Peanut Butter Sandwiches Banned from Schools

[siead_lietrathua]

I really wish those of you so concerned about nut-sensitive kids were at least half as concerned about the children who are not getting proper nutrition because they live in poverty and go to bed hungry every night.

this thread wasn't about starving children though. it was about kids with allergies. if you want to start a thread about starving children, then i'm sure many people would be agreeing. otherwise it's a derail to the thread.

[Aethian]

I find that account difficult to accept. Yelled at for getting something from her pocket? Or yelled at for suddenly making hoarse breathing noises and gasping.

In either event, a simple, "I'm having an allergic reaction to that person's food. Sorry." Get up. Move. Use epi-pen. Problem solved.

From what I understand this professor is a hardass about people making what he considers distracting sounds. Except he also allows eating, if it's done quietly. I don't know, I'm not in her class, I wasn't there when this happened. I only know her from a different forum.

She expected others to modify their behaviour simply to accomodate her. I'd have shunned her too.

Personally, I can't stand the smell of cigarette smoke. I literally gag and vomit. But when I'm outside and someone is smoking nearby, I bloody move so I'm upwind. I don't expect them to change their behaviour to suit *me*.

All she wanted was some consideration that certain things not be brought into certain classes. A simple little change that would make part of her college life a bit easier. Something I think most people out there would find no harm in doing since most rules do state in her school that food isn't supposed to be in the rooms anyways.

So tell me is your lack of personal responsibility so damned important that everyone else has to give up their rights to accomotate it?

Anyone with a PB allergy stupid enough to eat a PB&J sandwitch deserves a Darwin Award.

My what? When did this become about me? I don't have any allergies but I sure do my best that when I know there is a allergy about I don't try to trigger it. Like with one of my coworkers and dog hair, during shedding season I wash my clothes outside my home and then put them into a garmet bag. I take them out of the garment bag only to put on. Sure sometimes I still trigger her allergy but it's not as bad as coming in without taking said percautions.

And my friend didn't eat anything to cause the reaction, it was near her in the next seat over.

[draco664]

From what I understand this professor is a hardass about people making what he considers distracting sounds. Except he also allows eating, if it's done quietly. I don't know, I'm not in her class, I wasn't there when this happened. I only know her from a different forum.

So, the professor allows eating in class, but gets upset by people making distracting sounds? Sorry, but it sounds fanciful to me. The fact that she said that she went to the prof and the counsellor and both blew her off seemed to me that she didn't have a legitimate complaint.

All she wanted was some consideration that certain things not be brought into certain classes. A simple little change that would make part of her college life a bit easier.

Right. A change by everyone else to suit her. If she got up and sat in the corner, the problem would be solved too, but that would involve her actively taking responsibility.

Something I think most people out there would find no harm in doing since most rules do state in her school that food isn't supposed to be in the rooms anyways.

Yet food is allowed by the prof. So again, she expects others to change their behaviour to accommodate her, just so she doesn't have to take responsibility for her own health.

My what? When did this become about me?

Yes, my apologies about that. I specifically tried to make my post about generalities, or specifics when referring to your friend, but that line slipped through my rant. I did not mean to imply that you were not taking responsibility for yourself. Sorry.

I don't have any allergies but I sure do my best that when I know there is a allergy about I don't try to trigger it. Like with one of my coworkers and dog hair, during shedding season I wash my clothes outside my home and then put them into a garmet bag. I take them out of the garment bag only to put on. Sure sometimes I still trigger her allergy but it's not as bad as coming in without taking said percautions.

And my friend didn't eat anything to cause the reaction, it was near her in the next seat over.

Ah, again, my bad. For some reason I thought that your friend had the reaction because of someone's PB sandwich. It was others making the PB sandwich posts. PB has no dust and you can't get a reaction from the odour, so I made the assumption that she was being precious.

There have been studies done that suggest that the mind does have an impact on how severe an allergic reaction is. The University of South Australia did one where they gave histamine to volunteers, and one of the test groups were only 'convinced' they were given it, but were not. Oddly, the ones who were tricked also had reactions, some of them even greater than the ones who were actually given histamine.

The research suggests that some of the the increased number of allergies may simply be a result of the 'belief' of allergies. It also suggests a method that people can have reactions to things where the smell is what sets them off, rather than contact.

I have no problem with schools listing kids' allergies, and banning those foods from those specific classes. That is good risk management, and such a policy works well here at my daughter's kinder.

