by James Henry

Created on: March 13, 2009

Perhaps I am hypersensitive, as a person who is afflicted with many allergies, but to me when you have a condition such as a food allergy that can be alleviated by an action as suggested by this debate, it should be a no-brainer that the answer should be a resounding yes!

Twice in my life I have been hospitalized with nearly fatal reactions. My allergies are mostly to medicines, though I also can add to those allergies to clams, scallops and presumably other shell fish. So I have had a life-long experience with allergies. We are not talking about hay fever because I happen to be allergic to grass (I am!) or cold-like symptoms because I am allergic to dust (or dust mites....little bugs that eat dust). We're talking about hives covering my body from head to toe because I reacted to a medication that previously had been safe for me to take. That's the way it is with allergies sometimes. A child may think they have a mild allergy to peanuts, because they sneezed when they came in contact with peanut products in food. Then comes the time that the allergy leaps into high gear and that child cannot breathe because their airways have been constricted. Before a paramedic can get to the school to issue an injection of Epinephrine to save the child's life, he has died because he did not realize that an allergy can evolve over time.

You may be surprised to know that I am a HUGE peanut butter fan. As a child, instead of giving me sugar-filled lollipops and other pieces of candy, my mom used to give me a spoonful of peanut butter, a much more healthy choice. I believe there is a special place in heaven for whoever conceptualized the marriage of peanut butter and chocolate, as a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup. So I have no personal ax to grind against peanut butter.

Yet, as a compassionate human being, concerned for the welfare of my fellow men, women and most importantly children, I would say that the inconvenience of not being able to eat products with peanuts in them at school would be tiny compared with the consequences of an accidental exposure of peanut products to a person who is allergic to peanuts.

Then there is the issue of liability. School districts are government entities, and government entities all carry heavy liability insurance policies. Depending upon the claim history, rates can go up or down. The impact a lawsuit against a school district would have on insurance rates for the district could be significant. Those insurance premiums are paid by taxpayers, and the taxpayers have a right to expect that the school district will do all it can to limit exposure to liability. If a school district can reduce its liability by passing a policy of this nature, and then diligently enforce it, they are being fiscally responsible, but more importantly, they are being morally responsible.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence declares certain inalienable rights, specifically, "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." It is hard to imagine that a school district would be upholding these inalienable rights by failing to pass such a policy. If one child dies because a school district made a conscious choice not to pass such a policy, when evidence shows that accidental contact with peanuts among people who are allergic to it can be deadly, that school district would have violated one of the basic tenets of what it means to be American - we value life.

http://www.barpeanutsinschools.com

Learn more about this author, James Henry.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.