<p>^ Cobrat are you saying a parent could be held liable (sp?) because they let their kid have peanuts at school and another child had a reaction?</p>
<p>Something from WrightsLaw</p>
<p><a href=“When a School Refuses to Protect a Child with Life-threatening Allergies … | Wrightslaw Way”>When a School Refuses to Protect a Child with Life-threatening Allergies … | Wrightslaw Way;
<p>
</p>
<p>As in this college overacted… I vote the college dig up all the flowers, too, so no bees come near this campus. It’s a marketing strategy…the college can attract all the kids with bad allergies and protect them all in one place. No seafood, no bee loving plants, no nuts of any sort allowed anywhere on campus. Wait my first real severe need to go to ER immediately bee sting happened on MY college quad in the summer of 1975 while wearing my Dr. Scholls…too much clover in the grass…probably too late to sue.</p>
<p>^ban sandals.</p>
<p>My husband is severely allergic to avocado. Add avocados plus all avocado oils, lotions, shampoos, etc to the list of banned substances. </p>
<p>That may sound ridiculous, but that is where these bans are heading. If schools are going to start banning allergens based on an extremely small group of students, then how can they refuse to ban the next substance that a new student is allergic to?</p>
<p>Gluten, dairy, pineapple, latex…</p>
<p>Let us not exaggerate the effectiveness of epipens. According to my SIL, mother of a child with a life-threatening peanut allergy, in the case of a person with a severe allergy, they are meant to give you the 20 minutes to get to a hospital. They don’t solve the problem.</p>
<p>I am surprised at many of the responses. Why would it be so upsetting for a school/college to do what they can to create a healthy environment for all of their students? They aren’t outlawing peanuts, just saying that peanut products can’t be in this one specific place. Second hand smoke isn’t immediately deadly to anyone, yet banning cigarette smoking in an area or in entire buildings is considered to be OK, or even expected (Thank goodness). Why would it be so wrong to eliminate this health threat? Some are saying that people with allergies will have to go to restaurants, etc. sometime, so might as well get used to it now. People do not have to go to restaurants, but students at college do have to eat regularly and the dining hall can provide that. Those with extreme allergies who do go to a restaurant would have to be very vigilant, and I’d imagine it would be pretty stressful to have to be on alert everyday, for every meal. Some have said that students with this allergy could go to a CC or find a college that allows them to live off campus. This would limit their selections and/or would isolate them from campus life. As has been mentioned, accommodations are made for students with a wide variety of specific needs, seems to me this fits into that category.</p>
<p>Once again, cigarette smoke is NOT comparable to a severe peanut allergy. </p>
<p>Banning cigarettes and cigarette smoke is very, very easy. You don’t randomly find cigarette smoke in a kit-kat bar. However, banning all peanut products is extremely difficult since peanut derivatives are in so many things. </p>
<p>Carry on with arguments, but it’s not an accurate or fair comparison.</p>
<p>The other difference with “typical accommodations” is that they generally don’t affect the entire student body. Banning peanut products from the only dining hall is nowhere near comparable to something like a ramp or braille menus.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Second-hand smoke is dangerous to everyone who breathes it. Peanuts are only irritating to 0.5% of the population, and actually dangerous to far fewer than that. The number of deaths from peanut reactions is tiny, and basically non-existent compared to deaths from tobacco. But CC doesn’t seem to care about facts. </p>
<p>For some reason, it is still surprising to me how willing most of those in this thread are to just gloss over and ignore posts containing actual facts and from people with training like the pediatrician who posted a long time ago. No wonder views like this (“omg peanut allergy is so much worse than any other type of allergy and is always deadly - my sister’s friends brother in law said so and his kid has a bad allergy so he would know everything there is to know on the topic and is totally evidence based”) continue to gain traction. </p>
<p>Although I have little doubt this will get buried in rebukes and cliches like variations of “think of the children”, to those of you who read this thread in the future, please read some reputable sources on this topic, and don’t just rely on the crowd here and at places like the “peanut allergy forums” (yes this is a thing).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If the child & parent were told beforehand someone suffered a severe PA by school officials and yet, figured "What harm can eating a PB sandwich around him(student with severe PA allergies), some lawyers I’ve known who heard that account have said that parent is likely liable not only civilly…but also criminally due to gross negligence. </p>
<p>Especially considering the parent was clearly informed and wantonly decided to disregard that information. They felt it was a factor in why that parent’s lawyer likely advised that the large settlement he was said to later agree to was the most prudent course of action than taking a chance with judges/juries who aren’t likely to be sympathetic to him in light of the outlined circumstances…even if “he forgot about it”.</p>
<p>The incidence of severe ground & or tree nut allergy is actually about 1%.