I have a huge problem with *all* schools banning those foods on the basis that *some* kids might be in danger. That is not only bad risk management, it is bad management full stop.

[draco664]

Uh, because cars are hard to miss? You're seriously trying to compare two things that have nothing to do with one another. Car accidents may claim more lives per year than peanut-related allergies, but that really doesn't matter in this equation. Probably because there are many, many, many, many, MANY more cars in the United States than there are children with peanut allergies. Comparing their death rates is absurd.

I was trying to compare the way people reacted to risk management in both instances, not the death rates.

Where many children die on the roads yearly, the focus is on personal responsibility and education - in Australia there's the Stop, Look, Listen, Think campaign. There are child restraints available, and kids need to be in proper child-seats.

Where far fewer children die of anaphylaxis, the focus seems to be on protecting them by banning everyone else from doing stuff that is legal. I don't particularly like PB, I don't think I've eaten it in a decade, but if I wanted to eat it everyday, that's my choice. And banning kids from taking it to school when there are no allergy sufferers in their class is fucking retarded.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Actually, having a "special" table for kids with allergies separates them and turns them into an "other" class. It makes them inviting targets for bullies, which is why a lot of schools don't segregate the children.

Hardly. The kids aren't segregated at all; their friends can sit with them. It's just that the table is labeled as an "allergy" table. And for the record, it's delusional to believe that bullies need a reason to bully.

Like this girl at my secondary school who had a severe lactose intolerance. She of course was singled out and horribly bullied... oh wait, no she wasn't. That was me.

Or what about the epileptic girl, of which everyone in the school knew about? She was bullied for being different... oh yeah, she wasn't. I was. Damn, wrong again.

[Dreamstalker]

I'm still trying to work out how I feel about these types of bans. Initially, I thought, "Gee, why ban something just because of a few kids who might be allergic?" Then I read some more and started to sympathize with people who support the bans, but I'm still not too sure I agree with them.

Let's say the school allowed peanut butter, and then some kid allergic to it somehow came into contact with another kid's peanut butter and had a reaction. That might be a potential lawsuit for the school, especially if someone had proposed a ban in the recent past and the school turned it down.

But if they hadn't, can a public place be sued for something that they likely had no control over?

I'm not sure how I feel about the ban either. A little cousin of mine had a 'magic' peanut allergy. Sometimes his mom would flip out at the sight of anything that looked like it may contain nuts, other times he was scarfing peanut butter cookies by the bucket. As far as we know he was never tested and didn't have an epi-pen.

[lordlundar]

I can see a ban if a significant number of children have severe reactions, but these bans have been occurring in such a manner of a full school permanent ban because one chile in ten years might have a minor reaction. It's the equivalent to flash burning a forest because a person was stung by a bee in it.

Extremely heavy handed response to say the least.

Now as for the "allowing the teachers to teach" argument, I would like to remind you that a number of zero tolerance policies (of which this is one) were enacted using the exact same reason.

(And to the best of my knowledge, unless you have a medical condition you aren't allowed to eat anything during class time anyways, so the "allowing teachers to teach" argument goes right out the window there.)

[Aethian]

So, the professor allows eating in class, but gets upset by people making distracting sounds? Sorry, but it sounds fanciful to me. The fact that she said that she went to the prof and the counsellor and both blew her off seemed to me that she didn't have a legitimate complaint.

I had a professor who would screech if she heard the sound of paper being ripped out of a spiral bound notebook.

She has a copy of her allergists reports that show he having allergies to both tree nut, peanuts, and four or five kinds of seafood. Have I personally seem it? No but then I'm in Michigan and she's a navy wife in Hawaii.

My school didn't believe one of my classmates was a late type 1 till a lawsuit was brought against them. So I can see these two individuals having the mentality that she's trying to make it worse then what it is, when she's not.

Thankfully the board of her school is meeting to discuss the rules and what ones need to be enforced stronger. I have a feeling the plaques that say no food in hallways or class is going to be held to every teacher now.

Right. A change by everyone else to suit her. If she got up and sat in the corner, the problem would be solved too, but that would involve her actively taking responsibility.

It was supposed to be a anonymous deal. A, " There is someone here who is allergic to x, y, z. Please don't bring said items to class to avoid potential reactions." It went way past that and she was signaled out.

Yet food is allowed by the prof. So again, she expects others to change their behaviour to accommodate her, just so she doesn't have to take responsibility for her own health.

