Kindergartner's peanut allergy infuriates some school parents

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Eli
Ridiculous.

It is not the schools job to conform to the childs allergies.

if the state is going to FORCE the parents to send their child to school, then YES IT IS the school and states responsibility to accomodate this child.

why is that hard to understand?

Why is it so hard to understand that the school can --with some minor modifications-- isolate this child and allow the other children to maintain normalcy?

Why must EVERYONE conform to this kid, and not the other way around?

This is the the parent's problem, not the world's problem.

how should this kid conform? just choose not to be peanut allergic?

i'm not fully in support of the way the school chose to respond to this issue, i just take issue with everyone that seems to respond that the school should have done NOTHING.

mb the school went overboard, but can you honestly respond that a response of doing NOTHING would have been the appropriate response?

I can guarantee you that if the headline had read, 'Kindergartner dies due to peanut allergy". and the story read, that the parents informed the school of the childs allergy and it's severity and the school just chose not to make adjustments.

I can guarantee you that many of the same people complaining about the current schools resopnse would be complaining because they DIDN'T respond.

 

[dquan97]

Originally posted by: Geekbabe
I'm sitting here today stuffed with claritin,wearing a pound and a half of under eye concealer in an effort to appear as if I'm not feeling half past dead thanks to my allergies to airborne substances that I cannot avoid.I have empathy for that child and his parents.Additionally,peanut based product allergies are on the rise,probably because of the millions of parents who have introduced peanut based food products into their toddler's diets far too soon.Less peanut products around day care centers and schools might be a good thing.

sorry to hear that...here's an Alegra for you: :gift:

 

[digitalsm]

I bet these parents pay property taxes, and thus why should they have to pay more money to homeschool/tutor their child.

Also, the school is following the LAW. Although searching backpacks etc is going a bit overboard. IMHO the other parents should get over it, there are other things besides PB&J.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

sorry, but public school != prison. he is in public schools by choice. it might be hard for the parents to home school or send their kid to private school, but tough sh!t, it's their problem.

 

[TMPadmin]

Read this! Especially the Lifestyle adjustments section.

"The parents of non-sensitive children may selfishly (or for financial reasons) argue that "Why should my child be deprived of peanut when the problem is that of another child?" Perhaps the answer lies in the counter-argument that if their child had the life threatening reaction would they not be the first to demand that all peanuts be removed form the child's environment. Fortunately many schools and summer camps have come to realize the magnitude of the problem and controlled the problem. "

That's funny http://www.peanutallergy.com/ is not available. Is everyone reading?

Now that we have all schools peanut free this comes out. Link

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

And, as I pointed out, they ISOLATE the affected prisoner and allow the normal operations of the general population to continue.

 

[gopunk]

why can't the parents just make him a bubble boy? wouldn't that solve everyone's problems...

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: TMPadmin
Read this! Especially the Lifestyle adjustments section.

"The parents of non-sensitive children may selfishly (or for financial reasons) argue that "Why should my child be deprived of peanut when the problem is that of another child?" Perhaps the answer lies in the counter-argument that if their child had the life threatening reaction would they not be the first to demand that all peanuts be removed form the child's environment. Fortunately many schools and summer camps have come to realize the magnitude of the problem and controlled the problem. "

That's funny http://www.peanutallergy.com/ is not available. Is everyone reading?

Now that we have all schools peanut free this comes out. Link

that "counter-argument" is fundamentally flawed... if you think about it, they're just saying "well, everyone else would do it, so it must be right". just because it's human nature to act selfishly, doesn't mean it's right.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

And, as I pointed out, they ISOLATE the affected prisoner and allow the normal operations of the general population to continue.

So you propse they isolate this kid? This isnt a prison. All children ARE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION. They could isolate him, but it would likely be more costly for the state and school. Also isolating the child would be taking away a big portion of his growing up.

 

[Amused]

Let's look at a world in which we accomodate everybody's allergies, shall we?

