Skip to comments.Boy with nut allergy banned from school because he is a 'health and safety risk'
Posted on 09/27/2007 2:22:06 PM PDT by UKrepublican
Boy with nut allergy banned from school because he is a 'health and safety risk'
Like anyone with a nut allergy, George Hall-Lambert had always assumed it was the food that caused the problem not him.
His new school didn't agree. Concerned that none of the staff was trained to cope if the 11-year-old had an allergic reaction, the headmaster banned him on health and safety grounds.
George, who was diagnosed with a nut allergy at 18 months, carries an emergency adrenaline injection, known as an EpiPen, and wears a medical tag to alert carers to his condition.
When he began at Howden School in East Yorkshire, his mother informed the comprehensive about the allergy.
A file with medical notes was forwarded from his primary.
If the boy went into severe anaphylactic shock it could render him unconscious and he would need assistance using the EpiPen.
He had been at school for only four days when the head summoned his mother for a meeting.
He told her George must go home as no policies were in place to deal with his condition.
Judith Hall-Lambert, who has three other children, said: "Howden School is saying nobody could take charge of his EpiPen because staff don't know how to use it.
"They won't let him back in school until everything has been sorted out and he is classed as safe.
"If he went back now they say he would be a health and safety risk."
George, who was near the top of his class in his SATs tests, is receiving 15 hours a week tuition at home.
But Mrs Hall-Lambert, 37, of Eastrington, near Goole, added: "George is being discriminated against because he has a nut allergy.
"He is a bright kid and this could set back his education."
She dismissed an offer for him to attend the inclusion unit at the school, as it is predominantly for children with behavioural problems.
"George is well-behaved and there is no reason for him to be in that unit.
"He is entitled to a mainstream education like everyone else," she added.
East Riding of Yorkshire Council said arrangements had been made to send him to school full-time, but his mother had decided not to send him.
"The school is following guidance from the local authority and the Government in ensuring that George can access his entitlement to education in a safe environment."
Head Andrew Williams said staff were working towards an acceptable solution.
"My main concern is to ensure that we meet the health and welfare needs of all students in our care."
The nut allergies have always been there. People just no longer take responsibility for themselves. My brother was diagnosed as being allergic to chocolate fifty years ago. Mom simply made sure that he didn’t eat chocolate. I have a coworker that is allergic to nuts. He simply tries not to eat nuts. He accidentally ate a cookie with nuts. We went down to his truck and he used his Epipen.
Apparently it hurts a bit as this Afghanistan war Veteran complained about the pain. At least he quit swelling up and could breath again.
Sometimes it's like this ~ my nextdoor neighbor is this insufferable screamer ~ and she's deathly allergic to bee stings. So, do I kill the bumble bees that live on my property, or talk to them gently and encourage them to propagate ~ even, maybe, grow wildflowers they particularly like?
Neighborliness has real limits. So do nut allergies ~ which is why the person with the allergies really needs to avoid dangerous situations.
In the afternoon, though, they all fry those breaded fish things in what we all hope is the third vat to the right ~ but sometimes they screw up and drop them into the french fries vats.
I know it every single time (within half an hour) if I eat frenchfries.
The prophylaxis here is to instruct the cooking staff, in Spanish, English and Farsi, HOW TO COOK THE FISH.
Then, don't buy the fish because the breading is a killer.
Thanks for the tip on the lactose. Didn't help me. Still don't have enough production of lactase to make a serious difference. However, yoghurt and saurkraut, with meals, works fine.
In truth, the things you mentioned ( which seem to almost be the norm, today) are far more odious than removing the kid.
Did you realize that after a lifetime of eating wheat and rye crackers that a year and a half deprivation makes white, whole kernal, cornchips taste great ~ with peanut butter, cheese, and so forth.
In our school I have a second grader. We just received a letter stating that during their snack time (which we have to send in as well as their lunch) there is to be no nut products. No peanut butter crackers or anything that has nuts in it or is made with nuts or peanut oil. Now I have to read labels and distinguish what I can send in because someone in her class has a nut allergy. She cannot take PB&J for lunch either. If she does she has to tell the teacher and sit away from the others. Something does not seem right to me about that.
Nanny state BUMP!
Best the kid get on with learning what to do right from the beginning. That means he or she has to learn how to AVOID nuts.
Judges with some backbone are sorely needed. If the parents agree to the terms, they should be bound to the terms.
You are, of course, correct. Western Civilization is dead, merely waiting the associated fall.
As absurd as completely banning all nuts (and nut products and items which may have the remote possibility of having some relation to nuts) from a school campus because one student has an allergy??
