[Adder]

So why can't the child with the peanut allergy be excluded...why is everyone ELSE jumping thru hoops? Thats upside down and bs. The kid that had the problem should have the onus, not everyone else.

[ctlpdad]

It was not as if the whole school was affected, just this classroom. the poor kid wore gloves everwhere he went, even in the bathroom, because if he touched a handrail or toilet handle that had a trace of peanut oil (NOT JUST IN PEANUT BUTTER BTW) he would have had a violent allergic reaction.

The allergic kids parents did not (nor did the kid) force the whole school to forego the pbj's and wash hands, just a class of volunteers.

like i said, it wasn't a real big deal, because my daughter Annalia didn't like (at the time, now she loves...) pbj's

[meyer]

So why can't the child with the peanut allergy be excluded...why is everyone ELSE jumping thru hoops? Thats upside down and bs. The kid that had the problem should have the onus, not everyone else.

I agree - an analogy would be if one had a highly communicable disease. Would you quaranteen that one person, or quaranteen the rest of the people around them?

[OldEagle]

"The kid that had the problem should have the onus, not everyone else."
It sounds good to me, but what does "life-threatening" really mean in a case like this? Life is threatened in many ways. It is hard to believe that a single contact with a peanut eater could be fatal in all cases. Are there degrees of this allergy? Obviously he didn't die the first time he ate a peanut.