; (b) the adults who have the allergies can take the responsibility themselves for reading the labels and ingredients and simply not eating things that have a bad effect on them.
At work or college, people can avoid eating peanut products in the office or lecture room (eating is typically discouraged in such places anyway) and someone who is severely allergic can eat somewhere else than the main cafeteria if need be.
In cases where it is just a question of children not being able to eat certain foods, the parents could send them with a packed lunch; problem solved; but some children can get a bad reaction even to the touch of peanuts.
I have an adult friend who has a severe peanut allergy. She takes responsibility for what she eats, and generally doesn't have problems, but on one occasion was at a dinner where she was assured that none of the food had been in contact with peanuts. Unfortunately, some of it had, and she was rushed to hospital in an ambulance with severe breathing problems. She was fine in the end, but it was scary.
pnwmom
(108,960 posts)Particularly if you can keep them from being repeatedly exposed.
But I read recently about a college student who died of a peanut allergy so, yes, the risk is always there.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Americans with Disabilities Act. They can't decide that employing this person is too complicated.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)I assume me knows enough to look both ways before crossing the street, and not to stick his fingers into electric sockets. I think he should be able to avoid any foods that aren't clearly peanut-free.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)Neoma
(10,039 posts)Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)allergy without consuming peanuts. I did find an article that refutes the idea that there is an epidemic of food allergy deaths. In fact, the article offers that it is the Pharma corp. that make the epi-pens that is generating much of this hysteria.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meredith-broussard/food-allergy-deaths-less_b_151462.html
Neoma
(10,039 posts)I'm allergic to cashews and Tylenol, my dad's severely allergic to MSG (he has an epi-pen) and poison ivy... My mom is developing a new allergy a month it seems like, but hasn't hit the realm of food allergies ...yet. Except aquafresh toothpaste.
I guess my argument has to be that schools need better funding for better food (like actual vegetables) that can accommodate food allergies, diabetes, lactose intolerance, glucose intolerance, etc. (And more money for teachers in general...) But I might as well be ignored for that, since that's not going to happen. Since anything good that's suggested for this country is always shot down. Trains? Shot down. Electric cars? Shot down. Solar panels? Shot down. Gun control? Shot down.
Excuse moi, being a pessimist.
RobinA
(9,886 posts)about these peanut allergies that seem to be everywhere. I was in school in the '60's - '70's and never met a kid with a peanut allegory, never heard of one. All the kids who "carried" brought peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for lunch, so the cafeteria must have been covered with the stuff. Where were all these allergic kids? I know no person my age with a peanut allergy. Back then, people got "allergy shots" if they were allergic to something, as did my 20-year-old niece when she turned up allergic to yellow jacket stings. Do these shots not work for nuts? What's different now with the peanuts?
Neoma
(10,039 posts)So I can't answer about peanuts. I don't need an emergency epi-pen since it's only cashews. It's always pretty obvious if cashews are in something. Not so with regular peanuts.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)I have no information to back that up, but it seems logical to me.
I DO know that Monsanto has taken a protein from Brazil nuts and married it into experimental soy plants, and the resulting hybrid has gotten out "into the world." Which means that people with Brazil nut allergies have to be careful of soy products now.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Some parents are terrified of peanut allergies. So they don't feed peanut products to their kid when they're first on solid food. That lack of exposure appears to make peanut allergies much more likely.
As for allergy shots, those don't work for all allergies.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Allergies/college-freshman-peanut-allergy-dies-eating-cookie/story?id=18723777
http://www.suntimes.com/2966858-417/reaction-according-allergic-allergy-examiner.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2259443/Nut-allergy-teenager-William-Luckett-15-dies-bites-Chinese-takeaway-spare-ribs-marinated-peanut-sauce.html
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/03/12/19-year-old-plymouth-man-dies-of-peanut-allergy/
Mariana
(14,854 posts)They don't refute what Vinnie said.
MADem
(135,425 posts)that had peanut oil in it. He wasn't at a public school, he was a college kid and he was home on vacation when the tragedy happened.
The fourth example was from the UK, not USA, and was caused by peanut sauce in chinese food at a place where he'd previously eaten--not in a public school.
The third link happened at school, but doesn't specify what the food allergy was.
The first example was a death from a solid peanut given by a child at recess, at school.
In every case, someone ATE something--they didn't die from "peanut dust" in the air.
lynne
(3,118 posts)- especially in a school cafeteria. There are items that don't have peanuts but were made in a plant or using equipment that is shared with peanuts and are "contaminated". If the allergy is so severe that such items could cause a problem, how could anyone guarantee that they wouldn't be present in the cafeteria?
The school can exclude peanuts from school lunches, can ask other parents not to pack peanut related items, but certainly can't guarantee a peanut-free environment. It's impossible. If that is what the child really needs, as a parent I would school my child at home.
tavernier
(12,371 posts)especially if the child is extremely allergic and it is a life or death situation. Ten is very young to send him off with instructions and warnings and think that he will always remember not to eat anything that is offered to him. As he gets older, he will become more responsible for his own well being, but until then, the parents, IMHO, should provide as safe an environment as possible.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)When they celebrite something like easter, or christmas and the teacher sends a letter home and asks if you can send something she reminds parents not to send anything with peanuts in the item. That is helpful for a class setting. I don't expect the lunch room to make special exemption for my child. I would however make the kitchen aware my child's special problem and to make sure to watch out for him. I also think the parents just work with their child.
Neoma
(10,039 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)She carries an epi-pen and her school has them on hand as well. She knows to be careful about what she eats, but neither she or her parents are paranoid about it. They don't want her to grow up living in fear. They just educate her and teach her to be careful. Her father is a doctor. She is also allergic to eggs and a few other things, but they only make her break out in hives, they aren't life threatening.
My sister and her husband are not threatening to sue the school to make it peanut free for her, they trust her to always ask and they have informed the school that there can be no peanut products in anything she consumes at the school. Everyone is happy to cooperate and so far there have been no problems. I sometimes worry about her, but she is a smart kid and very mature for her age - very vigilant, but considerate of the fact that other people are going to eat what they want to eat.
Hopefully, she will eventually grow out of her allergies some day.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)
ananda
(28,838 posts)Some sort of allergy shot or desensitizing program.
Inkfreak
(1,695 posts)I'm allergic to wasps & hornets. Severely. And I underwent extensive treatment as a kid. Shot after shot until at one point(years into this) I was injected with a full shot of venom. The Dr brought my mother & I in and said "Well, we don't know if this worked. We'll just have to see.''
Fast forward 10+ years. I somehow managed to avoid being stung all this time. I took my dogs out one morning. Felt a pinch on my back. BAM! It was hornet. Severe reaction & a trip to the ER lol. I carry an epipen everywhere now.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I find it hard to believe that he's so allergic that dust from peanuts will cause a severe reaction. If so, that unfortunate person will need to be in sterile environment for the rest of his life.
Solutions that don't impose individual sensitivities on the entire community are startlingly simple.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)LEARN something. Belief is not knowledge.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Allergic reactions can be extremely severe for some people. Nonetheless, I still don't believe that it's either practical or necessary that an entire school enforces a total ban on peanuts and nut products required so that one student can be afforded a completely allergen-free environment. Home schooling seems to be the best alternative, until hopefully the child grows out of this.
TimberValley
(318 posts)At some point the logistics have to be considered and the question needs to be asked, "Would it be more practical for many, many people to cater to the needs of one, or for one to adjust to the preferences of many (in this situation, not going nut-free)?"
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)the school would accommodate. So it seems fair in this case to ask the parents of the other kids if they would accept a minor inconvenience for the good of an unfortunate kid. Maybe get the input of the other parents? See if there's enough compassion around to make a compromise?
We had a kid in school with CP and another with Tourette's--it did affect the other kids somewhat. But they learned a lot too. You shouldn't always hide kids with disabilities I have come to believe.
TimberValley
(318 posts)What if the school had 10,000 students instead?
LostOne4Ever
(9,286 posts)Its a minor inconvenience to the kids.
Vs
The other kid's life.
uncle ray
(3,155 posts)manslaughter charges if the allergic kid dies? at some point the minor inconvenience becomes a major burden on every parent or guardian associated with the school.
Logical
(22,457 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)The teachers on the computer do it. The school district pays.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)this is a case where "one-size fits all" blanket policies don't work very well. Most elementaries aren't too large.
You would get a consensus of parents that this is a situation they would like to be sensitive to, since it is putting them out somewhat. (Although asking kids to eat peanut butter some other time of day doesn't seem too drastic to me). If I were another parent at the school I would do this only to help the family cope with their situation--only to lighten their load, which I'm sure is considerable. I see it as a case for a little extra compassion. Put yourself in the parents of the kid's shoes. The school could even put a positive spin on this and teach the kids that helping others may be a little inconvenient sometimes.
So if you put it to a PTA vote--you might have one school where parents agree to the restriction by consensus (tight-knit community) or another where parental consensus is too negative (judging by the input on this thread, that is imaginable). Put up a website where parents could vote anonymously even. That should decide it.
I am sensitive to the plight of disabled children. This is a disabled child but you want him to have as normal a life as possible, even if you can't ultimately guarantee his safety or save him from whatever fate will bring him in life. Imagine having to be kept at home (he is already restricted I'm sure) all your life.
Imagine if the kid were you.
newmember
(805 posts)No matter what the school decides or what each parents tells his child.
A form of peanut butter will be brought in the school by a child.
Could be a candy bar inside a back pack after Halloween .
I don't know how many children attended that school but it won't be peanut butter free
no matter what the school decides. The parent of the child allergic needs to make some tough choices here.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)--everyone knows that. But it is a calculated risk the parents are willing to take so that their child can have some normalcy. All the parents are asking for is a group effort to minimize the risk. The parents have probably already had to sign legal waivers and such--I don't think that's the issue. The issue is whether the community is flexible enough to handle this as a disability, which they accommodate for other children. It is invisible, but it is a disability. Whether the community has enough compassion and sees it as their desire to help the family--is the deciding factor. Personally I would be happy to use it as a way to teach my kid that helping others can be a group thing. I wouldn't hesitate to offer to support the family in such an easy way. Maybe sometime I might need some generosity in my life. This is just what I was taught--not from a religious angle but from having parents who always helped others and received it in return.
I had a good buddy in elementary who was a severe diabetic. It was always a fight to balance the kid's sugar levels and once he even ate a little too much fruit (some other kid's fruit) at school and it was a crisis. So these things are always going on in schools and kids can be made aware of what they can do to help out and be kind to the kid and his family. Diversity applies to health as well as ethnicity.
newmember
(805 posts)If it was my child I don't think I would take the chance.
I would try to find an alternative , home school with a tutor.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)School employees can be trained to accommodate, but hundreds of parents and kids can't really be, and certainly not effectively. The best you can get is fairly peanut-free.
I have two kids, in two schools, and one is completely peanut and tree nut free. It's a small preschool with few enough kids that they can do a pretty good job. But the more kids you have, the harder it gets. In elementary school, you have kids packing their own lunches, bringing their own snacks, and so even if every single parent is on board and careful enough about it, stuff can end up in the school.
It seems to me like the best choice is to find a level of accommodation that the school can reasonably and effectively provide. Controlling every single piece of food that comes into the school seems beyond their abilities. So either the school can try but not do a good job of it, or find a place where they actually can have a good level of control. I think they should have a good grasp reality rather than create a situation that makes the parents feel better but isn't really safe, and isn't necessarily safer than an alternate solution.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)I'm advocating that the other parents weigh in on it.
It's always going to be a compromise. No you can't control it completely. The parents know it's a risk, but the risk is lower. Nothing like this is perfect.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)is that the school has a responsibility to accommodate disabilities. What I'm saying is that a) this isn't about the school accommodating but hundreds of other people accommodating and those hundreds of other people don't have that responsibility and are unlikely to really do it; and b) that the school can possibly create a safer environment by creating zones they can actually control by people who are actually trained.
That's how it's done in my older child's school. There's a section of the cafeteria that is peanut and tree nut free, and you have to have your lunch poked through to sit there. Kids without allergies can and do sit there if they want to sit with allergic friends, but they have to either have school lunch, or have their lunches poked through by people who are trained and very careful. And then some classrooms are nut free and in those classes the school provides snack, and kids are not allowed to bring in any outside food. And every single child files past sinks and washes their hands after lunch and before going in the playground. (It helps that this is a new school and was built with sinks on the way out from the lunch room.)