As absurd as sueing airlines to force them to stop serving airline peanuts because someone who has an allergy *might* want to fly someday??
Since when has the world gone so topsy-turvy that the vast majority must now adjust to accomodate the tiniest minority, instead of the other way around??
I did not realize that this was a contest.
Yes, it is absurd. What difference does it make which one is the most absurd. Both alternatives are absurd. Fortunately, Banning all nuts and nut products or banning the kid are not the only alternatives.
Sheesh! Where has common sense gone? The school can easily accommodate this child, and it can do so without banning all nuts (I'm not counting the teachers here) and nut products.
If lawyers and judges had spine and principle rather than a lust for money, this wouldn't be an issue. A return to taking responsibility for one's self should be taught and then later enforced.
I understand that we got into this predicament by piecemeal application of distorted mercy. I'm looking forward to "The Comet". Sometimes a clean slate is the best approach.
I hope you strive for balance and decency in your cases.
Keep one eye on the cat while you sleep. It may take a fancy to conquest.
” If lawyers and judges had spine and principle “
I’d settle for even a rudimentary sense of proportion......
To think schools can come with anything based on common sense is quite possibly an unsupportable belief.
Alas, they use barley in soups ~ gotta’ watch those guys ~
GOOD. It's about danged time.
Many may not like my attitude, but too bloody bad, I'm sick and tired of the pathetics who are in the minority dictating the lives of the rest of us.
I tend to agree on this matter.
I say great. The child is unfit to be in society alone. He must live in a bubble to assure survival.
All the world must not be qurantined to protect him
Uh oh, at the risk of being flamed. I have to agree, we are all responsible for ourselves and our children and (thanks to lawyers) the school does not want to be held liable.
I have a boy who has almost died twice from ingesting a tiny amount of peanuts. Luckily, he doesn’t react (much) to airborne exposure or to touching peanut. But I purposely slip him food with peanuts in it every once in a while. I am trying to instill in him that he cannot rely on ANYONE to watch out for him. He must read the ingredient lists himself. If he misses it, I make him read it again.
Restaurants are another matter. You can’t rely on what the workers or managers tell you. But my kid can tell by tasting the food. His mouth will burn violently, unless the nuts are in ice cream or something cold. As long as he doesn’t swollow or drink anything afterward, he can wipe out his mouth and avoid going into shock.
Thanks for the ping, Gabz.
It is unfortunate that people have allergies, but I shouldn’t have to adjust my life to accommodate their problem.
Some are blind; should all newspapers be written in braille?
If you agree to punish an entire school for one kids allergy you’re not seeing any sort of bigger picture.
The school is correct in banning this kid. End of story.
What surprises me is that it is always the children of upper middle class parents who have all of these allergies and never the children of those of lesser means. By banning certain foods, the yuppies are forcing the parents of lesser means to purchase more expensive and less nutritious foods--or for their kids to go without lunch. That often results in poorer performance by the undernourished kids.
Oh, and I forgot to mention eggs. The kids around here are not allowed to bring eggs to school to eat.
Maybe I am going nusto on this, but if the yuppies kids are so allegic to life, maybe they should keep them home living inside a sterile, tofu-rich environment.
I thought “nut allergy” was the British term for jock itch?
***If someone wants to buy me a ticket I will fly over there and happily educate the school in how to take care of this child.***
Heck, I’m not a nurse and even I have an EpiPen sitting right here on my bookshelf, and I’ve had instructions on how ot use it if my son needs it. It’s just not hard to learn.
I can dream, can't I?
not absurd at all at least the Brits did not make a whole school stop eating PBJ’s. They did as they should have took steps until they had a solution in place so he and the school could handle his condition. Why the hell should other kids suffer because he has allergies?
I’m shocked but I’m with school on this one. The mother went out of her way to tell them they may have to administer the EpiPen. In this ligitegous society the school should be paranoid that the kid:
1. Might get something with nuts and sue them
2. Might have an attack and sue them
If the child dies, the mother seems to be covering all her bases ... stacking the onus onto the school. But the kid’s problem is not the school’s, not the other kids or nurses.
But the mother is trying to shift the legal status and well being of the child to the school. If something goes wrong ... it is the school’s fault.
I wouldn’t blame any person or organizatiton for trying to avoid a set up like this mom is trying.
This might be fun for kicks and giggles to argue the “other” side of the nanny state argument for a change.
My daughter has severe peanut allergies. (must insert this to play the liberal role of unassailable “victim”) It’s really not a joke. Nobody has ever died after being exposed to SHS, but people who are allergic to peanuts have died instantly after being exposed. No junk science there. They didn’t die 50 years later, they died on the spot.
