Posted on 08/30/2007 6:42:03 AM PDT by TornadoAlley3
I believe its the decent, Christian and American thing to do..
Very quickly in this thread it became ‘those damn selfish spoiled peanut allergic kids are imposing on us’. And you’re dang right I take it personally. I cant separate out the fact I have to make a freak of my daughter when I take her to the playground by asking other parents if their kids had peanuts that morning. She cant just run out and play, I wipe down swings, I shower at work before going home because a co-worker thinks I’m imposing by begging him not to shell peanuts five feet from me.
Why do I do all this? As a young kid my daughter has a three or four year window where she can outgrow a peanut allergy, its very rare but it happens. But if she has any major reaction the odds of her outgrowing it shrink to almost nothing!
The other reason is because peanuts are the only allergy that can suddenly spike without exposure. To get a sever allergy to fish or soy or milk it takes allot of exposure over a prolonged periods of time (with very rare exceptions) with peanuts it can happen with just one.
Hell people have implied that this is some sort of ‘Im the center of the universe’ attitude rather than a ‘Id like to have my kid live long enough to take these precautions on their own mentality’s. I would trade almost anything to take that allergy away from my kid but apparently I’m some spoiled nanny stater who just wants to impose on others..
I only have a half dog in this race, my wife and I plan to home school but I feel for other allergic parent who have these worries more than someone who might have to spend 10cent more on their lunch.
Yes, your child may die if they come in contact with peanut butter. I may die if I have an asthma attack and don't have a rescue inhaler. How do I handle it? I carry my inhaler with me and make sure that I always have one available.
It's called personal responsibility.
The rules set up by this school board WILL NOT PROTECT ANY CHILD FROM DYING!
What you have been doing for your daughter will protect her life, but what this school board has done is of such minimal protection that even the organization that advocates for nut allergies has said that it is a useless gesture.
But you can't see it. Every argument you make is personal and emotional, even when others have acknowledged how difficult it is for you, you attack them. I didn't say "So they die, who cares!" (read my first post again), I said that if your child will die from someone eating peanut butter before talking to them, they are not going to survive a normal childhood.
From that position I asked the question "How do you protect them from X"
If your assertion that peanut dust can kill, then how is a school stopping all treat trading going to help the person avoid all peanut dust?
Peanut dust is found everywhere, it doesn't magically get contained at the school door.
What about someone eating peanuts at a ballgame and wearing the same jacket to school the next day? How will the banning of treat trading stop the peanut dust on his jacket from killing the hyper-allergic child next to him?
Oh, I'm sorry. That's a logical question and not one based on emotion and your personal situation.
Ill tell my 30 month old to get right on that...
WILL NOT PROTECT ANY CHILD FROM DYING!
It will lessen the risk of exposure at school where the parents cant be..
I said that if your child will die from someone eating peanut butter before talking to them, they are not going to survive a normal childhood.
Not what you said: 'not long for this world', usually indicative of imminent death.
how is a school stopping all treat trading going to help the person avoid all peanut dust?
I never said the all treat trading should have been stopped, read some of *my* post before telling me what I think and the reason I think doing anything more than banning peanuts in the school is wrong is because then I am stepping on other peoples rights there is a balance to be struck.
What about someone eating peanuts at a ballgame and wearing the same jacket to school the next day?
I have been quite clear up to this point, why now do you expect a different answer? Its a matter of rights. A school has the right to say don't bring peanuts its their building and is reasonable! Telling someone what to do outside of the school is not reasonable or within their rights.
“Approximately 125 people die in the United States each year from food allergies. The majority are over 20 years old. I can’t find the source but it seems that there have been about 13 children die from nuts in the last decade. IT IS NOT A PROBLEM. WE SHOULD NOT STOP SOCIETY BECAUSE OF THE REMOTE CHANCE THAT A CHILD MAY HAVE AN ALLERGY.”
Why are you screaming at me?