First, we'll have to blot out the sun Monty Burns style, because of the folks with sun allergies. Then we'd have to kill every living plant, because of plant allergies. We'd have to kill all the pets as well, because of all the animal dander allergies. Hell, we'd all be walking around in hypoallerginic bubblesuits.

Folks, where does it stop?

Yes, the school can take action to protect and educate this child. But what should that action be? Restrict the diets of every other child? Or isolate this child and allow the other 99.9% of the school to operate normally?

The majority should NOT be forced to give up their normal lives to accomodate a very tiny minority (1% of kids are allergic to peanuts) with allergies.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

And, as I pointed out, they ISOLATE the affected prisoner and allow the normal operations of the general population to continue.

So you propse they isolate this kid? This isnt a prison. All children ARE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION. They could isolate him, but it would likely be more costly for the state and school. Also isolating the child would be taking away a big portion of his growing up.

And having a deadly allergy sucks. This child has no right to restrict the freedoms of everyone else to accomodate his condition. There are kids who are unable to leave the house due to sun allergies. Are we to blot out the sun to accomodate them???

Where does it stop?

 

[TMPadmin]

After doing some reading and putting more thought that I should have to this subject I change my mind. I would not be offended if the school I send my children were to ask me not to pack peanuts or PB&J in my sons' lunches. It's a small courtesy I can give to another family who is having an issue that could mean their child's life. I would appreciate the same from them if I were in that situation. If they didn't then I would fight for it. I no longer think that eliminating PB&J from lunch is a big deal. There is plenty of other healthy (or even healthier) food out that I can give my children for lunch.

I was wrong! You can be wrong too! REPENT! Cleanse yourselves from the impurity!

Sorry, but life tends to come and go, as long as you know.

 

[BillGates]

Ban the kid from school.

 

[PunDogg]

thats a tough call

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

And, as I pointed out, they ISOLATE the affected prisoner and allow the normal operations of the general population to continue.

So you propse they isolate this kid? This isnt a prison. All children ARE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION. They could isolate him, but it would likely be more costly for the state and school. Also isolating the child would be taking away a big portion of his growing up.

And having a deadly allergy sucks. This child has no right to restrict the freedoms of everyone else to accomodate his condition. There are kids who are unable to leave the house due to sun allergies. Are we to blot out the sun to accomodate them???

Where does it stop?

Thats where you are wrong. The child or his parents arent restricting anything, the government is. It is a reasonable accomidation to ban nuts. Also your anology of sun allergies doesnt work. We have no control over daylight, we do have control over nuts. The school is following the law.

Also, the US was founded on the principle of protecting minorities.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

And, as I pointed out, they ISOLATE the affected prisoner and allow the normal operations of the general population to continue.

So you propse they isolate this kid? This isnt a prison. All children ARE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION. They could isolate him, but it would likely be more costly for the state and school. Also isolating the child would be taking away a big portion of his growing up.

And having a deadly allergy sucks. This child has no right to restrict the freedoms of everyone else to accomodate his condition. There are kids who are unable to leave the house due to sun allergies. Are we to blot out the sun to accomodate them???

Where does it stop?

Thats where you are wrong. The child or his parents arent restricting anything, the government is. It is a reasonable accomidation to ban nuts. Also your anology of sun allergies doesnt work. We have no control over daylight, we do have control over nuts. The school is following the law.

Also, the US was founded on the principle of protecting minorities.

:::sigh:::

The US was founded on protecting individual liberties.

As Ayn Rand said:
"Any alleged "right" of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right."

This child does not have the right to restrict the rights and freedoms of others to accomodate his needs... even if he does so by proxy using the government to enforce the rule.

He is a special needs child. As such, he must be accomodated by seperating him from the other students if he cannot fuction normally in the general student population. Not by dragging everyone down.

 

[brtspears2]

When I went to school, I never heard of this peanut allergy. I was never told I couldn't pack a PB sandwich, a sack of Mr. Peanut peanuts, or PB+celery. Heck the cafeteria served PB. To that that was only 16 yrs ago. Whats wrong with kids these days? Overdrugged?

