No Tag 4 U!

[rise]

Originally posted by: Armitage
So denial of peanut butter for lunch = suffering? Have your peanut butter somewhere else - I don't see it as that much of a hardship. And I love peanut butter. Compared to a kid that could possibly DIE if they accidently came into contact with it.

It's not a matter of teaching the kid not to eat anything from home. They don't have to actually eat it - simply coming in contact with it can be enough ... like the crumb on the table thing. Besides, you have kids. How well do kindergarteners listen? Maybe by middle or high school that will work, but not daycare & elementary school.

I see it as a very minor inconvenience to help avoid potentially deadly consequences. Compared to the rest of you list where the "consequences" are entirely imagined or the OP subject where the restriction is entirely unreasonable compared to the risk.

my brother, 29 now, has a deadly allergic reaction to nuts, among other things. he made it through k-12 just fine. and we had peanut butter in the house, cashews on the holidays etc. kids aren't freakin stupid.

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

I'm with you on everything but the peanut butter thing. Some people have peanut allergies that are extremely serious and potentially deadly and can be triggered be even very small amounts - like a crumb left on the table that gets on the allergic kids food.

My son's daycare bans all nut products because a child there has severe peanut allergies. The staff has been trained to administer epi syringes that are kept on hand. My daughters elementary school sets aside a table in the cafeteria for any kids that have peanut butter. Sad ... but that's a very real and potentially deadly risk.

Sorry, but I disagree.

i do not think that an entire school of children should be denied something like peanut butter because of ONE kid. I think the parents need to a) teach their kid to NEVER EVER eat anything that did not come from home, b) go to a private school or c) home school.

I cannot see how it is fair that no child is allowed to have something as normal as peanut butter because of one kid. I think it is the responsibility of the parents to ensure the safety of their kid in such a situation. I dont think that hundreds of kids should suffer because of one kid.

Hard ass stance, I know.

So denial of peanut butter for lunch = suffering? Have your peanut butter somewhere else - I don't see it as that much of a hardship. And I love peanut butter. Compared to a kid that could possibly DIE if they accidently came into contact with it.

It's not a matter of teaching the kid not to eat anything from home. They don't have to actually eat it - simply coming in contact with it can be enough ... like the crumb on the table thing. Besides, you have kids. How well do kindergarteners listen? Maybe by middle or high school that will work, but not daycare & elementary school.

I see it as a very minor inconvenience to help avoid potentially deadly consequences. Compared to the rest of you list where the "consequences" are entirely imagined or the OP subject where the restriction is entirely unreasonable compared to the risk.

So, the kid who is NOT allergic to peanut butter has to live their life as if they had the same allergy? To them, if they love peanut butter, it IS a hardship to not be able to have it for lunch on a school day... and why? It is not anything they did, or they suffer from. They cannot do something they want, or they enjoy because of a problem that someone else has. Multiply that by hundreds of kids... all because ONE kid has a problem.

Now, suppose there was a kid who had to live their life in a bubble because thet had a germ allergy. Does that mean that ALL kids in school should have to wear face masks and those hospital gowns and hair coverings before entering school property?

No, because that solution is unreasonable and completely impractical. Yes, that's a judgement call. Not everything is black and white. In my view:

Not bringing peanut butter to lunch = reasonable and practical.
Maintaining the entire school to clean room standards = not reasonable or practical.

I think that if the kid has such a serious problem that DEATH could actually ensue just by touching something... that kid needs to be somewhere else.

So you will deny that kid from having as normal a childhood as possible for want of a peanut butter sandwich?

I mean... suppose some kid had peanut butter at home, dropped some and stepped in it. It gets tracked thru school and the sick kid steps in it. The next time he touches his shoes, he is a goner. Should we ban peanut from the entire planet? Or should all parents do a spot check on their kids to ensure there is not a trace of anything peanutty before sending them off to school? exaggerated....??? Perhpaps.... but how far should we go to 'inconvenience' hundreds of kids because of one?

Yea, you can come up with all kinds of extreme scenarios. And some of them might even be possible. You can't eliminate all of the risk. But you can take reasonable and minimally intrusive measures to greatly reduce that risk.

Further... should we ban all contact sports, or even running in an entire school because one kid happens to be a hemophiliac?

Yet another straw man argument. No - the hemophliac needs to take appropriate precautions, such as not personally participating. Other children playing tag cannot possibly injure the hemophiliac child if he doesn't participate. It is easily within their control, and easily enforced by the staff, not to participate. Compared to the severely allergic child who could be injured by events and actions entirely out of their control or understanding.