I am happy to defend anything I say here, but if you are going to post to me please make it relevant either to something I have posted or to the article in question. As far as I can tell, the policy at this school was not enacted because anyone died or was in danger of dying because of food allergies. The idea that something is not a problem because it won’t result in death is absurd. Where in the world did you get that idea?
I have a child with food allergies. The reaction my child has to certain foods causes a rash, sneezing and respiratory distress. It is very unpleasant. I ask the school not to feed my child any food. This is the extent of the “burden” I place on them. Considering that I fork over about 5 grand a year in taxes into the school district, I think this is a reasonable request. Our school has no problem with this. The article does not say why the policy in South Dakota went into place but I suspect that more than one parent asked that the school not feed their kids and the district opted for the shot gun approach rather than waste time complying with multiple requests.
I am not trying to “stop society”; I just want to receive value for the part I pay out the nose for. As far as I am concerned, if the school wants to insist on feeding my kid someone else’s homemade cupcakes they can damn well refund me my $5,000 and I’ll be on my merry way. So far it has not come to that. I suspect it never will.
So can he wear the jacket to school as is, or should it be tested for peanut dust before it can be brought in?
Because, honestly, if he wears the jacket in, he is as much, if not more, of a risk to the hyper-allergic child than someone having eaten peanut butter recently.
If he is more of a risk, then what is the point of the treat trading ban?
Go ahead and call me Margaret Sanger again.
As far as I am concerned, if the school wants to insist on feeding my kid someone else’s homemade cupcakes they can damn well refund me my $5,000
No offense, but is the school shoving the cupcake down your child’s throat? If parents are made aware of a child’s allergy in their child’s class, don’t you think we don’t send such foods to school? My child is allergic to things and has declined those foods when offered to her. She has been doing this since preschool.
I said: "Sorry, and I really am, but if a child can die from a situation like described above (and some can), they are not long for this world no matter how many school boards ban treat trading."
This means exactly what it says. No matter how many school boards ban treat trading, you will not prevent a hyper-allergic child from running into someone, someday, that has eaten peanuts a few minutes before they talk to the child.
When that happens, the child will have a severe allergic reaction. When that happens, a parent that has not prepared for these circumstances will likely lose thier child.
What you have done so far with your daughter is to prepare for this circumstance. But others rely upon the government to prepare for them.
It has nothing to do with wanting to wipe out people, it's simply a fact. These children are at a high risk of death. And I am sorry for that.
Would be nice if the parents ran it through the washing machine that night but its unreasonable to intrude into their home
Because, honestly, if he wears the jacket in, he is as much, if not more, of a risk to the hyper-allergic child than someone having eaten peanut butter recently.
No matter how many times you ask or state this my answer will remain the same. Do everything reasonable that is within the schools rights. Taking peanuts out of the school is reasonable, withing the schools rights, and significantly reduces a kids possible exposure.
Go ahead and call me Margaret Sanger again
Go ahead and say severely allergic kids are not long for this world again..
“No offense, but is the school shoving the cupcake down your child’s throat? If parents are made aware of a child’s allergy in their child’s class, don’t you think we don’t send such foods to school? My child is allergic to things and has declined those foods when offered to her. She has been doing this since preschool.”
No offense taken. Nobody has ever made my child eat anything and we have been pro-active with schools from the start about the school not offering anything. My child has also learned over the years which foods are a problem and as time goes by it gets easier. I did notice that the ban in S.D. is for elementary school only and not for any schools higher than that.
I’ve never asked for any ban and don’t care that there is not one in place at our school. Our school chooses to address our request as ad hoc and that’s fine with me.
Please pardon the delay in my reply, I had to take my daughter and her friend to their karate class and then run some errands.
I was 38 and my husband 43 when our daughter was born, so the “new to parenthood” claim doesn’t cut it with me.
I do believe it is an imposition for one child to be able to dictate the lunch box contents of every other child.