Making the whole school supposedly, but not really, peanut free, is more about keeping the parents of the allergic kids quiet than actually providing safety. There are things schools can do to create a truly safe setting, but that isn't it.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)maybe you read somebody else's post. Schools already accommodate many disabilities and this is just one more. Different schools will do different things--not a question of liability if it is the parents request. The risk is accepted.
What I am saying. Take it in. What I am saying is that this is a request that should be put out to other parents. The parents of the allergic child REQUESTS that the school try to lessen the risk, with the cooperation of other parents. If the other parents decide by consensus that asking others not to bring peanut foods is too much to ask, then that decides it. If the parents & school want to do the lunchtime sectioning off the way you describe, then that's what they offer (which seems like it has a lot of dependency on kids following rules and a lot of extra monitoring, but if that's the compromise, then so be it). It does not seem right to me not to try to accommodate the allergic child if at all possible.
Because all sorts of other conditions and disabilities are accommodated.
I can imagine small schools in tight-knit communities where people might actually want to help such a family by making the school a peanut free zone, so then they can do that. (It seems the least expensive way to go). If a school is large and has several peanut allergy kids and the community wants to be extra helpful, they could do both.
But my point is, the community & school can respond to a parent's request by group consensus. It's not a question of defining "rights and responsibilities." It's a question of the community coming together and imagining what they would want IF the allergy kid were their own. Different communities come to different solutions.
MADem
(135,425 posts)What happens when the janitor stops by for a few egg McMuffins on the way to work, and some of the flour residue from the buns lands on his clothing, and perhaps falls on this kid's desk?
Anyone who is sensitive to peanut DUST needs to go for desensitization therapy, covered by insurance. If it doesn't work (and it does work in at least two thirds of cases--and this is a new therapy, too) , the school should pay for distance learning or tuition at a school that accommodates children with these issues.
Other children with CP and Tourette's don't require people to modify their own behavior before and while they are in school, or require parents to be reading ingredient lists before they whip up those Jiffy mix brownies or what-have-you. I don't think a child with a speech or crippling disability is the same as a kid potentially killing someone because you ate granny's biscuits at home for breakfast, some of the biscuit flour landed on your coat, and the biscuit mix had some peanut traces in it and your little classmate inhaled.
Technically, everyone should be wearing freshly washed clothes, put on OUTSIDE the home where peanuts are eaten, have brushed their teeth vigorously before entering the school, and not travelled in a vehicle where peanuts ever travelled--that's what it would take to "protect" someone with a peanut "dust" allergy.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)but I would think that they are asking for help in minimizing the risks, not in providing a completely safe environment (otherwise they would want to keep him at home). I'm assuming they know about and have worked with desensitization. I think it would be sad to have a child confined to home if there is a reasonable alternative.
So I don't think anyone else would have to be that paranoid or go to the extreme measures you describe. Maybe they could make it a way for kids to learn about allergies and kids with disabilities? And treat them as they themselves would wish to be treated?
There are kids who can die from a bee sting, kids who can die from other foods or drugs, kids with major chronic diseases that require some monitoring at school. The school might actually appreciate some help from the parents on the peanut issue. It seems to be a problem that's not going away.
As I have said, I think what a school does about this should be up to a consensus of the parents of a particular school. If I were a parent I would want to help, but other parents may feel as you do. So I think the consensus could vary.
MADem
(135,425 posts)This mother, though, is SUING the school, and accusing the PTA of wanting to kill her kid, in essence. She's getting all batshit and doesn't seem interested in meeting in the middle. If I were her, instead of accusing parents of not giving a shit, I would
1. Get that kid of hers into one of these new desensitization protocols (which is making this issue go away for at least two thirds of the people who enroll in the program);
2. Call her state legislators (right effin' now!) to get state law changed so that Junior--or his teacher--can keep his epi-pen right there in the classroom (apparently not the standard in Detroit--though somehow, even though the kid isn't supposed to have his meds on him, they "get stolen" when he gets "bullied and beaten up" according to her complaint);
3. If the "separate table in the far corner" of the cafeteria thing isn't working for Junior. let him have lunch in the classroom...and Mom should pack it herself, just to be extra safe. Of course, she's suing the school because they let him have lunch in the nice, safe office--so they can't win.
I have a sneaking suspicion--since there's "litigation underway" over this issue, and the school is unable to comment on pending legal matters, that Mom is "sue happy." She's throwing everything against the wall to see if it sticks. I don't think she wants a solution...but she might want a payday.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)...I just talk about it in general terms. Hoping that people do what they can to help. America is a dog-eat-dog place now. I should take my idealism and shove it, I know. It's unrealistic to think anyone really cares about this kind of stuff, and teachers are underpaid and burnt out everywhere. Maybe the mother is out for money. I'd have to know the back story to make that judgement.
You know what--Judge Judy will decide and maybe that's the best way to go.
Cya
MADem
(135,425 posts)She's flinging shit (ascribing unkind motives to the other parents, putting cruel words in their mouths I'm quite sure they didn't say) and the school administration is constrained from responding.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)I don't know anything about.
You may be right. I'm more interested in the whole issue and how people are dealing with it rather than just this one case. As I said, I'm sensitive to kids with disabilities. I think there's a way to compromise here so that nobody has to get so riled up about it.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)inconvenience" when it comes to providing nutritious meals at a reasonable cost and on a large scale?
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)"Peanut, tree nut, and seed allergies are among some of the most common food allergies in both children and adults. The prevalence of these types of allergies varies substantially world wide, but the highest rates are in western countries where approximately 1-2% of people have peanut, tree nut, and seed allergies. Of these groups, peanut allergy is the most common. Among tree nut allergies, walnuts are the most common allergen, followed by cashews and almonds. In one study, about one third of patients with peanut allergies had coexisting tree nut allergies and, similarly, about one third of people with tree nut allergies were found to have coexisting peanut allergies."
PEANUT ALLERGY IS THE SECOND MOST COMMON FOOD ALLERGY
IN CHILDREN AND IS ON THE INCREASE. IT OCCURS IN ABOUT
1 IN 50 CHILDREN AND 1 IN 200 ADULTS. PEANUT IS THE MOST
LIKELY FOOD TO CAUSE ANAPHYLAXIS AND DEATH. IT HAS BEEN
ESTIMATED THAT THERE IS ONE DEATH FOR EVERY 200 EPISODES
OF ANAPHYLAXIS.
----
So I guess you'd have to know what these parents are asking for--didn't say they are talking about other nuts.
The child in question in this case would be likely bringing his own food from home, so I doubt that tree nuts in other kids lunches would be a problem as long as peanuts are kept to a minimum. Peanut butter seems to be the main fear.
I'm sorry I responded to this thread. I am not an expert in this--merely calling for
people to be open-minded and let each school decide--some compromise to keep the child at school. What would it hurt to try? I really don't know how effective it would be. I guess it's all experimental at this point.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)marions ghost
(19,841 posts)and I wish I never spoke up. All these people needing the pile on about this. Good grief! I'll stay out of any threads having to do with schools from now on, you can be sure.
Let there be avalanches of nuts everywhere for all I care.
Cya
womanofthehills
(8,668 posts)That would be more of a trauma to the children at the school than not having peanut butter for one meal a day.
rightsideout
(978 posts)There was a boy in my kid's elementary school class that has a severe peanut allergy.
He ate in a separate area of the cafeteria, actually in the vestibule between the cafeteria and the lobby at a table that had a "no peanuts sign" on it.
Before there was an outing or party in the classroom the mother would have the teacher send a reminder to the parents not to make baked things with peanuts in them and she would come to the class and inspect the food. This carried over to Cub Scouts meetings and campouts as well. She would inspect all the food before we went on campouts or outings. She would go to all the scout functions to ensure her son wasn't exposed to anything with nuts in them and would throw out anything she suspected was tainted.
She was a pain in the ass at times but I have chronic asthma myself (not food allergy related) and spent a good deal of my childhood in the ER getting epinephrine shots for bad asthma attacks. The worst thing for me was cigarette smoke, polin and dust. One time I had to go to the ER after visiting a family gathering. They all smoked. After that I refused to go to any more family get togethers or would refuse to go inside and I would stay out on the porch. Three of those relatives recently died of lung cancer.
But yea, this peanut food allergy stuff is quite common.
aikoaiko
(34,163 posts)If that's still true, then there is no need to ban peanuts. The child's food intake can be controlled, epi-pens at the easy reach for safety, and allergy meds can take care of lesser reactions to superficial contact.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)There aren't any documented cases of death-by-peanut that I know of.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)TimberValley
(318 posts)Would this mean that an entire school ought to dim its lights and draw the curtains?
I realize this involves significantly more inconvenience than not bringing in peanut products, but that's my point.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)schools do it all the time.
Flexibility is the way of the future.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)On one hand, I can see just banning peanuts from the school. Kids can live without nuts.
On the other hand, I can't imagine trusting hundreds of other kids, and their parents, to be that careful with their lunches and snacks. Even if the intent was to make the school peanut free, I don't know if it could be done perfectly, and I think if I had a kid with an allergy like that I might rather my child be on alert and aware than relax figuring the school is peanut free and therefore safe.
We have kids with severe peanut and tree nut allergies at both my kids' schools. One school (the one with fewer kids) is nut free. The other one has a nut-free table, and nut-free classrooms where necessary.
It is hard for schools to figure out how to handle this problem well.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)
Phentex
(16,330 posts)I hate the thought of any kid dying from this. My neighbor's son is severely allergic and has had a few very scary incidents. But he doesn't live in a bubble and unless he's going to, there's not a lot that can be forced on others.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)A friend of mine has a daughter that goes to a nut-free school. She was telling me a story about how they inspect the lunches and snacks of every single kid before they get to eat. One day, she had sent her daughter to school with a snack cake that had peanuts as an ingredient and the school staff took it away from her. As a result, the poor thing (6 years old) didnt get to eat a snack that day. So the very next day my friend sent her to school with the same snack, removed from its package, and in a baggie instead. And because the school had no way of knowing what was in the snack, it was not taken away from her.
missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)Not only for potentially endangering a child, but for the example she set for her six year old daughter.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)But I understand where youre coming from.
The larger point for me is that unless they ban all non-packaged food items, there is absolutely no way to ensure a nut-free school.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)<snip>
One factor that has a positive relationship with peanut allergy incidence is childhood vaccination. In the past hundred years, vaccination rates have steadily increased to the point where nearly every American child has vaccinations multiple times throughout childhood and infancy. At the same time, peanut allergies have increased to the point where everyone knows a child who has a peanut allergy, often life threatening in severity.
The Potential Connection Between Vaccines and Peanut Allergies
The onset of the peanut allergy epidemic coincides with the onset of refined peanut oil as a common product in manufacturing and producing vaccines. While people use peanut oil in other applications, such as cooking and lubrication, none of these applications delivers the potential allergen to the body in such a direct way as vaccines and drugs do. In the early years after vaccination became commonplace, a reaction called serum sickness began to cause shock in many children who received vaccinations. The symptoms are uncannily similar to allergic reactions to anaphylaxis-inducing allergens today.
Preserving vaccines and other drugs requires the use of an excipient, or an additive that ensures that the beneficial effect lasts as long as possible without losing the live component of the vaccine. Adjuvants are another key component, which increase reactivity and ensure that the immune response evoked by the vaccine is strong enough to fight the disease in practice. These additives often come in the form of a refined organic oil of some type, and they are still crucial to vaccine distribution today. Because of its availability and low cost, peanut oil is one of the top favored refined oils for use in vaccines.
It seems that in order to enjoy immunity against disease, we must live with hypersensitivity to perfectly natural environmental factors. An initial, early exposure to an allergen creates hypersensitivity—in this case, the “serum sickness” or mild-to-moderate discomfort that children experience after a vaccination. After the initial exposure, the child with newly formed hypersensitivity may experience a severe reaction to further exposures. This is the anaphylaxis that marks peanut allergies as dangerous, even life threatening in children. This hypersensitivity through vaccination is induced at a time when children are already at their most vulnerable, the first few months of life during infancy.
<more at link>
mainstreetonce
(4,178 posts)the only way the parents can be sure of no exposure is to home school.
It would be impossible to guarantee a whole school could be peanut free.
The school should not take in the liability of trying to be responsible.