 

[Dracos]

And the wussification of America's youth continues..

I figure the next thing to go will be science and science fairs since there is a chance the volcano may erupt and burn someone with "hot lava"

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

I'm with you on everything but the peanut butter thing. Some people have peanut allergies that are extremely serious and potentially deadly and can be triggered be even very small amounts - like a crumb left on the table that gets on the allergic kids food.

My son's daycare bans all nut products because a child there has severe peanut allergies. The staff has been trained to administer epi syringes that are kept on hand. My daughters elementary school sets aside a table in the cafeteria for any kids that have peanut butter. Sad ... but that's a very real and potentially deadly risk.

Sorry, but I disagree.

i do not think that an entire school of children should be denied something like peanut butter because of ONE kid. I think the parents need to a) teach their kid to NEVER EVER eat anything that did not come from home, b) go to a private school or c) home school.

I cannot see how it is fair that no child is allowed to have something as normal as peanut butter because of one kid. I think it is the responsibility of the parents to ensure the safety of their kid in such a situation. I dont think that hundreds of kids should suffer because of one kid.

Hard ass stance, I know.

So denial of peanut butter for lunch = suffering? Have your peanut butter somewhere else - I don't see it as that much of a hardship. And I love peanut butter. Compared to a kid that could possibly DIE if they accidently came into contact with it.

It's not a matter of teaching the kid not to eat anything from home. They don't have to actually eat it - simply coming in contact with it can be enough ... like the crumb on the table thing. Besides, you have kids. How well do kindergarteners listen? Maybe by middle or high school that will work, but not daycare & elementary school.

I see it as a very minor inconvenience to help avoid potentially deadly consequences. Compared to the rest of you list where the "consequences" are entirely imagined or the OP subject where the restriction is entirely unreasonable compared to the risk.

So, the kid who is NOT allergic to peanut butter has to live their life as if they had the same allergy? To them, if they love peanut butter, it IS a hardship to not be able to have it for lunch on a school day... and why? It is not anything they did, or they suffer from. They cannot do something they want, or they enjoy because of a problem that someone else has. Multiply that by hundreds of kids... all because ONE kid has a problem.

Now, suppose there was a kid who had to live their life in a bubble because thet had a germ allergy. Does that mean that ALL kids in school should have to wear face masks and those hospital gowns and hair coverings before entering school property?

No, because that solution is unreasonable and completely impractical. Yes, that's a judgement call. Not everything is black and white. In my view:

Not bringing peanut butter to lunch = reasonable and practical.
Maintaining the entire school to clean room standards = not reasonable or practical.

I think that if the kid has such a serious problem that DEATH could actually ensue just by touching something... that kid needs to be somewhere else.

So you will deny that kid from having as normal a childhood as possible for want of a peanut butter sandwich?

I mean... suppose some kid had peanut butter at home, dropped some and stepped in it. It gets tracked thru school and the sick kid steps in it. The next time he touches his shoes, he is a goner. Should we ban peanut from the entire planet? Or should all parents do a spot check on their kids to ensure there is not a trace of anything peanutty before sending them off to school? exaggerated....??? Perhpaps.... but how far should we go to 'inconvenience' hundreds of kids because of one?

Yea, you can come up with all kinds of extreme scenarios. And some of them might even be possible. You can't eliminate all of the risk. But you can take reasonable and minimally intrusive measures to greatly reduce that risk.

Further... should we ban all contact sports, or even running in an entire school because one kid happens to be a hemophiliac?

Yet another straw man argument. No - the hemophliac needs to take appropriate precautions, such as not personally participating. Other children playing tag cannot possibly injure the hemophiliac child if he doesn't participate. It is easily within their control, and easily enforced by the staff, not to participate. Compared to the severely allergic child who could be injured by events and actions entirely out of their control or understanding.

So, you agree with everything I originally said, EXCEPT for the one that affected you personally. And the one that affected you personally, you found it acceptable to inconvenience everyone else?

You would deny hundreds of kids a normal thing like peanut butter because of one kid?

To the kid who is NOT allergic to peanut butter.... yes, it is unreasonable to ban an entire school for ever having it on the premises because one kid is allergic to it. To them, it is unreasonable and intrusive.

We will ave to agree to disagree on this one... because I will never agree that hundreds of kids should be banned from something as normal as peanut butter because one child has an allergy. And you will never agree that the sole responsibility of a childs health remains with the parents and should not be forced on hundreds of other kids and their parents.

