Health & Fitness >
Allergies
RSS FeedSchool districts should bar anyone from bringing peanut products to school
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to Favorites
Contact this writerYes unequivocally.
The first of only two possible arguments that i can fore-see anybody having to this particular debate - in favour of their child bringing peanut based products into school, is a very leaky and selfishly constructed, (in my humble opinion), "human rights" case, which doesn't quite strike a chord with me, as this is far too important a matter to be playing the "human rights" card, especially without any real standpoint to comment from.
The person with the child susceptible to anaphylactic attacks, or indeed the person who has lost a child to anaphylaxis, has a very real, poignant and terrifying standpoint to scream their message from the mountains if need be.
The facts when spelled out plainly and concisely and they are simple and about as basic as anything ever could be, peanuts and peanut based products and even products made in a kitchen or production area where peanuts are present or where cross contamination can occur, can be a little irritant to some children, they can cause very concerning reactions and painful swelling to others,
AND TO A SMALL PERCENTAGE THEY CAN BE FATAL, DEADLY . . . THEY CAN KILL ! ! !
Yes, they can AND DO kill, most of us are aware of this, but never really think of the actuality of the situation, peanuts can kill children or adults if they come into contact with then, i didn't say if they eat them, i said if they come into contact with them.
So whose human rights are we to be most concerned about . . ?, the child who may be cruelly forced to endure a full six or seven hour school-day without peanut based snacks, (well perish the thought eh!) or the child whose life may END! that very day, because a parent decided that little Timmy must have his Snickers bar with his lunch or his life wouldn't be worth living. I believe this one is a solid gold watertight open and shut case, a classic "NO BRAINER" to use the popular American term.
The second, final and only other conceivable argument that i can fore-see is the one that maybe we shouldn't over protect our children and that they need to be aware of the consequences of their actions. They also need to know what they can and cannot eat in the real world to enable them to function as responsible and diligent adults who don't suffer from chicken licken syndrome.
For arguments sake and in the true spirit of debate let me take this in to account and process the information through my mind and see where this new piece of information brings me . . .
NO DAMN DEAL ! ! !
For that argument to work, i have to promise the other debater that i will play Russian roulette with the life of my child in order to teach them some "token" responsibility.
NO THANK-YOU, ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN ! !
We all value and prize the lives of our child above our own, and above all else in this universe, so why would we leave them exposed to such "UN-ACCEPTABLE RISK". I would be happy to let my child learn what is good and bad for them in their own sweet time, to do any other would be tantamount to saying o.k little one you can travel into town your-self today, but if you forget any of the hundreds of safety pointers i have taught you over the last five or six years, road safety, stray dogs, stranger danger, you may become seriously ill, you may be maimed or die and then through the consequences of your own actions you will learn true responsibility, "if you errm . . . live that is"
Is this a seriously viable plan to some people, (anybody? . . . I'll take a show of hands), if it is then maybe you need to be re-educated, responsibility is a great quality to learn to be independent, but safety first eh!.
Apart from anything else, the five or six year old child from my example may make all of the right food choices, may even remember to grill the head cook in the school canteen, (no pun intended), to ensure that all of the dishes, sauces and sundry items on the menu were created in a nut free environment, and in the course of finding a seat they may go and take one far, far away from any child with a packed lunch.
HOWEVER . . . .
The table that they choose may have a few crumbs (from a cereal bar, snickers bar, peanut butter sandwich or any of the numerous items created or cooked or manufactured in factories or kitchens where nuts are present) upon it, or maybe the table has been washed but unfortunately the cloth has actually cross contaminated the surface.
The consequence, hopefully they just come out in a blistering extremely painful sore that has them screaming with agony, or maybe, just maybe they fall to the ground clutching their rapidly closing airway, trying to scream in terror as they wonder if they are going to die, seconds before the onset of anaphylactic shock, maybe they slip into a coma, or indeed maybe they will die before the parent even arrives, maybe the teacher won't know where the epinephrine pens are kept, and maybe the child will not have one, as maybe the child comes from a poor family that can't afford to buy a new one till Mummies payday.
A lot of maybes, true!, but when it comes to the safety and the very life of my child, I, like a lot of you reading, choose to see a lot of dangerous possibilities in the above example and all because Timmy's Mum (who received a letter from the school just a week earlier, politely requesting that parents if they would be so kind, MAYBE didn't give their children nut based snacks to bring in to school out of respect for the kids with these terrible allergies) didn't think it was right that her little Timmy should be forced to fore-go his favourite snickers bar, just because some other kids have something or other that she didn't really pay too much attention to.