Labeling would help.
Just today a friend was rushed to the hospital because she consumed a banana cream pie that had been made with almonds.
She had an epi pen with her, that bought her about 20 minutes.</p>
<p>Considering deaths from anaphylaxis can be linked to one specific incident, comparing it to repeated exposures to a toxin seems spurious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because it isn’t possible to actually ELIMINATE it. Most of us here agree that having a dining hall with options for people with food allergies is a good idea. It’s the false sense of security (and the threat of legal liability for other students, as cobrat keeps bringing up) that is concerning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t all of us have our selections limited? What about all the kids who go to CCs for financial reasons? Don’t they deserve accommodation too? They probably want the residential college experience just as much as a PA sufferer. We can’t all have what we want. </p>
<p>I also agree with Icarus about looking at the facts, and would add that it is important to look at the SOURCE of the facts as well. Epipens may save lives but they are a business with a lobby behind them. It behooves them to work the “fear” angle to get their products in more places.</p>
<p>emerald, I am sorry about your friend, and curious about how this happened. Why did she trust that the pie was safe? Without a label, shouldn’t the default position on food ingredients be “I probably shouldn’t eat that”?</p>
<p>That’s one of the silliest things I’ve ever heard on CC.
My experience is you don’t get a prescription for an epi pen unless you have already experienced anaphylaxis.
Hardly an overreaction.</p>
<p>I don’t think it occurred to her that there would be nuts in a cream pie.
It wouldn’t occur to me either unless it was a pecan pie. But banana?</p>
<p>"
Gluten, dairy, pineapple, latex…"</p>
<p>Again, though, I don’t see how these compare to peanut allergies. My d with celiac can sit in the midst of 25 people eating sandwiches and pasta; she just can’t eat it herself. She has no need for the ENVIRONMENT to be gluten-free as long as she has a gluten-free option. Ditto with me and my allergy to shellfish; i just dont eat it, problem solved. Ditto for dairy allergies. Peanuts are different in that other people eating it around you can still be dangerous. I really think false equivalencies are being drawn here.</p>
<p>Emerald,
Some pie crust recipes call for crushed nuts.</p>
<p>Many Pie crusts also use nut flour. To me, it should be a given that you don’t eat bakery products unless it specifically labelled no peanut/ nut. When in doubt, do not consume.</p>
<p>You can tell I don’t bake much. But I do like pie!</p>
<p>emerald, I should have been more clear in my comment about the epipen industry. There is a move to have epipens in all schools and public spaces. I am not saying that is a bad idea–only that it is in the interest of the manufacturer to create demand for its product.</p>
<p>I don’t bake either but like I said I would always assume the worst about nuts in my food. I am not sure how much I would eat out if I had an allergy as severe as your friends.</p>
<p>I can see this is a really sensitive subject for some. I can also understand that if it were MY kid, I’d probably want to ban peanuts everywhere!</p>
<p>But, realistically, I am not in favor of banning things that are harmful or even deadly. ESPECIALLY when they are only harmful or deadly to a few people.</p>
<p>I would be in favor of reasonable allowances made to keep students relatively safe. So if a campus only had ONE dining hall, and no cafes, or other places to eat on campus with a meal plan, and they offered no apartment style dorms with kitchens, then yes, I would be for a peanut free environment in the dining hall. I would think in that (probably rare) case, it would be appropriate and very nice.</p>