Maybe the child could attend some class time in a very isolated from food products room and be taken home for meals and not be allowed to be present when any snacks are served.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)At what point do the "needs of the few" (not to die/keep breathing/get a quality education that isn't "separate but equal" override the "conveniences of the many"?
mainstreetonce
(4,178 posts)I think if the allergy is life threatening, the parents can't take a chance and the school cannot deal with the liability.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)their child should be able to have a "normal" school situation with a fairly minor accommodation (which the law provides).
I really don't see why this is a big deal myself; making a school "peanut free" seems polite/decent, and there are similarly priced alternatives available.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)at the same time they started using it in the vaccines (if I am reading the stories correctly).
I know quite a few people who don't vaccinate, and two of them have kids with some level of peanut allergies.
I've also heard that allergies can come from parents being overly careful with dirt and germs when pregnant and when their kids are little. That kids' immune systems don't develop the same way they do if they are around germs.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)I am not familiar with anyone who "didn't" vaccinate having peanut allergies.
My children both had peanut free classrooms, and we were fine with it. The mother of an affected child once tried to 'apologize' for the inconvenience she was causing, but I quickly brushed her off: there, but for the grace of good fortune, could have been my child.
I am a terrible housekeeper, while my MIL is fabulous. My husband suffers from nasty allergies; my children are usually pretty healthy.
No way am I going to share any of the "your clean house caused the problems" (except in my fantasies - lol!).
gollygee
(22,336 posts)however, here is a news link about the hygiene hypothesis.
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/08/14301214-is-it-possible-to-be-too-clean-researchers-say-yes?lite
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Was just trying to specify that I wasn't aware of anyone who *didn't* vaccinate with a peanut allergy, while I know several who have who are. The sentence seemed confusing to me, so I tried to make it clearer, which apparently only made it messier.
womanofthehills
(8,668 posts)I was never allergic to peanuts until I became ill after the city of Albuquerque sprayed Malathion for mosquito control. Pesticides can cause digestive problems and food allergies.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The "epidemic" of peanut allergies doesn't occur everywhere where peanut oil is used in vaccines.
In addition, there's alternatives to peanut oil, which are commonly used in the US - so there's lots of kids who didn't get peanut oil in their vaccines, but did develop peanut allergy.
But good job catapulting the anti-vax propaganda.
MineralMan
(146,262 posts)and peanuts. She works very hard to prevent exposure, picking foods, etc. only after reading complete labeling. Her son attends public school, and she has worked with that school to minimize possible exposures.
However, she also realizes that other parents are not going to take the same elaborate precautions in choosing food items to send to school with their own children. Last time we talked, she said that there was no way that she would ever assume that parents of non-allergic children would take the pains she takes.
So, she has taught her son how to avoid accidental exposure. He's eight years old. He knows how to avoid ingesting things that contain the ingredients that he's allergic to. There's an epipen wherever he goes, and he knows how to detect the first signs that he has been exposed and what to say to the people around him.
The bottom line is there is no possible way to make a school environment completely nut free 100% of the time. People whose children aren't allergic simply won't take the time to make absolutely sure they don't send stuff containing those nuts with their child. The only way to minimize the risk is through teaching the individual child thoroughly and to make sure emergency care is understood and available to everyone where the child goes.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I don't believe that "peanut-free schools" are really peanut free, and that's even truer of tree nuts.
People who haven't ever dealt with this have NO IDEA of what it entails.
Pisces
(5,599 posts)bubble. I am sure they go out in public where people have eaten foods with peanuts or traces of peanuts. No one, but the parents of said allergic are going to be as careful. It is therefore your responsibility to make sure that your child is aware of
all the precautions and symptoms of an allergic reaction. I feel like the OP is trying to get a certain reaction.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)Yes, it's unfortunate that peanut allergies are severe enough to kill, but the fact is that the hundreds of kids who DON'T have peanut allergies should not be punished because of the few that do.
TimberValley
(318 posts)I'm glad my elementary schooler doesn't see it as a punishment to not eat peanut butter so other children don't get sick.
Maybe a ban is not the most effective accommodation in this instance. But acting like this is some massive infringement on the rights of other children is absurd. This is curtesy and empathy.
I think people get ridiculous over peanut butter. If a child is so ridiculous about eating a certain food, to the point of not caring if they are physically hurting others (even by accident) the parents of that child need to teach them better.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)is simply because the Pharma maker of the Epi-Pen has done an excellent job in scaring people into buying their products. It is a story a old as time.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meredith-broussard/food-allergy-deaths-less_b_151462.html
womanofthehills
(8,668 posts)I had to carry an Epi-Pen around for a year and it gave me a sense of security.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)Cheers!
4Q2u2
(1,406 posts)I wonder if we are growing the peanut allergy problem bigger by creating larger numbers of the population that are nut free for extended periods of time to accommodate one person. Kids who would normally eat peanut butter or other nuts will now not have exposure to them. Will they now become more sensitive to them and then pass on a weakened genetic resistance to their children, thus propagating the allergies? Kind of like the Herd Doctrine for immunization.
Silent3
(15,154 posts)Rare mutations aside, the genes you're born with are the genes you pass on to the next generation. An environmental condition might change whether or not an allergic predisposition encoded into your genes is expressed or not, but it doesn't re-encode your genes so that a new genetic predisposition to that allergy becomes more inheritable than it otherwise would have been.
The cruel way of nature and genetics is we avoid passing on genetic weaknesses mostly by dying before we can reproduce, or, if not dying, then for some other reason becoming infertile or being unable to acquire a fertile mate. We now pass on many more genetic weaknesses than our ancestors could have gotten away with simply because we survive those weaknesses better with the aid of medicine and technology, making our descendents more dependent on similar medicines and technologies.
It's possible that there's a little more to inherited traits than survival of the fittest, some more complex mechanisms than the basics of either passing on or not passing on the genes you're born with (say, occasional naturally-occurring gene splicing via viruses and bacteria, or a selective influence on which sperm cells survive) that occasionally come into play, but it's not like, say, pumping iron to give yourself big biceps makes it more likely, genetically speaking, that your kids will have big biceps too.
When I was in school, the thing I got asked not to bring was my favorite ham, cheese and mustard sandwiches because the teacher didn't like the smell.
My mother packed them anyway. I understand if your child is allergic, but not everyone can afford to adhere to such rigorous standards. What if peanut butter sandwiches is all the other parents can provide?
It's like asking 29 other kids to go hungry because yours can't be in the same room with them if they are eating something that your child can't.
I'd keep my kid at home, to be honest. I wouldn't let 29 other kids go hungry just for the sake of them coming in contact with peanuts, which they surely will in later life.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)There is also a nut-free table in the cafeteria. Seems like a reasonable solution to me, and I don't think they've lost a kid yet.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)and it doesn't hurt kids that have peanut butter sandwiches at lunch.
happypeacebug
(20 posts)as are most schools here. Grocery stores carry 'peanut' free lunch snacks , everything from granola bars to little brownie cakes with a logo saying "peanut free".
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Peanuts are ubiquitous.
In poorer households, you accept that a peanut butter sandwich is what you get. Even in wealthier households, you still eat one.
You cannot escape them here in the South, is all that I am saying.
happypeacebug
(20 posts)We use sun butter and soy butter which cost a 1$ more then peanut butter for lunches. I serve Peanut butter on weekends. I am not a rich mother. I am a single mother and my daughter eats what she is served. We have poor households in Ottawa and Peanut butter sandwiches are equally as popular but the schools still have a peanut free environment!
It is do-able to have a peanut free environment. Schools provide accommodation for children with special needs, so why would this be any different? Every child has a right to go to school!
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)Soy nut butter is double here what regular peanut butter is. I have 4 kids (I'm also a single parent) and it has drastically affected my food budget. Maybe when you just have 1 child it doesn't seem like much extra, but with 4 it really adds up. Thankfully, as they get older the high school isn't nut free so I have 1 that doesn't have to worry about it. But while it's do-able, it does affect my kids' nutrition negatively while they are at school (hard to get protein in as they are lactose intolerant so rarely get cheese or yogurt. Meat for sandwiches is costly).
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)He should also be taught not to share food. Even if his mother wins this battle at school, Nick will only be able to go to school and home unless he learns to protect himself. It's an unfortunate situation for the kid, but he's the one who has to undergo the lifestyle modification, not the school
Apophis
(1,407 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)If the child's health is so fragile, the child needs to be at home.
madmom
(9,681 posts)does this kid ever go any place else? Grocery store,library,shopping,dentist office, even doctors office. How do they cope in these environments?
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)I bring PB&J sandwiches to work at least twice a week. I completely understand the need to keep the child peanut-free.
But to make an exception for ONE child in a large school district is utter nonsense. By doing this they have stigmatized this child for the rest of his school life, and there is no turning back.
I can hear the bullies now, 'peanut boy'.
So sad they think he is more precious than the rest. They ruined his childhood in their attempt to protect him.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The first thing is, I will take the school position. Removing all nuts from the food in the cafeteria is not easy. So I get it. A lot of your commercially prepared foods are processed in plants that process them as well.
And the kid can and should carry an epipen, and know how to use it. No time for the nurse. Yes, it's a weapon (zero policy) well, fine. Kid needs to carry it and know how to inject himself if need be.
And mom needs to get kid his lunch.
I say this as the aunt of a kid with peanut allergies who attends school.
Now some staples, such as PB and J schools have removed because of them.
Aristus
(66,294 posts)I think peanut allergies are wildly overdiagnosed. They exist, of course, and they can be dangerous. But I think it's gotten really out of hand, due to overprotective parents whose sole scheme in life is to point out to as many people as possible: "My boy is special! And you have to remember his special needs!"
(I don't remember ever hearing about peanut allergies when I was a kid. I don't even think I heard of it until I was 20 or so...
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Though nobody knows for sure the cause of allergies, some experts hypothesize that a weakened and bored immune system may be the root cause. Modern society, especially in developed nations, places a lot of emphasis on living in a squeaky-clean environment, where disinfectants and strong drugs are used to fight off any potential source of infection. While this may seem good at first, it's actually not. The lack of pathogens makes the immune system linger, until it finally begins attacking harmless proteins, such as those found in milk, eggs, peanuts and other foods.
Interesting.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Whoah! A bored immune system. Interesting.
So somehow we need to give it something to do, keep it busy!
Aristus
(66,294 posts)was decreasing our natural immunities to pathogens, and that we should just let illnesses run their course.
I was a little shocked. My first thought was, if you don't want to treat illnesses, then aren't you studying for the wrong profession?
My second thought was, are you completely unaware of how many people used to die from simple bacterial infections?
Matariki
(18,775 posts)I like that. Got to keep the ol' immune system engaged in interesting and challenging work!
Marr
(20,317 posts)The first time I went to an environment like that, I took lots of allergy medications, expecting to be miserable for weeks on end. But I found that I'd never felt better.
I spoke to an allergy doctor when I returned, and as soon as I told him I'd just returned from a jungle, he said, "I'll bet your allergies disappeared, huh?".
Apparently allergies can be an overactive immune system. Give the body something to fight, and it's in heaven. But leave it alone and it just starts beating itself up.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And they've got one, now--it works for 2/3 of sufferers, at least. It's covered by insurance. It involves "challenge" over time, and it is a slow process, but the end result is freedom to eat whatever you want.
If they can make the challenge + immunosuppressant protocol that is still in the experiemental phase viable, the time from treatment to cure will be shortened considerably.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)They used to be very rare...now they are rare.
http://health.howstuffworks.com/diseases-conditions/allergies/food-allergy/peanut/peanut-allergies-increasing.htm
And rare does not mean that helicopter mom s right in her demands. Some districts no longer offer peanut butter sandwiches, which is a good accommodation to the risk. What she wants s excessive.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)A mother wants to prevent the death of her child!!! OMG!!! How horrible!!!
For Christ's sake, grow up. Just because YOU don't know about something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Aristus
(66,294 posts)I see this sort of thing all the time. Women presenting to the clinic insisting they have fibromyalgia, for example, which was the fad disease of choice around ten years ago or so, but exhibiting none of the classic symptoms, and reporting a history inconsistent with fibromyalgia.
Now there is a fairly broad differential here. Arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic fatigue, thyroid abnormalities, etc. But they would insist that they had fibromyalgia. It became part of their identity after a while:
"Hi, my name is Bill. I live in New York. I like skiing and pottery."