Lets swap roles, you are the parent with the son who has this terrifying and often violent allergy, would you prefer it if nuts were banned at your child's school, and if they were banned and a parent puts a snickers bar into her child's packed lunch, in the event of a fatality;
WOULD THE PARENT BE GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER?
I'm not sure quite what i believe on that one, all i do know for certain is that neither of the two arguments that we have discussed here are strong enough or convincing enough to justify taking chances with children's health or their very lives.
And for that reason, i believe that schools should be completely nut free under any and all circumstances, and anyone found guilty of breaking this rule should be punished by law for endangering a child's life.
Let me be clear on this, i am not saying that i believe the situation should be identical to this for colleges and universities, the young people in these institutions are older and more experienced at displaying some greater degree of personal responsibility.
Always remember the words of Voltaire, when throwing yourself into the proverbial ring, when it comes to starting or responding to a debate posting, particularly one that has you hot under the collar, and "in the moment";
"Although i may not agree with what you say, i will fight to the death for your right to say it"
Top "Agree" articles on:
School districts should bar anyone from bringing peanut products to school-
1 of 19
Yes unequivocally. The first of only two possible arguments that i can fore-see anybody having to this particular ...read more
-
2 of 19
by L.A. Wolfe
As the parent of an eight year old child allergic to peanuts, I would breathe easier if peanut products were banned f...read more
Add your voice
Know something about School districts should bar anyone from bringing peanut products to school? We want to hear your view. Write now!
School districts cannot, nor should they, bar anyone from bringing peanut products to school. A school is a replication of community - a small society within a larger one. Schools were developed to create good citizens who are able to learn to live and work within society for the good of the many.
As a school nurse who works with children who have peanut allergies, and as an adult who has an anaphylactic allergy to bananas, I feel I am qualified to say this: those who suffer from lifethreatening allergies must learn as early as possible that we are ultimately and utmost responsible for our our well being and safety in avoidance of our allegens. There are many individuals with lifethreatening allergies to many things. We cannot live in a bubble nor expect others around us to. To create an artificial words where the allergen does not exist only makes the allergy sufferer dependent on others for his or her protection. Children with life threatening allergies need to learn from an early age to avoid the offending substance. They need to learn to ask questions before eating or drinking anything. They need to learn to say no to things they want but that might contain the allergen.
Most of all, they need to learn self-responsibility.
Peanuts are a part of life. Adaptations and provisions can be made. We do it all the time in school for kids with peanut allergies. There are different levels of allergic responses, but the bottom line is this: communication and planning are two skills even the smallest child can learn to practice with a little help from the adults in his or her life.
If a child cannot tolerate sitting near someone else eating a peanut product, then he or she can sit somewhere else. A child who has an allergy such as this needs to sometimes bring a lunch and should have an adult along on field trips if they are too young to know what they can or cannot eat. Epi-pens and commmon sense go a long way in providing peace of mind to everyone involved from parent and student to teacher and school nurse.
But just as I can't ban bumble bees from the play ground or the surrounding airspace, nor can I see the need to ban peanuts from the lunchroom. Peanut butter is a healthy and nutritious food. Yes, it is dangerous for those who have an allergy but not if they stay away from it. I do advocate going to a non-food policy in regard to classroom parties, holiday snacks, birthday treats, and incentive rewards for obvious reasons. But I do not feel that the small number of children who have peanut allergies justify banning peanut products from those children who like them.
When I was a little kid, my throat used to get itchy every time I ate a banana. My family - even my mom - used to laugh at me. Until the day I ate a peanut butter and banana sandwich on the way out shopping with my parents. Half way to our destination, my throat started to close and my eyes bugged out of my head. Yep, it was an anaphylactic reaction. That itchy throat was my body's early warning device which absolutely got ignored.
I learned rather quickly to never eat anything without making sure it that yes, it had no bananas. Mystery muffins need to be ID'd before munching. Fruit cups at weddings get examined with a magnifying glass to make sure there are no banana coins hiding behind the grapes. When I was in nursing school, I had to routinely unpeel bananas for my patients who could not do it for themselves. If I did not wash my hands immediately and happened to touch my face, my lips would become numb. I learned to wash my hands immediately.
Gosh, I love bananas but there's no banana splits in my life and banana bread is banned from my menu. Guess what? I survived.
It's a jungle out there. Kids need to learn to leap over life's lions and not get quagmired in its quicksands. Schools teach a lot of things, but most of all, they should teach independence, self-reliance, and common sense.
Just remember, at any given time, anyone can develop an severe, lifethreatening allergy to pretty much anything. If school districts start banning peanuts from school, where do they stop?
Top "Disagree" articles on:
School districts should bar anyone from bringing peanut products to schoolAdd your voice
Know something about School districts should bar anyone from bringing peanut products to school? We want to hear your view. Write now!