We are at an impass, but I hope your kid is and remains healthy.

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Armitage

I'm with you on everything but the peanut butter thing. Some people have peanut allergies that are extremely serious and potentially deadly and can be triggered be even very small amounts - like a crumb left on the table that gets on the allergic kids food.

My son's daycare bans all nut products because a child there has severe peanut allergies. The staff has been trained to administer epi syringes that are kept on hand. My daughters elementary school sets aside a table in the cafeteria for any kids that have peanut butter. Sad ... but that's a very real and potentially deadly risk.

Sorry, but I disagree.

i do not think that an entire school of children should be denied something like peanut butter because of ONE kid. I think the parents need to a) teach their kid to NEVER EVER eat anything that did not come from home, b) go to a private school or c) home school.

I cannot see how it is fair that no child is allowed to have something as normal as peanut butter because of one kid. I think it is the responsibility of the parents to ensure the safety of their kid in such a situation. I dont think that hundreds of kids should suffer because of one kid.

Hard ass stance, I know.

So denial of peanut butter for lunch = suffering? Have your peanut butter somewhere else - I don't see it as that much of a hardship. And I love peanut butter. Compared to a kid that could possibly DIE if they accidently came into contact with it.

It's not a matter of teaching the kid not to eat anything from home. They don't have to actually eat it - simply coming in contact with it can be enough ... like the crumb on the table thing. Besides, you have kids. How well do kindergarteners listen? Maybe by middle or high school that will work, but not daycare & elementary school.

I see it as a very minor inconvenience to help avoid potentially deadly consequences. Compared to the rest of you list where the "consequences" are entirely imagined or the OP subject where the restriction is entirely unreasonable compared to the risk.

So, the kid who is NOT allergic to peanut butter has to live their life as if they had the same allergy? To them, if they love peanut butter, it IS a hardship to not be able to have it for lunch on a school day... and why? It is not anything they did, or they suffer from. They cannot do something they want, or they enjoy because of a problem that someone else has. Multiply that by hundreds of kids... all because ONE kid has a problem.

Now, suppose there was a kid who had to live their life in a bubble because thet had a germ allergy. Does that mean that ALL kids in school should have to wear face masks and those hospital gowns and hair coverings before entering school property?

No, because that solution is unreasonable and completely impractical. Yes, that's a judgement call. Not everything is black and white. In my view:

Not bringing peanut butter to lunch = reasonable and practical.
Maintaining the entire school to clean room standards = not reasonable or practical.

I think that if the kid has such a serious problem that DEATH could actually ensue just by touching something... that kid needs to be somewhere else.

So you will deny that kid from having as normal a childhood as possible for want of a peanut butter sandwich?

I mean... suppose some kid had peanut butter at home, dropped some and stepped in it. It gets tracked thru school and the sick kid steps in it. The next time he touches his shoes, he is a goner. Should we ban peanut from the entire planet? Or should all parents do a spot check on their kids to ensure there is not a trace of anything peanutty before sending them off to school? exaggerated....??? Perhpaps.... but how far should we go to 'inconvenience' hundreds of kids because of one?

Yea, you can come up with all kinds of extreme scenarios. And some of them might even be possible. You can't eliminate all of the risk. But you can take reasonable and minimally intrusive measures to greatly reduce that risk.

Further... should we ban all contact sports, or even running in an entire school because one kid happens to be a hemophiliac?

Yet another straw man argument. No - the hemophliac needs to take appropriate precautions, such as not personally participating. Other children playing tag cannot possibly injure the hemophiliac child if he doesn't participate. It is easily within their control, and easily enforced by the staff, not to participate. Compared to the severely allergic child who could be injured by events and actions entirely out of their control or understanding.

So, you agree with everything I originally said, EXCEPT for the one that affected you personally. And the one that affected you personally, you found it acceptable to inconvenience everyone else?

You would deny hundreds of kids a normal thing like peanut butter because of one kid?

To the kid who is NOT allergic to peanut butter.... yes, it is unreasonable to ban an entire school for ever having it on the premises because one kid is allergic to it. To them, it is unreasonable and intrusive.

We will ave to agree to disagree on this one... because I will never agree that hundreds of kids should be banned from something as normal as peanut butter because one child has an allergy. And you will never agree that the sole responsibility of a childs health remains with the parents and should not be forced on hundreds of other kids and their parents.

We are at an impass, but I hope your kid is and remains healthy.