"Hi, my name is Joan. I have brown hair and I like to travel."
"Hi, my name is Beth. I have fibromyalgia."
The likelihood that this child's parent is over-reacting seems to be in direct proportion to the degree of inconvenience she insists everyone else undergo for the sake of her child.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)At the very least, RAST and or skin tests indicate he's severely allergic to peanuts. Given the stink that mom is making, he's likely had some bad reactions to peanut exposure in the past.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Then go on at length about how hard it is to protect their kid. And how much work it is. And how there's peanuts in everything.
And how the doctors don't know anything, because they keep saying their kid doesn't have peanut allergy.
These moms also don't know that their kid regularly trades for PB&J sandwiches at school.
I have no idea if this mother is one of them. But plenty of them do exist.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Are you a lunchroom monitor or a psychic?
The only parents I know who say their kids are allergic to peanuts carry EpiPens and Benadryl at all times, as prescribed by their kid's allergist.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Everyone actually knows, the mom pretends that it isn't relevant for her insistence that the kid has a peanut allergy.
I've unfortunately spent a lot of time in areas with lots of upper-middle-class stay-at-home moms. Very, very bored stay-at-home moms. Who feel that their lives are not interesting enough. So they do all sorts of things to make their lives more interesting. The most benign are the ones go get together and gossip. Or become unsuccessful Realtors.
Then there's the ones who screw up their kids so that they have to 'sacrifice' to care for them. The undiagnosable-allergy is one of the common ways they do so - it takes a lot of effort on the mom's part, she can complain about how hard it is in order to get sympathy, and since the kid doesn't actually have a peanut allergy she doesn't have to be 100% successful.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)
kudzu22
(1,273 posts)and unreasonable ones. Training the staff in the epi-pen use is reasonable. Setting aside a lunch table away from other kids is reasonable. Banning all kids from eating peanut butter or any peanut product is unreasonable.
If the kid is that severely allergic, you're better off homeschooling. Better to have social issues than to be dead.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is not unreasonable given the rate of allergy is going up
What is unreasonable is her demand they go completely tree nut and peanut free, given how many staples are processed at facilities that also work those.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)If exposure to peanuts was so deadly to my child, why would I trust every other parent at the school to be super-careful?
One of the parents would say "Oh, it's just a small packet of Planters" and send 'em as a snack.
TimberValley
(318 posts)Throd
(7,208 posts)Oh wait, that didn't happen, even though we slathered ourselves in peanut butter every damned day.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)As do many children these days.
a la izquierda
(11,791 posts)I have my own food allergies, one which can cause anaphylaxis. I can't imagine two people in one house with allergies like that.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Is it really the peanuts, or is it genetically modified food, or pesticides, what?
womanofthehills
(8,668 posts)I never had food allergies in my life until I was poisoned by Malathion (mosquito spraying). All the people in my support group who were made ill by pesticides had severe food allergies. After I was exposed, I could only eat 2 foods for 6 months and then was gradually able to keep eating different foods. Now I can eat most foods although I only eat organic. My problem was severe as food would make my throat close and I would cough for hours. I moved way out to the county and I'm 90 percent better.
There is a great allergy dr in Los Alamos who uses drops to desensitize. But, you can be so allergic to the drops that you have to put a toothpick size on your arm for a while to work up to taking a drop. Her office is right next to the emergency room which is great because you can have a bad reaction to the drops until you desensitize.
joeunderdog
(2,563 posts)Surprised things aren't worse...yet.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Peanuts were put in so many foods that the chance of developing an acute allergy was high, because just avoiding peanut butter didn't solve the problem.
One of the epidemiological hypotheses is now that delaying peanut exposure in babies or young children combined with the hyper-hygiene of some kids' environments is sparking not just an increase in allergies overall but an increase in peanut allergies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_allergy
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)feeding your kids peanuts before the age of 3, not feeding your kids peanuts before the age of 3, mom eating "too much" peanut/soy while the kid is in utero. I've heard all sorts of theories but the best "evidence" any theory has is of the "correlation equals causation" type.
YarnAddict
(1,850 posts)Are they saying that children who bring a packed lunch not include a PP&J sandwich, peanut butter cookies, etc? I would say that is totally unreasonable.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Peanuts and all tree nuts. No candy or baked goods containing them also.
It's particularly problematic for vegetarians, because most of them include nuts in the diet.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)You have to accommodate the needs of vegetarian and vegan families too, and it's hard for them to pack lunches that don't need refrigeration beyond an ice pack or cooking, and include nothing that has any nuts, but have enough protein to keep the kid going through the rest of the school day.
YarnAddict
(1,850 posts)The child needs to learn sooner or later how to exist in a world where other people don't accomodate his special needs. What if we ALL had to alter our lives to accomodate everyone's special needs? Kind of reminds me of a Kurt Vonnegut story.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Between religious/medical/ethical prohibitions, there wouldn't be any acceptable lunches!!
YarnAddict
(1,850 posts)Xithras
(16,191 posts)We've never asked the school to ban peanuts and wouldn't do so. My son is acutely aware of the dangers of coming into contact with peanut products, as are his teachers and school administrators. My son knows that he can't sit next to kids eating peanut butter, and the school makes every kid wash their hands after lunch before they can go play on the playground. He carries an epipen in his backpack, and his school nurse, his teachers, and the yard duty teachers all know how to use them. That's all the accomodation we need.
He's never had an allergic reaction from another kid at school, and there is peanut butter everywhere. In fact, the only problem we've ever had was an incident where another kid thought it would be "funny" to smear peanut butter on my sons shirt, knowing that he had allergies. The school was initially only going to give him a short detention, but ended up upgrading it to a 10 day "major assault" suspension after I called and reamed the principal on the phone. That was the first and last time any kid tried that particular "joke".
If this kid can't manage his own space, and learn to recognize and respond to peanut dangers on his own, then he has no chance. My youngest could do it at FOUR years old. Hand him a muffin, and the first thing he would do is ask whether it contained any peanuts. The word peanut was one of his first, and at three and a half years old he could recognize it in an ingredients list. He never eats cookies where the ingredients aren't known. That's simply LIFE for a kid with a life-threatening allergy.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)grocery and saying, "My archenemy!"
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)SheilaT
(23,156 posts)what I'm most struck by is that only two or three people brought up the question of how this kid is going to function in the real world. Sure, the school, or at least the homeroom and part of the lunch room can be peanut free, but out there lots of us eat peanut butter, and there are peanuts in all sorts of products.
I also think that among our problems is things like far too many vaccinations at too early an age, and an over-protection against any kind of germs. Allergies and auto-immune disease seem to be on the rise.
I know it's a bit of the "which came first" question, but in my casual observations it's those people who most obsess about germs and cleanliness who seem to get ill the most.
Me? I avoid doctors, use soap and water for my washing, not the chemical stuff, eat a reasonably decent diet with very few processed foods and oddly enough I'm the healthiest person I know. Don't take vitamins. Never fell for the "Menopause will kill you so start taking hormone replacements right away" nonsense. Don't worry if I'm around someone who has a cold or the flu. Don't get flu shots. Had influenza several times in my childhood and youth. Did I mention I'm the healthiest person I know?
While I do agree there can be reasonable accomodations for children in schools, including removing peanuts insofar is is possible, there is a larger world out there that can't be controlled.
RobinA
(9,886 posts)It's like the flu shot people. Everybody I know who is a flu shot fanatic gets the flu every year. Me - I've had the flu twice, I'm 55, and never had the flu shot. No one in my family gets the flu or the shot.
I know, anecdotal, but there it is.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I wonder too.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Not to mention all baked-at-home goods. The list of foods that contain peanuts in one form or another is massive. There is just no way to keep peanut products out of schools 100%. Its not possible.
As I said upthread:
A friend of mine has a daughter that goes to a nut-free school. She was telling me a story about how they inspect the lunches and snacks of every single kid before they get to eat. One day, she had sent her daughter to school with a snack cake that had peanuts as an ingredient and the school staff took it away from her. As a result, the poor thing (6 years old) didnt get to eat a snack that day. So the very next day my friend sent her to school with the same snack, removed from its package, and in a baggie instead. So because the school had no way of knowing what was in the snack, it was not taken away from her.
Parents with kids who don't have allergies wont inspect every label of every product they buy to ensure the items are nut-free. My friend is proof of that.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Boggled my mind at first, as lunchtime bartering was a daily event when I was a kid, but it's one way to reduce accidental ingestion of allergens.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)And all it would take is a few lunch monitors. But youre right... trading at the lunch table was always so much fun. Ugh. Tuna again. What do YOU have?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)My best friend's grandma made tuna for her almost every day, and she hated it. 
Brigid
(17,621 posts)What is with the sudden apparent uptick in food allergies? When I was a kid, we took peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to school. We didn't have "nut-free" tables in the lunchroom. We played outside at recess. I think we may have had one kid who was a diabetic.No one freaked out if somebody brought a plate of cookies or something to school. Are kids today really that sickly?
This is some sort of trend to make people seem like good parents because they care about what their child is doing at school, but they have no time for them at home.
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)pollen maybe (raises) but benadryl was a godsend back then for that. It still is for dogs and cats....
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)I went to elementary school in the 80s and never remember any kid who had this issue. I do remember some that were lactose intolerant however. Either we have better ways to ID the problem in kids or there some other root cause.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Allergies can be cured--it takes a while but it can be done. Long article, but instructive.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/magazine/can-a-radical-new-treatment-save-children-with-severe-allergies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
unblock
(52,126 posts)desensitization programs don't always work, not everyone qualifies, they can take a long time, they run the risk of triggering exactly the reaction you're trying to avoid, ....
so yes, it's great that they're working on this front, but until they have a proper cure, controlling the environment for people with life-threatening allergies remains a requirement.
MADem
(135,425 posts)1. It's been very successful;
2. It's not so much a question of qualifying but finding the money for the trial to fire up; or alternatively finding an allergist/immunologist to take on a patient and do a one-on-one (so the issue is money--a search for grants or fundraising might be required);
3. They do take a long time--but a lifetime takes a long time, too.
4. Because the patient does this in a controlled environment, any "triggering" can be immediately ameliorated.
This is a "proper cure," or the closest thing to one that anyone is likely to get in the near term. It's either that, or stay home, don't eat anything that could be a problem, and be miserable, frantic and perpetually hypervigilant. AND have people, behind the afflicted child and parent's back, roll their eyes in exasperation.
It's a long article, and it deals with treatment for multiple allergies, but it is full of information.
If the problem is just peanuts, here's another type of study to seek out and apply for:
http://kfor.com/2013/02/18/simple-cure-in-the-works-for-peanut-allergy/
I don't agree with shutting peanuts out of schools to satisfy one person. You're never going to "guarantee" a peanut-free environment (peanut dust on clothes, for example) and making the claim that a school is "peanut free" opens the district up to lawsuits if some kid brings in a Payday bar.
Sometimes, one person needs to think of the larger group, or take steps to solve their problem. Help IS available, as these trials demonstrate--if the problem is money, the schoolkids' parents can get together and fundraise. But that "Special Snowflake" stuff isn't helpful to anyone. There's a paragraph in the NYT original article I posted (link in my last post) about that aspect, too:
If the environment needs to be controlled to the point where a child will be in danger by being in proximity to food he or she is not eating, the child needs to be kept in a controlled environment--like the home. The world does not adapt to people with that degree of special needs--it just doesn't. A "peanut free table" in a school cafeteria is one thing; a peanut free school or world is just not happening, and anyone who thinks that it should happen needs to take a different direction, because it just will not happen.
unblock
(52,126 posts)they're of limited success for the people who are able to complete the program.
many people don't complete the program because the reactions are too severe and they don't improve.
so they start the program with a lot of people, many drop out, and then the new york times comes in and writes a story about a couple kids that it worked for.
that's great, and by all means if even a fraction of kids can turn a life-threatening reaction into something less than life-threatening, that's great, but it still leaves a life-threatening problem for all the kids for whom the program doesn't work.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And -- like it or not -- desensitization is becoming the "go to" therapy. For just peanuts, five thousand bucks, and insurance is covering it, too:
http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/health/treating-peanut-allergies-in-kids#.UXrJIrWG2So
You might want to go talk to those doctors again--this research is new, and this treatment is new, too, having only migrated into the clinical setting in the last month or two.