Having said that, I’m not sitting around bitching and moaning. The first thing we did is send our daughter to a PRIVATE CATHOLIC SCHOOL that has banned peanuts. We went out of our way to find one.
Secondly, she has to know what to do and what to avoid. The Gubmint can’t protect her everywhere. She might be at a ballgame or in the park and smell roasted nuts from a vendor. When she is older, she will know how to use the Epipen herself. In the meantime, we make sure the teachers are trained in how to use it.
Its the schools policy not just her class. So even if there is no one with an allergy in the class...they all have to do the same.
It gets back to ...the rights of the individual over the rights of the majority.
We all know your child has a peanut allergy. Good you sent her to a Catholic school that has banned the entire school from eating nuts. You know, I truly do sympathize with you, I love my children as much as you obviously love yours BUT I would not expect the entire school to change their lives to submit to your loved one’s dangerous allergy. It is required that her family do what they must but the entire school is not responsible to change their lifestyle to fit your dear one.
Good for you...you sound like a responssible parent who takes on the responsibility of their child. Kudos.
If you ban the nuts, it’s a catastrophe.
If you ban the kids, it’s a catastrophe.
If you ban neither and a kid dies from an analphyactic reaction, it’s a catastrophe.
This, folks, is what we call a conundrum.
I agree. She has to learn what to avoid when she gets older and carry an epipen and know how to use it. I can’t and she can’t expect the Gubmint and the pubic skool system to protect her. Nor do I or she need any help from the Gubmint or the NEA. We can take care of ourselves. At least I can, she is only 3.
I just get really pissed off when I here people poo poo this condition as if it is nothing. I’m as insensitive and uncaring as any man and damn proud of it.
But some of the stuff people say and that I have heard here when this subject is brought up makes my blood boil.
On a thread a few months ago somebody on FR said “Good, let Darwin’s theory of evolution work and let the weak die”. If somebody said that to my face about my daughter they would be drinking through a straw for months.
Too late!!! And what's worse, it seems to have staked me, and my den, out as his private territory.
I am very sorry about the peanut allergies of your daughter and am happy you have found a school that can accomodate her needs. Too bad for the rest of the kids in that school they have a no peanut policy. Obviously since you chose the school because of the policy your daughter did not cause it, but some other parent did.
If my child had such a severe sensitivity to something as common as peanuts I would not expect anyone to cater to her.
I spent 12 years in Private Catholic schools and no such accomodations were made.
I’m sorry, I just can’t accept an entire student body of families having to cater to the needs of a few anymore than I can accept any of the rest of the nannystate bravo sierra.
OK, let me take a few deep breaths and go have a cigarette and calm down before responding to that one. I don’t want to piss off friends.
You’re a smart women, I’ll give you 5 minutes to please read your post again and figure out what is wrong with your statement. It should only take you 30 seconds.
Because if a teacher screwed up and didn't do precisely the right thing at the right moment, the mother would wasted no times in suing for all the money she could possibly convince a court to award her. She would have lawyers running ooout of her ears, wanting the case.
Even if the teacher's actions were an honest and innocent mistake.
I wouldn't allow this kid anywhere in the same galaxy of my school system. To do so would be extremely foolish, unless the mother would execute a general release of responsibility.
Do you think she would?
Very good friends of mine have a daughter who is allergic to peanut stuff and every year as the daughter moves up a grade, Kathy (who is a registered nurse) goes to the new teacher and provides her with whatever it is they give to people who go into shock from the peanut stuff and gives the teacher detailed instruction on what to do if the daughter accidentally consumes anything that has peanut stuff in it.......
I guess I’m not as smart as you give me credit for, Eric, because I see nothing wrong with what I said.
It is my responsibility as a parent to protect my child, no one else’s and I do not believe I have the right to disrupt the lives of other people in doing so.
There are some quite specific chemicals that can cause that reaction ~ not just the nut allergy ~
It seems to be a reaction to chemicals associated with the cyanide found in plants.
The kids are asleep and the wife is out, so now I'm going to need something stronger than a cigarette. I'll have a double shot of Jack and some Miller Lite to calm myself down.
Obvious Hint: Just think about what we always complain about when it comes to Gubmint mandated smoker bans in PRIVATE as opposed to PUBLIC places. Come on...
Justice is an attempt to address wrongs and uphold rights. Fairness is an illusion in our worldly life; it exists somewhere else.
The school can easily accommodate this child ...
Not with today's legal system, it can't.
The legal system seems to promote the idea that if it's unfair, it's wrong and justice must be sought. The truth is that fair or unfair often has nothing to do with right or wrong.