Food isn't supposed to be allowed at all. She has a epi pen, benadryl, and sits closest to the door to have a easy escape, just in case. She's not asking that much in my view. The first time she had a reaction and was yelled at was the first day of class. Her other professors didn't allow food, how was she to know this one did?

Yes, my apologies about that. I specifically tried to make my post about generalities, or specifics when referring to your friend, but that line slipped through my rant. I did not mean to imply that you were not taking responsibility for yourself. Sorry.

Apologies accepted.

Ah, again, my bad. For some reason I thought that your friend had the reaction because of someone's PB sandwich. It was others making the PB sandwich posts. PB has no dust and you can't get a reaction from the odour, so I made the assumption that she was being precious.

Again, apologies accepted. Her problem wasn't dust. She would start to hive up if someone just had oil on their fingers and then touched her skin.

There have been studies done that suggest that the mind does have an impact on how severe an allergic reaction is. The University of South Australia did one where they gave histamine to volunteers, and one of the test groups were only 'convinced' they were given it, but were not. Oddly, the ones who were tricked also had reactions, some of them even greater than the ones who were actually given histamine.

The research suggests that some of the the increased number of allergies may simply be a result of the 'belief' of allergies. It also suggests a method that people can have reactions to things where the smell is what sets them off, rather than contact.

True, that had actually been brought up in the other forum thread. Her reactions have gotten steadily worst since they began to develop over the past seven or eight years. So I think she's just getting more cautious.

I have no problem with schools listing kids' allergies, and banning those foods from those specific classes. That is good risk management, and such a policy works well here at my daughter's kinder.

I have a huge problem with *all* schools banning those foods on the basis that *some* kids might be in danger. That is not only bad risk management, it is bad management full stop.

Well yea a blanket ban serves no purpose. But like with a cousin I used to watch in the afternoons, her teacher sent home a letter asking parents to not send in a certain food because of a allergy. The particular student wasn't singled out since no name was stated and there are 30 kids in the class.

[Rebel]

Now as for the "allowing the teachers to teach" argument, I would like to remind you that a number of zero tolerance policies (of which this is one) were enacted using the exact same reason.

(And to the best of my knowledge, unless you have a medical condition you aren't allowed to eat anything during class time anyways, so the "allowing teachers to teach" argument goes right out the window there.)

So your suggestion is to simply ban peanut butter, but never have the children told why?
I see that failing very quickly.

And it keeps going back to the "Children are dumb" mindset.

And as for teachers teaching, need I remind you that that is what they're there for?
When I was taught about dangerous allergies as a child, the lesson took less than half an hour. The teacher talked about all the main information on the subject, then we were allowed to ask questions. Notes also went home to the parents so they were made aware as well. We knew that giving peanuts to this person was a very bad thing, so we didn't do it. We were about 5-6 years old at the time.

Keeping children ignorant about the problem, and instead just issuing a blanket ban of peanuts at school would probably cause more harm than letting the children know. Withholding the information could lead to kids acting out and bringing the banned foods just out of spite.

The adults are creating a zero tolerance environment in the school because they don't want to talk to the kids, and that's just fucking stupid.

[HYHYBT]

Knowing why a rule exists is much better than just saying "don't do that." Especially when "if Amy is around this she may die" is something even young kids can understand... if not the mechanism, then at least that it's a good reason not to have the stuff around her.

And for the record, it's delusional to believe that bullies need a reason to bully.

Good point.

[blas87]

There, there.

We can just have Michelle Obama lunch programs. All kids will have amazing arms, but fat asses.

[dpilker]

I was a kid that would have had a hard time with a nut ban in school. I was a vegetarian and nuts were my only protein back then. The only things I ate consistently were soups and peanut butter/nuts. Since the school wouldn't allow me to heat up soups, I took peanut butter sandwiches every day. I see both sides of the situation, nut allergies are dangerous but how far do we go with allergens? Nuts, milk, eggs, seafood, etc. Do we ban them all? I personally think we need to find a safer way to accommodate allergies and we really need to get to the bottom of why these allergies are becoming more and more common.

[the_std]

I just have to say... I'm surprised at the amount of vitriol and heat this debate has stirred up... All over peanut butter in school lunches. I've seen debates on child porn and pedophiles go more calmly than this one. Isn't it weird what gets us humans riled up?

[blas87]

Just wait until bacon becomes the problem.

Oh god, not the bacon.

[Greenday]

Just wait until bacon becomes the problem.

Oh god, not the bacon.

I'd protest the shit out of that. No one messes with my bacon damnit!