I'll agree to disagree. But note that my kids do not have peanut (or any other) allergies. I'm not arguing from the position of something that affects me personally.

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Armitage


I'll agree to disagree. But note that my kids do not have peanut (or any other) allergies. I'm not arguing from the position of something that affects me personally.

Then I will stand corrected and apologize for my misunderstanding on that point.

 

[Captante]

My daughters arn't allergic to peanut butter & while I don't like it much, I have to say that I wouldn't protest a peanut butter ban in K - 5th
grade because it simply isn't worth the chance of killing a child over a sandwich preference & I'd bet that the VAST majority of parents would agree with me.

On topic ... rules like banning tag at recess, Halloween parties & dodgeball are complete nonsense.

 

[zebano]

and the pussification of America continues...

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: Armitage
I'll agree to disagree. But note that my kids do not have peanut (or any other) allergies. I'm not arguing from the position of something that affects me personally.

how did i know that

kids with allergies learn very quickly what they can and cannot do/have. my entire family (7 siblings) suffers from different allergies from shellfish to nuts, eggs besides the hay fever, asthma etc.

all of us made it through school just fine.

 

[Exterous]

Originally posted by: rise
kids with allergies learn very quickly what they can and cannot do/have. my entire family (7 siblings) suffers from different allergies from shellfish to nuts, eggs besides the hay fever, asthma etc.

*GASP* We have to add shellfish and eggs to the list NOW!!!!! Also, any activity that induces heavy breathing! Its for the children! Why won't anyone think of the children!

 

[cKGunslinger]

Good - that stuff stinks. I much prefer Axe to Tag.

 

[DougK62]

Changing the name of dodgeball reminds me of that recent Simpsons episode.

Bombardment!

 

[Imported]

Should they ban everything one kid is allergic to? Kid allergic to apples, ban them. Kid allergic to wheat, ban them. Etc etc.. soon kids won't have anything to eat cause everything is banned.

I'm allergic to peanuts but not in the way where it'll kill/harm me. Just my mouth gets irritated. I thinka ban on peanuts/peanut butter is a bit excessive.

 

[BrokenVisage]

Originally posted by: DougK62
Changing the name of dodgeball reminds me of that recent Simpsons episode.

Bombardment!

...of Bible Questions!

(Rod and Todd): Yayyy!

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: Homerboy
They going to ban hide and seek too in case one of the kids can't be found?

Hide and seek was great, especially if there was somewhere with relatively narrow halls around. always fun climbing up the walls and hanging out there as people walked thru looking.

 

[Anubis]

if i ever have kids im gonan hoem school them and their friends and we will play dodgeball and tag and eat peanutbutter all day long

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: Anubis
if i ever have kids im gonan hoem school them and their friends and we will play dodgeball and tag and eat peanutbutter all day long

looks like they'll do well.

 

[Iron Woode]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
School bands tag, other chase games

ATTLEBORO, Massachusetts (AP) -- Tag, you're out!

Officials at an elementary school south of Boston have banned kids from playing tag, touch football and any other unsupervised chase game during recess for fear they'll get hurt and hold the school liable.

Recess is "a time when accidents can happen," said Willett Elementary School Principal Gaylene Heppe, who approved the ban.

While there is no districtwide ban on contact sports during recess, local rules have been cropping up. Several school administrators around Attleboro, a city of about 45,000 residents, took aim at dodgeball a few years ago, saying it was exclusionary and dangerous. (Watch how second-grader Kelsey interpreted the rule -- 1:30)

Elementary schools in Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Spokane, Washington, also recently banned tag during recess. A suburban Charleston, South Carolina, school outlawed all unsupervised contact sports.

"I think that it's unfortunate that kids' lives are micromanaged and there are social skills they'll never develop on their own," said Debbie Laferriere, who has two children at Willett, about 40 miles south of Boston. "Playing tag is just part of being a kid."

Another Willett parent, Celeste D'Elia, said her son feels safer because of the rule. "I've witnessed enough near collisions," she said.

I take it British Bulldog is out of the question?

 

[Shawn]

What a bunch of pussies people are becoming. Recess and tag are some of my best memories. Childhood is the best time in a person's life and they have to ruin it. Sure I slipped and scraped my knee or something every now and then. BFD! :|

 

[flashbacck]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Imagine the day where they ban the physical activity of having sex and make everyone reproduce in a lab a la Demolition Man.

Everyone gives each other that virtual high-five instead of shaking hands and taco-bell is the only franchise left? I can't wait!