The field of people who do not benefit is "small." This works for most, and if you don't try, you don't fix the problem.
I should think the FIRST thing a parent would do is opt for treatment, rather than demand accommodations.
The 'small' group of people who can't be fixed need to adjust their lifestyles for their own safety. People in wheelchairs don't expect to climb Mt. Everest, either. Life sucks sometimes, and people have to adjust--it's unreasonable to demand that schools be sterilized and every human entering the school subject themselves to an onerous protocol for one or two people. It's cheaper for the school district to just pay for a "distance learning" program and let the child's parents take control of the child's environment.
unblock
(52,126 posts)i am a parent of a child with a severe peanut/tree nut allergy so i have looked into this.
for starters, we were advised to wait to see if he would simply grow out of it.
second, even if had gotten him into a program as soon as we had the diagnosis, it would still be years before completion of the program, meaning he would be vulnerable in the interim anyway.
third, upon completion of the program, best case scenario (worst case is that you die in the trial) is merely that accidental exposure is less lethal. it's not at all a cure. you still can die from eating a bowl of chili thickened with (surprise!) peanut butter. the hope is that a small, accidental exposure causes a less lethal reaction, giving a greater chance(but not at all a guarantee) that epi/Benadryl/911 will save your life. a large exposure is still likely to be lethal.
fourth, the mass media invariably hypes the promise of new medical treatments and rarely discloses the disappointing aspects. this is no exception. keep in mind that my information comes from doctors who run these clinical trials and have a financial incentive to enroll kids in the program, and they were quite discouraging to us in terms of explaining the limited benefit of this treatment.
bottom line is that while this is promising research and we are continuing to pay attention to this, and probably will enroll mini-unblock in a desensitization program at the appropriate time, a safe environment will ALWAYS remain a requirement for him. life sucks for some people so let's ruin your life so the rest of us can enjoy one particular food that everyone could easily do without is not a reasonable answer.
quite the contrary, more and more businesses and institutions are doing away with peanuts entirely, either removing them from the menu or using alternatives such as sunbutter (from sunflower seeds), as our school cafeteria has done. given the prevalence and lethality of peanut allergies in particular, i think the long term trend is toward peanuts becoming increasingly rare. over the next couple of decades, more and more restaurants and cafeterias will be peanut-free.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I'm not talking about the immunosuppressant studies (those are still experimental), this is what they are doing in allergists' offices today, now. They start out with small amounts, and they "challenge" the child repeatedly over the course of four months. The cost is five grand.
It's not research...it is happening and it is covered by insurance.
I fly fairly often, and I always get peanuts with my beverage. Every other thing that is fried, is fried in peanut oil. Peanuts are common ingredients in many foods, and the only way to make a school "peanut free" is to require an insane amount of label reading, restricting the food intake of everyone in the school even at breakfast (because of that "peanut dust" from flours and other ingredients--even a toast crumb can be problematic) and putting everyone through a shower and making them wear scrubs. It's impossible for a school to be truly "peanut free." It creates a false sense of security to declare that a school is, too.
Peanuts are not rare--they're everywhere. If you think the world is peanut-free, you are very much mistaken. And this problem can now be fixed:
References:
http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/health/treating-peanut-allergies-in-kids#.UX9GVbWG2So
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/article/231878/8/New-treatment-cures-peanut-allergy-with-more-peanuts
http://www.wbaltv.com/news/health/Study-helps-peanut-allergy-sufferers-kick-problem/-/9379230/18498592/-/c06g27/-/index.html
unblock
(52,126 posts)what the doctors have described to me is every day in a doctors office for at least a few weeks. they start with tiny, tiny exposures to peanuts and ramp up gradually. every time there is an excessive reaction they jump to a safer level and slowly ramp back up again. every time they jump back it extends the daily office visits.
if the patient ever gets to a certain level, then gradually those daily office visits are replaced with home administration combined with fewer and fewer office visits.
in any event you don't get to the full level of desensitization for at least a year, in most cases longer, at which point you're basically taking 3 peanuts a day to maintain that level of desensitization.
the doctors in the area have made it clear to me that this is a MAJOR time commitment for a very uncertain result. it is possible that they are taking note of the severity of mini-unblock's reaction to peanuts, which may be giving them a hint that he may be less likely to be a successful candidate for such programs than some other people with severe peanuts allergies. so it is possible that my specific information may differ from the more general case. in any event, the place where they do this is a 2-hour drive from home, and given doctor's office hours this would mean taking him out of school early for possibly months, quite possibly for something that costs a lot of money and doesn't do him any good at all.
and trust me, i'm well aware of how common peanuts are, but more and more places are eliminating them from their products and kitchens.
airlines aren't consistent about peanuts; some no longer serve peanuts at all, others still do. if you alert delta to the situation with 48 hours notice, they actually won't serve peanuts within 3 rows of during that period leading up to your flight, as well as no peanuts at all during your actual flight. of course, they can't guarantee that passengers won't bring aboard peanuts themselves, nor do they guarantee that everything they serve is free from peanut cross-contamination.
MADem
(135,425 posts)in these circumstances, it wouldn't matter how much of a "time commitment" must be invested, if, after four months, five months, even a year, there's a VERY good chance--not an uncertain one--it's seventy percent or better--that the kid will be cured or at least have less severe reactions.
I'd home school for a year, if that's what it took. I just don't think that the "too much time" excuse suffices. A year of inconvenience against a lifetime of of terror? People with peanut allergies live tortured, scary lives, and there's a way to solve the problem. I'd solve it. Even if I had to move closer to the allergist, rent out the house to a short term renter, and live in an apartment for a year.
Very recently, in the last three years, I had to make a similar decision. I had a relative who had a massive stroke and, even after months of hospitalization, needed a shitload of care and therapy that wasn't covered by insurance. I am retired, so I packed my bags, moved and got some training from the physical therapists. I was gone from my home and family for nearly a year, but I got that relative out of a wheelchair, off the walker, and reasonably independent on a cane, and able to drive. You do what you have to do for family--you sacrifice.
As for airlines and peanuts, most aren't buying it. Delta will make "special arrangements" and so will Air Canada, but they want YOU to clean your own seat (sort of screws up the purpose) and they guarantee absolutely nothing. If you are at all familiar with the shitty job that cabin cleaners do, that's just a false sense of security--bring the epi-pens.
You will, of course, make your own decision, but if it were me, I'd roll the dice. And if it didn't work, I'd look for an immunosuppressant trial, where they administer those drugs, then challenge while the immunosuppressant is active in the body, and take it from there. It is showing huge promise. For a kid to have even a chance at a normal life, it's worth it, IMO.
Peanuts are everywhere, and the way that businesses solve the problem is to post that "We cannot guarantee" caveat--no one will say that they are "peanut free"--not a plane, not a restaurant, and not a school. The liability is too great and it's just impossible to frisk/supervise everyone to guarantee compliance.
unblock
(52,126 posts)if we could be assured that it would work and be a safe and effective long-term solution for him, of course we would move heaven and earth to get it done for him (though we likely would try to plan most of it over a summer to minimize the interference with school).
but it's simply not ready for prime time. among the problems is that the long term success and effects remain unknown. there is some evidence from studies of desensitization program for other allergens (milk, e.g.) that any desensitization gained from these programs fade over time. even worse outcomes can't be ruled out, for instance, the end result of all this might be to make the immune system less receptive to some later, more otherwise successful form of treatment. we could easily be doing him more harm than good. as i have said, the experts in the field have essentially advised us to continue to pay attention to this promising line of research, but to wait as far as mini-unblock is concerned.
www.jaci-inpractice.org/article/S2213-2198(12)00025-6/fulltext
The prevalence of peanut allergy in the United States and other Westernized countries has tripled in the past 15 years, now affecting more than 1% of the population. Strict peanut avoidance is the current standard of care. In the past decade, a number of small, largely uncontrolled clinical trials have suggested that oral immunotherapy (OIT) can effectively desensitize most children with peanut allergy. Some in the allergy community now feel that OIT is ready for clinical practice. In this review, the evidence base in the medical literature is examined. Although peanut OIT shows promise, the evidence currently available on its effectiveness, risk benefit, and potential long-term consequences is insufficient to support its use in clinical practice. Appropriately designed, prospective clinical trials are urgently needed to determine whether OIT is a safe, effective form of therapy for food allergy.
MADem
(135,425 posts)This breakthrough is VERY recent--just in the last two months or so are allergists starting to use this method as the "go to" choice, the "standard of care." Before that, yes, it was "experimental," at least in some areas of the country-- not just the incremental challenge method, but also the method where they actually give the kid an immunosupppressant and challenge them more vigorously (with lots of peanut, not micrograms)--that method is still under study (it came out of Duke University).
But the "bit-by-bit" method is now out there, because it works and it's easy to do.
Here's a link to the Duke studies: http://www.dukechildrens.org/services/duke_food_allergy_initiative
They are so confident in the micro-dose protocol that they're varying the theme and have begun a trial so that parents can do it at home--this one (a "patch" study) is interesting, requires only 13 doctor visits over the course of a year, and wouldn't require daily challenges in a doctor's office:
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20130430/New-patch-therapy-A-breakthrough-for-peanut-allergy-sufferers.aspx
A parent's story (from 2011)--from "severe peanut allergy" to "eating 10 peanuts a day" in thirteen weeks. http://justalittlepeanut.blogspot.com/2011/03/breakthrough-treatment-for-peanut.html
They've been working this issue for a long time--they were doing studies in Australia five years ago. The science is there. An effective "cure" (in reality, an established and maintained tolerance) can happen.
If it were up to me, and I had a kid in this situation, I'd run-not-walk. It's just crazy to be spending a lifetime reading labels, like they're "always" accurate (helloooo recalls!), being hypervigiliant, querying waiters and cooks (particularly in major chain restaurants where most of the food is frozen, anyway) who don't frigging know, demanding "special treatment" that one cannot depend upon (and making the kid feel like a dork in the process), and constantly worrying whenever the kid is out of one's sight. The inconvenience of any course of treatment is worth it, not just for parental peace of mind, but so the kid can be "normal" and not be the singled-out "peanut kid" in the class. If it were me,, I would find the nearest hospital, find the allergy - immunology department in that hospital, and find out if the doctors there can treat the kid (and I'm sure they could). The sooner, the better, IMO. To me, it's a no-brainer.
unblock
(52,126 posts)i updated it several times, du apparently doesn't handle parenthesis in links well and i don't know how to get around that, so please copy the link directly into your browser. it's from January 2013.
MADem
(135,425 posts)This is one of those cases where the doctors are saying "It works. We know it works. It's stupid to keep dithering when lives can be changed," and thus they've taken the bull by the horns.
DU does have that link issue--I guess there's no fix save cut/paste or "tiny URL" which is a last resort!
unblock
(52,126 posts)mini-unblock has a checkup with his allergist coming up soon anyway, and i'll ask my usual questions about the latest treatment options. it would certainly be great if he now is singing your tune rather than the one he has been singing the last few years.
we've always though we were quite likely to get him some form of treatment at some point. it's mostly a matter of the right program, the right age, the right time, etc. that's why we've been paying close attention to the research. in the meanwhile, school and childhood for the most part can be pretty well controlled and as a young adult we can hope by then he will be mature enough to control his own environment appropriately, so college is really our biggest concern. so if this sort of thing is merely a one-time, temporary cure, we'd shoot for doing it late in high school. if the latest research is that it's not temporary, or that it's repeatable, then we could to it now as well as just before college.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)Not all practitioners are trained in allergy elimination.
Basically, the treatments train a person's body to not react to the allergen.
Our general practitioner agreed it can work as alternative to meds.
MADem
(135,425 posts)He'll graduate when he eats the three peanut M and M's.
Supposedly, according to mama, "peanut dust" will kill him--and the PTA "just doesn't CARE!!!"
So she's suing.
I say send her home--with her kid--with a certificate for a quality distance learning academy. If the kid IS getting singled out and bullied and having his medication taken away (what a trick--since in Michigan the kids aren't allowed to have the medication on them) then he'll be happier with classmates he interacts with online. No wedgies.
She doesn't want to compromise--she wants to tell everyone what fuckups they are and how she's better than they are. And she wants a payday in court.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)If the situation is THAT extreme the school can't guarantee safety. If its not that extreme them the school can best control one or two tables and frequent hand washing.