I’m truly sorry your daughter is embarrassed about you asking other parents on the playground about their children’s peanut contact. We don’t have an allergy problem, but we do have a time and distance problem, so we solved it by basically building a “playground” in our yard. Our daughter’s friends come here to play.
As I have said, I sympathize with your desire to protect your daughter, I do the same. However, my protection of my daughter does not extend to dictating what other parents feed their children.
The policy of this school district is bad policy, it is teaching the wrong message to all of the children. It also infringes upon parental autonomy to determine what is in their child’s lunch box.
What is next?
You and your wife have no dog in this fight because you plan to homeschool. My daughter attends public school, so I have a full dog in this, although not in this particular district.
I find the policy to be reasonable. The school system is asking that elementary children and their families to not supply any home-made treats at any time during the year, but does allow them to bring in their own snacks. The policy does not apply to the older students.
This policy protects not just the children with nuts allergies, but other allergies and those that are diabetic. In addition, those with religious objections are also protected.
This policy goes in place at a time when children are learning about good choices and those choices should be taught by the parent, not the school. The policy does not say that nuts may not be brought into the school, but it does say that no foods can be shared.
As far as not bringing in treats at Halloween, Christmas, and Valentine's, sorry just don't get the big deal anyway. There are other ways to celebrate other than with food (BTW, I was impressed they used the word Christmas rather than Winter Holidays)
I know this thread went into other directions, which is typical and always interesting, but as far as this policy in this school, if the local community in NC stands behind it, then I in VA have no right to criticize it. The more local control over a school the better. But the cost is that some school districts will do things we in other districts don't like. Them's the breaks.
oops, not NC but ND - ahhhh smart brain, dumb fingers :)
When your child was vaccinated at 2/4/6 months, they should have been given a DTP shot. Mine reacted badly at the first shot and was only give DT after that. She had a weak, very weak protection against Pertussis or Whooping Cough. She contracted Whooping Cough 2 years ago ostensibly from someone ultimately not vaccinated against the disease. It was heart-wrenching to watch her struggle for every breath. When I am 90 years old, I will still remember that cough. I would have sold 20 years off of my life to give her relief.
That would be an example of how a vaccinated child could be infected by a non-vaccinated one.
You misunderstand, I tell you Im new so you know my opinion on this is not born out of having an allergic kid, though that has hardened what I believe.
I do believe it is an imposition for one child to be able to dictate the lunch box contents of every other child.
Perhaps but that does not make it a rights violation, nor does it make it wrong. Its not always wrong to impose...
We don’t have an allergy problem, but we do have a time and distance problem, so we solved it by basically building a “playground” in our yard. Our daughter’s friends come here to play.
Wow youre comparing having to drive to the park to having to worry a kid dying there? BTW some of us dont even have yards..
Here ifs the serious flaw in your argument:
I am not saying stop kids who do eat peanuts from coming to school or stop kids who come to school from eating peanuts. What I am saying is Dont bring the peanuts to school. Frankly its a very sad statement that people would need a board policy to do this rather than simple human courtesy but thats another story.
To make your analogy correct we would have to have a school baord policy that says ‘if your kids has an infectious agent, dont send them to school’. E.G. even for the 5% whos immunizations have failed if they get Chickpox or Whooping cough they cant come to school.
Well such policies exist at many day cares and school. If A kid has chicken pox they cant come in.
Wow their kids had a potentially life threating anaphylactic reaction and you had to go pick up your kid from school..... That must have been so hard on you...
And people are accusing the parents of kids with allergies of being self-centered..
And children are often carriers of a disease before it manifests itself in physical symptoms. There is the “serious flaw” in your argument.
But, and I have said this many times were talking reasonable precautions here.
I don’t expect other parents to be required to wash their kids cloths after a ball game, just don’t bring nuts into the school. The existing policies don’t require a health screening before a kid ges to school you just cant send them if they have running mucus or a condition like chicken pox.
The two policies are far more similar than the way you tried to use it..
I had a druggist that had an allergy to tree nuts, he could not even hold a bag of pistachios
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.