 

[gopunk]

Thats where you are wrong. The child or his parents arent restricting anything, the government is. It is a reasonable accomidation to ban nuts. Also your anology of sun allergies doesnt work. We have no control over daylight, we do have control over nuts. The school is following the law.

Also, the US was founded on the principle of protecting minorities.

if we tried hard enough, we could have control over the sun...

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

What the hell? There are a lot of ways to meet this address that childs disability.

1) Have kid wear gloves.
2) Allow kid to eat at a special 'peanut free table'
3) Provide a whistle or some other 'alert' device to child in case of emergency.
4) Provide supervision at child's lunch table.


In general, schools don't KNOW what a reasonable accomodation is.

 

[skace]

WEAR GLOVES.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Amused
If you or your child has an allergy, YOU must conform to the world. You cannot expect the world to conform to you.

I have many allergies. Granted none are life threatening, but some are very unpleasent. You will never see me dictating how someone may live or act outside the confines of my property.

if you were put in prison and you had a life threatening allergy, tho you may not get much sympathy, wouldn't you expect the prison to accomodate your allergy? wouldnt' your parents and loved ones want to know that you are kept in a relatively allergy free zone?

Prisons do have to accomidate persons with severe allergies or other medical problems.

And, as I pointed out, they ISOLATE the affected prisoner and allow the normal operations of the general population to continue.

So you propse they isolate this kid? This isnt a prison. All children ARE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION. They could isolate him, but it would likely be more costly for the state and school. Also isolating the child would be taking away a big portion of his growing up.

And having a deadly allergy sucks. This child has no right to restrict the freedoms of everyone else to accomodate his condition. There are kids who are unable to leave the house due to sun allergies. Are we to blot out the sun to accomodate them???

Where does it stop?

Thats where you are wrong. The child or his parents arent restricting anything, the government is. It is a reasonable accomidation to ban nuts. Also your anology of sun allergies doesnt work. We have no control over daylight, we do have control over nuts. The school is following the law.

Also, the US was founded on the principle of protecting minorities.

:::sigh:::

The US was founded on protecting individual liberties.

As Ayn Rand said:
"Any alleged "right" of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right."

This child does not have the right to restrict the rights and freedoms of others to accomodate his needs... even if he does so by proxy using the government to enforce the rule.

He is a special needs child. As such, he must be accomodated by seperating him from the other students if he cannot fuction normally in the general student population. Not by dragging everyone down.

Where exactly is eating PB&J in a public school a right? And last I checked in public schools YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH.

 

[Lucky]

Where exactly is eating PB&J in a public school a right?

OK, say my son is deathly allergic to cotton. I'm sure you'd be OK for forcing 600 kids to not wear cotton, right? You would be saying, "since when it is a right to wear cotton?"

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Where exactly is eating PB&J in a public school a right?

OK, say my son is deathly allergic to cotton. I'm sure you'd be OK for forcing 600 kids to not wear cotton, right? You would be saying, "since when it is a right to wear cotton?"

Point me in the direction of someone being deathly allergic to cotton?

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Originally posted by: yamahaXS
What the hell? There are a lot of ways to meet this address that childs disability.

1) Have kid wear gloves.
2) Allow kid to eat at a special 'peanut free table'
3) Provide a whistle or some other 'alert' device to child in case of emergency.
4) Provide supervision at child's lunch table.

1 and 2 certainly reduce exposure risk, but the point that so many people don't understand is that it's very simple for peanuts to be present in common areas from kids who may be slightly sloppy eaters (and at a kindergarten age, that's going to be the norm more than the exception). 3 is actually the worst false sense of security, since it relies on the child's judgement to determine when an exposure has occurred, and the capacity to use whatever is provided (anaphylaxis can, in severe cases, block airflow and cause shock/unconsciousness). Supervision is probably the best way to insure the child's safety, but again, the dangers exist even outside lunchtime/the lunch area.