The average parent is not going to read every label and go to the extremes that she's demanding - no matter what the policy is.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)They should get rid of all products with lactose in them.
They shouldn't serve any lunches with meat in them.
They should ban soy.
They shouldn't serve jello or products with gelatin in them.
All foods should be kosher.
They shouldn't have any foods with gluten in them.
Wheat should just be banned.
No foods with sugar in them.
unblock
(52,126 posts)we're not talking about a few sneezes or loose poop here.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)And I have seen accommodations for some of these things. Definitely not all of them. I don't think it's reasonable to ask every parent and every child to monitor what they bring from home to school. I do think it is reasonable to have choices accommodated for all students. I think dairy really should be banned. More and more students are lactose intolerant due to immigration.
Violet_Crumble
(35,956 posts)They die. They don't just get a sore tummy or a rash. They die. It's very reasonable to ask parents to not send their kids to school with peanut products. Not only did my niece's school do it, but when my daughter was young, she came home with notes the school sent home with kids before anything where parents sent in food with them for special morning teas and would request that nothing with nuts be sent as a kid at the school had the severe allergy...
Aerows
(39,961 posts)because next, we'll have kids that can't take a ham sandwich to school because someone is "allergic" to it due to religious principles.
The kid is going to come in contact with peanuts. Either as a child, or as an adult. No, I don't advocate that the child eat peanuts, but he DOES need to deal with coming in contact with them. I can't understand why people want to deprive a small child of a sandwich when that is all their parents can afford.
Keep your child at home if they are that special needs, don't make other children suffer.
Violet_Crumble
(35,956 posts)..or anything that has traces of peanuts. Religious stuff doesn't cause children to die, do they? I must have missed spotting any incidents where that's happened.
Small children don't understand what happens when they eat peanuts and their classmates don't understand what will happen if they give them any. As with all things with small kids, adults, especially parents take the lead and protect them until they're old enough to understand and look after themselves. Why should it be any different when it comes to a life-threatening allergy?
I do NOT want to deprive a small child of a sandwich. The parents can put something fucking else but peanut butter on it if they value a child's life over that of needing to be able to eat peanut butter every minute of every day...
And my niece isn't 'special needs' because of the allergy. That's really offensive...
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)If a student can not eat certain things, then they need to know it, and not eat it.
I'm allergic to strawberries, and I certainly wouldn't object to a school serving something with strawberries in it, I would just eat something else.
At least in the kids situation, just being around peanuts can kill him. I'm guessing being around milk won't kill somebody who is lactose intolerant, and being around strawberries won't kill me.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Kids who are lactose intolerant usually just have to do without. My point is if you are going to bend over backwards for one child you can make reasonable accommodations for other children. It isn't unreasonable to offer dairy free alternatives to other children. It isn't unreasonable to have menu items for children who have religious dietary restrictions. And it isn't unreasonable to accommodate children who are vegetarians.
Now the problem is that accommodations are expensive and someone is going to have to figure out who has to pay what price. I don't happen to think low income people or people who are vegetarian should have to give up a staple because someone somewhere has an allergy even if it is a severe one. If that is the case someone needs to open up their wallets to accommodate those who are low income or vegetarian and help them with the added cost of not being able to us their go-to staple.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)Squinch
(50,924 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)And in this case it isn't just peanuts and they aren't just asking for a ban on what the school serves. They are trying to get everyone to not bring product with peanuts into the school.
ETA: Accommodate, doesn't just mean ban the food. It could also mean provide foods that students can have as an alternative. For example the lactose intolerant kids should have a non milk option for their lunches like almond milk. As far as I know this isn't offered.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Schools go peanut free all the time to help out kids with anaphalactic allergies. It isn't a big deal.
AndyA
(16,993 posts)I remember reading about someone who died after eating a bowl of chili in a restaurant. They knew they had a peanut allergy, but never thought that a chili recipe might have peanuts in it, and it did.
I'm not sure I agree that everyone else should accommodate her son's allergy, although it's possible peanuts aren't a staple at his school. I don't recall ever having peanuts when I was in school, unless they were in something and I didn't realize it.
I think the mother needs to make sure her son understands his allergy, and what he can and cannot eat. There will be places where peanuts are served as he grows up (like the ball park), and it can't be expected that all of them stop serving peanuts, so he needs to take responsibility for his own health and make good decisions to protect himself.
Wasn't this an issue with the airlines a few years back? Last time I flew, they still served peanuts.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Ours did several years ago. It's really not a hassle and I'm not aware of any parents complaining.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Wrapping your child in a bubble won't teach him how to manage this allergy, which is so severe it might as well be a disability.
My cousin has a severe peanut allergy. She had several scary incidents as a child. But she learned to be careful and now hasn't had a severe incident since jr high.
When he goes out into the world after high school, colleges won't ban peanuts. Malls won't ban peanuts. Restaurants won't ban peanuts. How many workplaces can manage to keep all their hundreds of employees from touching nut products? She's conditioning him for a sterile environment that cannot exist outside of a classroom.
unblock
(52,126 posts)first, that's absurd, that kid is going to grow up highly aware that anything that comes in contact with his lips could be fatal. just because he can trust school cafeteria food is not going to make him be completely oblivious to the fact that he has a life-threatening condition, especially because every teacher and every class he ever has is going to talk about it.
more important, even if you're right, that's hardly an excuse to make every day of his school career a life-or-death test. why can't school be a *safe* training ground for life's challenges?
at work, a co-worker isn't likely to get peanut butter smears all over their face and shirt arms and then surprise wrestle him.
LeftishBrit
(41,203 posts)are very young and still learning, they need some protection.
Traffic is an outstanding example. Sooner or later, everyone needs to learn how to handle an environment that contains lots of traffic, and to cross the road safely. However, schools are expected to have adequate fences and supervision to prevent children from running into the roads; and often there are rules requiring people to drive slowly when near a school. None of this means that the children are not ultimately expected to learn to deal with traffic themselves; just that they should not risk getting killed while learning.
I think a lot of the problem of peanuts in particular would be solved if schools had adequate accommodation to make sure that peanut-eaters and non-eaters can eat separately, and to make sure that the room where kids eat their peanut lunches is not used for other school activities immediately afterwards. But most schools don't have the resources.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)On one hand, going peanut free is do-able and could save the child's life. While some may say it would be better for the child to be isolated, what he has is essentially a disability, so why should the child suffer for something that is not his fault?
On the other hand...if my child had this type of allergy, I'd probably find a way to keep them at home. Putting the responsibility for keeping your child alive on 400 or so other people, most of which are kids, is ridiculous. I can't tell you how many times I've accidentally sent a granola bar with almonds in it, or I send banana bread or muffins with nuts without thinking (forgive me, I'm in school fulltime and I'm not always thinking about other people's kids when I'm trying to get stuff done when I have an exam first thing in the morning....)Yet I understand that if both parents work, or are unable to give the child a quality education at home or elsewhere it's unfair to ask them to quit to care for their child. On the other hand, many kids with deadly diseases have parents who have to make sacrifices for them to keep them healthy and alive.
And where does it stop? My brother has an anaphylactic reaction to fish (can't even be in the same room as it's cooking) - should the school ban tuna sandwiches as well for those kids? There are plenty of people who are deathly allergic to many things - if we ban them all there will be slim pickings at lunch time, and usually it affects poorer families the most. My brother was taught from a young age to stay away from anyone eating fish, and the only times he's had problems has been at restaurants where they add things like anchovies in sauces or cook fish in the same oil as the fries or something. He had zero problems at school, as long as he was aware of what his friends were eating. This child with the peanut allergy will have to learn to do the same and it's always better to teach them sooner rather than later. Keeping peanuts out of school 100% can lull parents and child into a false sense of security.
My kids' schools are all different - one doesn't ban anything (the high school), one has 'warnings' if a child in the classroom has an allergy (no bans though - totally voluntary) and the other one bans ALL nuts. It isn't easy to find nut-free healthy food without spending tons. I'm a single parent of 4. Peanut butter is a cheap source of protein for my kids. This nut-free stuff has put a serious dent in my food budget. I can't buy the cheapest granola bars, I have to buy meat for sandwiches so my kids get some kind of protein at lunch. Luckily the older ones can now have peanut butter if they wish, so I'm only paying extra for 2 kids right now. I know there are many ways to keep nuts out of lunches, but nuts are, imo, an essential part of my kids' diets and it's filling for them too. As of right now, their lunches are too many carbs. They can't eat much dairy as we're all lactose intolerant, so they don't take cheese strings or anything like that. This total nut ban is affecting my children's nutrition while they are at school. Now, I don't complain about it to the school, because my complaints sound selfish even to me. But it DOES affect my kids. I've heard some say 'why should the child with the allergy be isolated?' but in my youngest dd's kindergarten, if a child accidentally brings something with nuts, they are banished to another room to eat by themselves. HOW on earth is that any better? Not only that, but it seems the parents of kids with the allergy don't get how difficult switching to nut free for school is if you aren't generally nut-free. And there's NEVER any thanks from those parents. One of my oldest dd's best friends is a 'little person' (that's what she likes to be called). She has a lot of skeletal problems and is sometimes in a wheelchair. The school had to make modifications just for her, including ramps, smaller steps in the staircases, and so on and people volunteered to build those things. Her parents took out an ad in the local paper (it was a very small town) to thank the other parents and the school for helping out their daughter. I thought that was nice that they recognized that others were helping their daughter. I've never heard that from a parent of a child with a severe nut allergy. Just a quick group email to the class, "Thanks for staying peanut free this year, Junior is severely allergic to peanuts and we'd like to thank all of you for making an effort to help keep Junior healthy and safe this year." Is that too much to ask?
So I'm torn about this. I don't think suing is the answer, obviously, and some of the comments said are horrendous and those people should be outed. Generally, people are selfish (me included) so it's no surprise there's some backlash but I do think that going nut free isn't as 'simple' as some think, and it does affect some other families negatively.
God, I just spent way too much time on this.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)also...
I can understand the fears of the parents and the desire to try and control the school cafeteria.
OTOH, what about everywhere else?
Do the office personnel know they probably shouldn't be handling peanuts either, or using things that have likely come into contact with peanuts?
I just finished reading an article that says even if a label specifies that the product is peanut-free, it could still have been contaminated by utensils that had come into contact with peanuts or peanut oil.
So what if a kid makes his own lunch at home...a baloney and cheese sandwich...and mistakenly uses a knife his older sibling used for peanut butter? He gets the oil on his sandwich...the oil gets on his hands during lunch, transfers to the allergic kid, and all hell breaks loose...
It's definitely not a simple issue to address, and, like you, I have no easy answers to the problem...
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)There is no easy answer, that's for sure.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Coping with it, resigning oneself to life as a victim who must be treated differently, is setting someone up for a shitty life. The first option should be to seek a cure, and very recently, therapies have been made available, not just at the clinical trial level, but in medical centers, covered by insurance.
If that's not Step One, then, absent extreme poverty (and waiting for Obamacare), I have to wonder if the attention-seeking aspect isn't part of the dynamic.
If the kid can't be cured, the kid should be educated via distance-learning, paid for by the school district.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)should be sure to thank the school and the parents for helping their allergic kid.
All to often, especially for us with no sensitivities or allergies, it comes across as selfish and demanding: "My kid is highly allergic so YOU must inconvenience yourself for us!"
Yes, I understand that some inconvenience can hardly be equated with a life-threatening allergy, but there are nicer ways to ask.
My younger son was in school with a child who had some sort of food intolerance, possibly gluten. The mom was wonderful. For birthday parties, she'd pack something her son could eat so that he could join in the festivities. This was twenty years ago, before being gluten intolerant became the latest food fad.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)he would get a much better meal than the rest of the school.
I packed a lunch for 12 years and ate only in the cafeteria one day when I accidentally took a bag of potatoes instead of lunch.
We packed for our daughters until they wanted to be cool with the crap at the cafeteria.
If safety is the first concern then they should not trust that an open environment like that will be 100% peanut free. Not only do they have to deal with all of the people who are preparing it but all of the subcontractors providing as well.
If they want to keep their kid safe they should pack him a great lunch and make all of the other kids jealous as hell. Their law suit may be successful but they will still be trusting strangers to enact it perfectly 100% of the time.
Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)They are adult men now, but I packed lunches for them when they were in school. Nuts were a big part of their lunches. Some schools have banned all packed lunches. Not even apples are allowed in case they were cut with a knife that had peanut butter on it. If I had a child with a severe peanut allergy, I would have him eat in a separate room away from the other children and their food choices.
With such extreme restrictions on peanut butter, what if a child went to school with peanut butter smeared on his face or a chunk on his clothes. When my boys were little, it seems I was always wiping peanut butter off their faces.
A little boy died when he ate a peanut cookie the school provided. I believe it was on a school trip. The school district went overboard to protect children from peanuts. It's a big world out there you can't expect a nanny to protect you your entire life.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)What about the vegetarians?
The parents don't just want PB and all PB products, but all TREE NUTS banned from the school.
It sounds undoable to me.
appleannie1
(5,062 posts)one cookie or sandwich with nuts in it to kill a child that has an allergy to nuts. The only way to make sure that probably will not happen is to not allow any child to bring food with nuts in it to school.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I have severe allergies. I'm one of the people who is genetically apparently doomed to it.
I've been dealing with this since I was a kid. Unless you read every label, you have no flipping idea of what has or does not have nuts in it. OKay. Salad dressings. Big one. Many, many types of baked products. Many types of cookies and crackers have some nut components.
Coconut is one of the banned things.
It's utter bull to think that the parents of these other children will sort out the products that do and don't have nut components in them. The only way to deal with such an allergy is to teach the kid never to accept food from other people. NEVER.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Tree nuts are in so many things so it's not just peanut butter. It's a pain sometimes but not the end of the world. We have nut treats at home instead.
People with allergies need to be thinking about this all the time and carry an epi pen. It's crazy the state won't let the kid carry one. They need to change the state law or make the school safe for those with allergies. Choose one.
Butterbean
(1,014 posts)our turn comes around to buy snacks for the class, but whatever. I accept this as a small price to pay seeing as I don't have to worry about my kid dying from accidental contact with peanut residue. That has to be absolutely terrifying as a mother. I can't even imagine.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I dont think making the school peanut free is that much of a sacrifice for someone's health and safety.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)make sacrifices, like paying higher taxes
but when it comes to giving up peanut butter at school, apparently the burden is too large for a school district to pay.
absolutely absurd.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So, yeah. Its kind of a sad story. I feel bad for this kid.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)as well
MADem
(135,425 posts)It's about the moisturizer you use, the stuffing in that hackysack, what oil those chips you put in your kid's lunch were fried in, that burger bun that was made on equipment that also processes peanuts...do you really expect a school to "certify" that they are peanut free? That every single employee, every single parent, every single child is going to read every label for every single product they use to accommodate one child? That they are going to "promise" that the breakfast croissant that the school secretary had on the way into work wasn't made with peanut oil?
Supposedly, "peanut dust" can kill this kid. Peanut dust is everywhere.
It is just not reasonable to expect the level of assurance sought in this instance. "Reasonable accommodation" is sending home a letter to the parents of the kids in the kid's class asking parents to be careful because there is a sufferer in their child's class, and giving the kid a safe place to have lunch, and keeping his epi-pen handy. Not demanding that everyone eschew peanut products--which is damn near impossible.
Peanut shells or skins may be used in:
Artificial fireplace logs
Fiber roughage for livestock feed
Kitty litter
Paper
Stuffing for beanbags or stuffed animals
Wallboard
Peanuts themselves may be ingredients in:
Axle grease
Bird seed
Bleach
Cosmetics
Detergent
Explosives
Face creams
Ink
Linoleum
Medicine
Metal polish
Pet food
Paint
Rubber
Shampoo
Shaving cream
Soap
http://foodallergies.about.com/od/nutallergies/a/Peanut-Products-23-Surprising-Non-Food-Peanut-Products.htm
The mother needs to take her kid to an immunologist and just get him desensitized. There's a brand new protocol, just out this year, that works in 2/3 of cases. They're working on another protocol, still in trials, that might work on a larger population but involves immunosuppressants, but the one that is out there and covered by insurance takes a few months but will do the trick in many cases.
It's not that the burden is "too large," the burden that this woman wants the school to assume is IMPOSSIBLE. Unless they send storm troopers to toss every student and employee home, to throw out anything with peanuts in it, and monitor everyone 24-7 to insure they don't ingest peanut products and bring the "peanut dust" into the school on their clothing. Mother wants the school to certify that the place is peanut free, and then, when it isn't, as it can't be, and the kid has a reaction, she is in the "sue them blue" catbird seat.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)and should be made.
MADem
(135,425 posts)cafeteria, or a separate room (like the school office) where he can safely dine. That's what has been done, but it's not enough for this mother.
An even more reasonable accommodation--that would change the child's life-- would be for his mother to seek out the aide of an immunologist to start the child on the new desensitization therapy that is covered by insurance.
Life is not "peanut free." It never will be. The first approach to this should be medical, and the therapies to help this child are now available. A child who is--supposedly--allergic to "peanut dust" is in danger EVERYWHERE, not just at school, and if this is indeed the case, the mother needs to positively control the child's environment 24-7...or get him help so he can live like every other child.
The school can frankly LIE and say they've gone "peanut free" and this kid could still go into shock in school, because someone didn't check the ingredients on their moisturizer, or a classmate brought in a hackysack or a stuffed toy with ground peanut shell filling. Then what happens? The school is held pecuniarily liable for declaring a condition they were unable to enforce in the first place? Ka-ching!
Unless the 'school storm troopers' are going to search every student/teacher/employee house regularly and get rid of all peanut products, and follow every student, teacher and employee and monitor their food consumption, or require everyone coming into the school to go through an air lock, shower, brush teeth, and change into scrubs before entering the school, this child can never be assured that his environment is "peanut free." And he shouldn't be given those false assurances. If he's going to live with the condition, he needs to live with the vigilance associated with it. Far better for him to try the allergist's solution--and if he's one of the few who doesn't benefit from that protocol, he should enroll in one of the immune-suppressing trials to see if he can be cured that way. It's stupid to accommodate invalidism that has a very good chance of being cured, and this condition can now be, in fact, cured in many children.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Why should she trust every other parent and every other kid to abide by the ban?
"Oh it's just a brownie. I'm sure it's safe. There's only a few nuts on the top".
Warpy
(111,175 posts)Her kid is going to have to deal with the whole wide world some day and it might as well start now. I've got all sorts of food allergies. I avoid those foods.
Chances are he's not even really allergic. Allergists testing children whose parents claimed they were allergic to peanuts found only a minority of them actually were. Momma needs a note from a real allergist, at the very least, to get her kid ghettoized at lunch.
This woman is a control freak and needs to be slapped down. If her kid is allergic enough to be affected by another kid across the table (or across the room) with a peanut butter sandwich, he can jolly well eat lunch alone in a classroom. Or Momma can jolly well home school him.
However, feeding her a Valium will likely take care of her kid just fine.
http://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/peanut-allergies-overstated
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Squinch
(50,924 posts)Lots of people seem to be choosing death.
Innnnteresting......
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)Almond
Beechnut
Brazil nut
Bush nut
Butternut
Cashew
Chestnut
Coconut
Filbert
Ginko nut
Hazelnut
Hickory nut
Lichee nut
Macadamia nut
Nangai nut
Pecan
Pine nut
Pistachio
Shea nut
Walnut
http://www.kidswithfoodallergies.org/resourcespre.php?id=60
My non dairy creamer has coconut oil and so do my gummy vitamins.
If every parent had to read all labels for all these items...
The parent of this child is crazy to leave him in this environment.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Are they grown in Texas? 
dkf
(37,305 posts)Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)First of all, I don't think any school is actually peanut free. The most parents will achieve is not sending actual PEANUTS to school in food items, but peanuts themselves are components of so many foods that it just doesn't happen, and all those foods with peanut components present a risk to the other child.
This suggests to me that the risk from contact allergies is less than life-threatening for most kids who have it.
But as for making a school tree-nut free, that's insane. It would never happen. It could never happen. So if the school did go ahead and say that it was tree-nut and peanut free, then it would be setting itself up to get sued when it wasn't.
I thought about this overnight, and the woman's request is unreasonable, and it would be unreasonable to rely on compliance in order to assure the child's safety. Therefore I think the school is actually taking better care of her son than it would be if it theoretically complied with the request.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Telling her its nut free would actually be deceptive.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)And presumably the Livonia school distrcit belongs to any number of statewide education associations. Why don't they try and find out what other schools have done in this situation?
Brimley
(139 posts)I ate peanuts all the while when growing up, the saltier the better! Didn't even know they could be deadly till my early 30s.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)“We had asked them to go peanut and tree nut-free, ..."
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)but I'm wondering why there are so many of these kinds of allergies these days. When I was a kid -- which admittedly was back in the Dark Ages -- I don't recall anyone having a peanut or other nut allergy. Peanut butter sandwiches were kind of staple in our lunch boxes and bags because they don't get slimy or soggy like meat sandwiches sometimes can.
I'm not saying this isn't a real phenomenon, but it just seems like there's an awful lot of it going around.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)She had such a severe allergy to dairy and soy that when I was nursing her, I myself couldn't ingest those foods or she would have the same reaction as if she ingested them.
Me? I was born in 1948. I had a citrus allergy as a child. If I ate or drank oranges, grapefruit, lemons, my entire body would be covered in hives which would burst and ooze. It was very, very gross. A little better 50 years later. Now my lips and throat just feel like they are on fire if I have citrus.
It really has been around a very long time, and runs in familes, although the specific food item can vary.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)have parents who just assume the child has allergies. As another poster said up thread - when allergy tests were done on kids, there were FAR fewer reactions than what the parents claimed. I know many parents who, when their kid develops hives, or vomits, think, "Oh, it must've been those peanuts they had 2 hours ago!" because peanut allergy is so well known - even though anaphylaxis happens in seconds - and they take the kid to the doctor and say, "My kid reacted to peanuts, we need an epi-pen!" and the doctor says, "OK" and the kid is forever labeled as having a peanut allergy. One of the moms I used to know was certain her kid had a deadly peanut allergy because he vomited (once, no other symptoms) after he at a bag of peanut M&Ms - at 18 months old. Well, um, you think it could've been too much junk food for your baby??
I'm not saying these allergies don't exist - they do, just not in the numbers reported by parents. My own brother was deathly allergic to fish (nearly died on his first reaction, which happened seconds within eating the fish and was very severe). I just think parents look for explanations for things that may just be a coincidence and if there's illness around the same time as peanuts, they feel the need to make that connection for some reason.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)We knew our kid didn't tolerate peanuts, but didn't realize how bad it was until we took her in to get treatment for her other allergies. We got a call from the doctor, telling us, "She's severely allergic to peanuts. I've called in a prescription for an EpiPen. Pick it up today." It wasn't until we'd gone over her history with the allergist that we realized that the swollen face and vomiting shortly after ingestion were more ominous than we'd realized. No one in our family had had an allergy that bad and we were clueless.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)She told me her 17 yr old son couldn't take peanut butter to school for lunch. This is in Clarkston. I told her that I could understand a no peanut policy in elemetary schools, but that at high school level, anyone with a nut allergy should be aware enough of their environment to avoid any such product. I asked, do they not go into restaurants or grocery stores? Do they demand that these establishments remove all peanut products from the premises before they enter. Seriously, at what age can a child be considered aware enough of their surroundings that a ban is no longer necessary?
Jasana
(490 posts)but why are there 381 replies to a topic like this when there are so many more important things to be worrying about? Seems ridiculous. Maybe I just need to get used to the place more.
Uzair
(241 posts)God help us all that this is even a controversy.
Shame on all of you in this thread who have a problem with this mother's request.
We're talking about one child possibly dying because the majority don't want to be inconvenienced. What is the big fucking deal about not packing a goddamn peanut butter sandwich for you kid's lunch? Is it going to kill you? No? Well I can think of ONE child it might kill.
But please, continue on with your tirades about how "life isn't fair".
greatlaurel
(2,004 posts)Thank you for your post. How sad there are so many people so selfish they will not make a slight effort to save the life of one of their children's classmates.
The school district must be run by idiots to refuse to help the family. Severe nut allergies are really common and many districts deal with this easily. This is a matter of ignorance and selfishness. I `cannot believe the number of DU members who are so heartless.
Good luck to the child and family.
Silent3
(15,154 posts)Not just in some schools, but throughout the country, all schools, all workplaces, public buildings, private homes, etc.?
If you don't, then you're also performing a balancing act between a degree of safety for children with these allergies and the size and the scope of the response that's justified for every marginal, theoretical decrease in the risk they face. You're just drawing a line at a different level of inconvenience and imposition on the many for the few, you aren't in a totally different realm of moral superiority.
As one poster pointed out, he/she couldn't even find any reports of any non-ingestive deaths of school children due to nut allergies -- cases where mere environmental exposure to someone else's food caused death. When people say peanut-free schools "work", they might "work" the same way wearing garlic prevents vampire attacks -- i.e., with or without the garlic, there wouldn't have been any vampire attacks anyway.
The ride to school on the bus, or participation in school sports, probably carry MUCH higher fatality risks than one kid dying because another kid sitting at another table eats a snack cake that might contain a little peanut oil. For some reason, however, the buses and the sports aren't being banned.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)school is a necessity, other places are not
Silent3
(15,154 posts)Besides, the overprotective mother aside, the kid can probably attend a public school without significant risk anyway, risks that are small when compared to plenty of other things we don't raise a ruckus about.
I'm not against, in principle, inconveniencing many people for the benefit of the few, but the inconvenience here is large and the benefit is questionable, small, and attainable by other means.
For those who've said they know plenty of schools that already have no-peanut policies (I'm not sure if no nuts at all, as this particular mother wants, has been implemented anywhere), and it's no big deal, I'll bet that if you looked into it closely that there's a whole lot of cheating going on (like the parent another poster mentioned simply repackaging a forbidden treat in a plain plastic bag without its original and damning ingredients-listing wrapper), so that protection is diminished or even illusory.
It doesn't end up mattering very much, however, if the garlic is real or fake, because it turns out vampire attacks are awfully rare with or without garlic on hand.
Uzair
(241 posts)Nobody's talking about banning peanut products everywhere. They're talking about banning them in schools with students who have these extremely severe, life threatening allergies. It is a MILD inconvenience, to say the least, to ask parents to not put peanuts into their children's lunches. And whether or not they die from ingestion is not exactly relevant. It's not hard for a child to accidently ingest peanut products. By banning them, you reduce the risk that much more.
Is it so much to ask that a child be able to at least grow up with a little less of a risk of being killed? I understand that he's going to have to live his whole goddamn life with the disease and that the world will not be able to accommodate him. How about we give him a childhood then? How about people have a little bit of fucking compassion for the situation that this child has to live with?
When I see people here saying that he "has to learn life isn't fair", or any other such bullshit, my faith in humanity diminishes a little bit more. Do you people realize what you're saying? His "learning" that life "isn't fair" requires him to DIE FROM ACCIDENTLY INGESTING SOMETHING that shouldn't have been in the building. This isn't some fucking game. This isn't some fucking stick your finger into a mouse trap and learn from your experience type thing. This isn't breaking a bone, getting a cut or a scrape, this isn't trying a smoke or a drink, or riding a bike too fast.
This is life and death. That's my "line", as you so put it, for the inconvenience. Oh the humanity, now you can't put peanut butter in Jenny's peanut butter and jelly sandwich! How dare this one kid who may just DIE from it deny you your selfishness!
Silent3
(15,154 posts)I was asking about why the dividing line would be drawn where it is. Life is full of risks, risks we take on ourselves and risks we impose on others. Every time you drive your car to see a movie, for example, you're risking your own life and the lives of other.
The bullshit, let's-forget-all-scale-and-scope way of putting that would be, "Seeing a movie isn't worth a PERSON'S LIFE!!!111!!!". So why do we drive to see movies? Because we're all incredibly thoughtless people who don't care about killing innocents, so long as we get to be entertained?
You absolutely can die, and can kill, with a car. "This isn't some fucking stick your finger into a mouse trap and learn from your experience type thing", as some might say. Real and permanent death, as well as severe life-long injuries such as paralysis, can and do occur.
Why do we accept car related risks, but not peanut related risks? Especially when you compare the statistics, car deaths (and gun deaths, to drag in other hot topic) are much, much more common.
The kid will probably be just fine without all of the excessive over-the-top restrictions on everyone else.
Edit: I should add... In fact, my post was just the opposite of "slippery slope", because I know those broader restrictions never would happen, that it's in fact a gentle slope with very good traction. That there there is no slippery slope here is very telling about how we evaluate cost/risk benefits.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Neither do I. But then again, that's not what we are talking about here.
Neither is a ban on peanuts everywhere.
So neither of our posts really has anything to do with this discussion.
Silent3
(15,154 posts)...rather than having a knee-jerk reaction, assuming like another poster from a few scanned key words that I was arguing a "slippery slope", but without really paying attention.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)It's tragic that this child has this problem, but if his allergy is this severe he and his family will have to discover a way to deal with it. Not simply in school, but everywhere. That solution will not involve somehow forcing the rest of society to change. If he were allergic to soap residue would we demand everyone in the school stop bathing or laundering their clothes?
It is not the other parent's or student's problem. If this kid cannot be around them then so be it. he can stay home or live in a bubble or whatever he needs to do. That's not being heartless, that's just reality.
Squinch
(50,924 posts)They're virtually the same. So your argument is totally logical.
And what if he were allergic to hands, huh? I bet there would be plenty here who want all the hands cut off. Because that's the same as saying no peanuts too. Damn those jackbooted peanut hand severers!!!!!
chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)that the school may open themselves up to liability issues. Parents would be put in the position of making sure a child brings nothing with any peanut product in it and what would happen if something was brought in with a product like peanut oil in it and the parent didn't notice it? The district and maybe the family would have a huge lawsuit if something would to happen to that student. Keeping it on the onus of the parent makes sense for the school district I would think. I'm not sure I agree with that but I'm sure liability is on the minds of people who are making the decision.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Unwrapped.
Thinking your child's environment is peanut tree nut free is a false sense of security. They really need to get the kid his epi pen because these types of measures depend on everyone being hyper vigilant.
dkf
(37,305 posts)And tree nut and tree nut products out of the entire school she is living in cloud cuckoo land.
This request is not only unreasonable, it is impossible to enforce because not everything comes with packaging.
How many parents are involved here? How much effort are they going to expend examining everything for a list of 20 tree nuts and peanuts and all their by products?
Boy they might as well ban home lunches and snacks and make the school responsible for providing all foods and snacks.
Response to alp227 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)When the allergy is this severe that a small amount will kill...
Putting a ban in place for peanuts and all tree nuts can give a false sense of security.
Kids/parents will make a mistake and will come to school with a product or have it on their skin when they get to school.
Time is one of the enemies...some will occasionally forget.
yes, it is fine that the school cafeteria, etc..has no nuts and tree nuts but it will be impossible to keep it out completely from the kids bringing lunch or eating nut products at home and bringing traces with them.
The level of protection is best when closest to this individual child.
That means instruction to the child and an epi-pen. If the kid can't carry it then the school must.
I know as a parent, even if there was a ban at the school, I wouldn't let the kid attend without knowing that the epi was quickly available. I would seriously think about moving to a state that allows an individual to carry.
Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)Here in our Canadian school systems and school boards, peanut products are routinely banned. And there is NO, I repeat NO backlash because of it.
Parents genuinely have empathy for those families with a severely allergic child and willingly go along with the ban.
And think about it. You're only denying your child ONE meal with peanuts. You can stuff them FULL of peanut butter at breakfast AND dinner.
Honestly, I thought this was a board full of compassionate, civil-minded people.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)Nobody ever DIED from nuts other than peanuts
marybourg
(12,602 posts)are the most likely allergen to cause death.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)
Squinch
(50,924 posts)Schools routinely become peanut free when a child is enrolled who has the allergy. And where I have seen it done here, there is no backlash either.
It seems to me that some of those arguing against it have no idea what goes on in schools, have no idea that this is done all the time, and just can't let go of their position in the argument.
It's kind of crazy.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Is to ban peanuts or nuts from any meal before school, so breakfast too.
Although, it is easily accomplished for me. It would be harder if I couldn't give her eggs, as she needs a protein-based breakfast to keep her going.
My only concern is that I don't think banning peanuts and tree nuts actually creates a nut-free environment. They just send home a note asking people to not send in anything with nuts or peanuts, and in my daughter's school's case also asking us not to feed them those foods before them come to school. But kids bring in snacks and pack their own lunches, parents pack lunches, and there's a long list of ingredients that involve nuts. One mom sent a snack to my younger daughter's school that included coconut. She didn't know that was actually a nut. And that one is hard to miss - but there are lots of things to be really careful about. Hundreds of untrained parents and kids can't be trusted to do that.
But my older daughter's school has what I think is a better method. They create actual nut-free zones, areas small enough that they CAN be controlled. The kids don't bring their own snacks to nut-free classrooms. The schools provide them so they can be absolutely sure there are no ingredients that might have peanuts or nuts or related ingredients. There is a section of the cafeteria that is peanut and nut free, and the cafeteria workers are well trained about what is allowed there. If you pack your lunch, the cafeteria workers go through it if you want to sit with an allergic friend, and it might very well be rejected. And then there is a bank of sinks and kids wash their hands before going out to the playground. It seems like a safer way of doing it to me.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)I don't know if that is the case here, but I'd certainly be suspicious.
I know a guy who has had a whole series of "allergies". Every time I see him, he is telling somebody about the terrible struggle he must bear with his restricted diet. One time it was lactose intolerance. Last time I saw him it was a gluten allergy. Next time, it will be something else.
How many parents had children suffering from "attention deficit"? That sounds so much better than "bad parenting", doesn't it? And they will even sell you a pill to medicate your child and rationalize his behavior. Here's a clue. 4 hours a day of video games, brain-dead teevee shows and texting will give a person a 15 second attention span.
marybourg
(12,602 posts)lack of real world experience, maturity and empathy displayed by many of the posters here. This post is the poster child (pun intended) " for this vacuousness.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)I liked this bit:
But Dr. Robert Wood, chief of the Pediatric Allergy and Immunology department at Johns Hopkins Children's Center, cautions against putting too much stock in such epidemiological studies. "The reality is that the vast majority of kids — 95% plus — have no potential to get peanut allergies no matter what you do," he says, "and there's ½ % to 1% who are going to get it no matter what you do." Although the findings of the U.K.-Israel study are intriguing, he says, they apply to a very small percentage of children, and more research needs to be done to determine the true impact of early nut exposure. (There is a study currently underway, says Wood, but the results won't be available for another three years.)
Despite the occasional cases of nut over-precaution, Wood thinks the public generally approaches the allergy risk with common sense. "There are definitely situations where we see a fear of the allergy that develops far out of proportion to the true risk, but for the vast majority of schools, things are mostly on balance and in perspective," says Wood, who treats some 2,000 allergy patients. Further, he says, it's important to recognize that the appropriate protective measure depends on the age group in question. "We recommend very different approaches between an early preschooler and a late-elementary schooler," he says. "We view preschool children as being at true risk — sharing food, having messy hands. There are many reactions that occur from those kinds of exposures," he says. "I think that having peanut-free preschools is a totally reasonable, justifiable thing to do." For children in the fourth or fifth grade, however, he says minor precautions like specialized seating arrangements in the cafeteria are probably unnecessary.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1869095,00.html#ixzz2S14jC831
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The original article doesn't say if he has ever actually had to use that medicine in an emergency or if he has ever been rushed to the hospital in an ambulance. I am guessing not.
He has been exposed to trace amounts of peanuts many times in his life -- practically a daily thing -- yet somehow he is still with us.
This is the time of year when I get really miserable with all the pollen, and if I didn't control that, this allergy could develop into an infection that could kill me. But I don't demand that my workplace eliminate all plants and pave everything with asphalt.
It seems this situation is fundamentally different than if the school, for example harbored nests of bees in the hallways or allowed venomous snakes to roam freely through the school.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)"it can't be an epidemic, it must be Bad Parenting!" school of denial.
Thank you for being an example of the problem.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)as do a great many professionals in the mental health field.
Walter-White
(17 posts)If a Kid can not be in the same room as a peanut without showing signs of a reaction then its probably best idea to homeschool the child instead.
Lets say a Kid bring a PB&J sandwich for lunch and the school has to take the kids food away because of 1 person. So now due to the 1 person someone else is starving.
What if a bunch of kids say 10 had different allergy's and the school had to accommodate them. So rest of the kids hardly get anything to eat.
