A Study of 32 Food-Induced Anaphylaxis Deaths in Ontario; 1986-2000

Very interesting article Cindy.

I copied this from the article:

[b] 2/6 people who died from ingestion of tree nut allergen knew that they were allergic to peanut but had not been tested for tree nuts.
[/b]

I wonder whether this would be cross-contamination, rather than an allergy to tree nuts. That possiblity doesn't seem to have been considered in the report.

Quote:Originally posted by Alternative to Mainstream:
[b]Another PA.com member asked me to post the link to this study, done by Anaphylaxis Canada re deaths in Ontario, Canada:-

[url="http://www.anaphylaxis.org/content/programs/programs_research_deaths.asp"]http://www.anaphylaxis.org/content/programs/programs_research_deaths.asp[/url]

What was of interest to this fellow member is that a lot of deaths occurred because someone had to run 200 to 300 meters to get the Epi-pen, which would be a *good* argument when addressing schools about your PA child wearing their medication.

One thought that struck me about this though was if a death occurred because someone had to run 200 to 300 meters to get the Epi-pen, could it also not occur because someone had to run the same distance (or more) to get to the PA child who was wearing their Epi-pen?

[/b]

Do you think a school could use this info as a reason to claim a child is at too much risk to attend school in a traditional institutional setting? ie: a school stating a child should be homeschooled/homebound?

Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. Merely reflecting on my own *highly individual, highly unique, and completely personal past dealings with my *own* childs situation*.

Anna Marie, sounds like cross-contamination to me as well. On the other hand, if you're PA there is a fairly high percentage that you can develop TNA isn't there? I don't know. It would be nice if the article/study had been clearer.

Momma Bear, I'm not sure. Do schools anywhere have the *right* to deny anyone schooling based on a visible or hidden disability?

The answer to me about why children die because people are running for the Epi-pen would be a *good* case for children being able to wear their Epi-pen (which I believe they are in Ontario, or my experience has been rather that the school has INSISTED that my son, even at the age of 3-3/4 have his Epi-pen on his person). It would also stress the importance to the PA child of always wearing their Epi-pen. And I guess also about Epi-pens not being locked away in some medicine cabinet (or cabinet used for one) in schools.

Do schools anywhere have the *right* to deny a child education?

Best wishes! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

------------------

Quote:Originally posted by Alternative to Mainstream:
[b]

Do schools anywhere have the *right* to deny a child education?

[/b]

My apologies if you misunderstood my question.

What I was referring to was a "homebound" option. ie: not denying an education, but schooling not in a traditional institutional setting, provided through the public school. At least this is how I understand a "homebound" option in the U.S. [i]I may be wrong in my assumptions.[/i] Anyone?

It is my understanding that "homeschooling" is somewhat different that "homebound schooling". [i]Again, my assumptions could be wrong.[/i] Just seeking clarification.

Anyone?

PA aside, I have heard of circumstances where for whatever reason, a child's health status may prohibit attending school in an institutional traditional setting.

Cindy, I don't actually know of any studies on how many people have peanut vs. tree nut vs. both allergies. But peanut and tree nut are [i]at least[/i] two separate allergies. (I say [i]at least[/i] because I think walnut, pecan, brazil nut, etc., are each different allergies.)

MommaBear, I think I understand what you are saying. Homeschooled is taught (or arranged) by the parent/guardian. Homebound is taught and arranged by school/school board, but is done in the child's home.

As for your original question: could a school use this info as a reason to claim a child is at too much risk to attend school - personally I would say no. Too much risk means they first have to look at whether or not it is possible to make the environment safe. If no agreement can be reached - then maybe they could say the child should be homebound.

Disclaimer: This is just my own opinion. I am not a professional in either the field of education or law.

Momma Bear, sorry I misunderstood your question. Homebound schooling is something that I know absolutely nothing about. Nothing.

I know that in discussions with the school principal early this year he did say that as far as homeschooling children, they do not even have the resources now to provide school board personnel to come into your home say once a month to check to see that you're meeting curriculum whereas in the past they did.

But no, I don't know anything about homebound schooling at all. Is this something that is as common or more common than homeschooling?

Personally, and again, like Anna Marie, not being a professional or anything, I still can't see how any school board could deny a PA child entry into their school based on the information in this study.

Again, I really just think it means they should "get with the program" and allow children to carry their meds and make sure everyone is educated.

Does homebound schooling even exist in Canada?

Best wishes! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

------------------

Cindy, Homebound schooling does exist in Canada. When one of my kids was in Grade 4 there was a little girl who had been taught at home - by a licenced teacher - at the expense of the school board. She was just starting school for the first time that year.

She had a very severe health problem and everyone involved had felt primary grades were to dangerous for her, but, by grade 4 they felt the benefits outweighed the risks so they did enroll her in school (with a lot of preparation of the teacher, classmates, and a teacher's aid provided for the students safety).

Usually Homebound schooling is done for short term problems (e.g. children who have surgery and will miss a few months/terms of school). This girl that was in my son's class is the only one I [i]personally[/i] know of that was Homebound taught for such a long time (3 years), and if the parents had wanted they had the option of continuing for at least an additional 2 years.

AnnaMarie,

Yes. That is what I was trying to inquire.

Cindy,

As for "getting with the program".....

[i]Time will tell?[/i]

Remembering the absolute refusal the school returned when asked if my son could carry his epi pen on him (with parent and physician approval).

An official at the private school my son attended stated (at one time) he would be able to carry the epi pen on his (my son) person in the successive school year (with parent and physician approval), but when push came to shove, [i]refused[/i] citing liability.

Wondering how public health regulations fit into this. As I have read many that mention certain personnel as key players.

Thinking of the "No Child Left Behind" act and the apparent lack of funds to fuel it.

A rock and a hard place?

Anna Marie, thank-you for telling idiot woman here that homebound schooling does exist in Canada. Do you ever say something that you feel completely idiotic for having said? But truth be told, I really didn't know if homebound schooling did exist in Canada or not and I've never been afraid to look stupid [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/rolleyes.gif[/img] so.....

I appreciate you telling me that it does. I'm wondering if it does in this school board district if they don't even have the funds to send a teacher out to check that curriculum is being met by children that are being homeschooled. Hmm.

I still really believe that the information in this study could be used to convince some school boards that our children should be allowed to carry/wear their meds. I don't have that problem myself because it was a requirement of Jesse's school, when he was 3-3/4 years of age for him to strap on an Epi-belt and it's been a requirement ever since (and one that I don't mind at all - I think it's great, he never goes anywhere without his Epi-belt and has done so since a young age).

But there are many members here who have to fight to be able to have their children be able to wear their meds and again, I really think this article could be used to their advantage.

And I think the other difference that we're probably experiencing, even in trying to communicate about this is that Canadians still seem behind/different as far as being the litigious and liability concerned nation that the United States is.

For example, in the U.S. I could have easily sued my former landlord for ruining my life (or that's the impression I get from watching my American drama shows). Here, in Canada, unless I have very specific documents, including psychiatric evaluations, etc. it would be a hard pressed case to even attempt to bring to court. I did consult my lawyer to see if I could sue the man and no I really can't in Canada.

Veered off topic, I know, but for a reason, I think.

Oh, just as 504 Plans are considered legal documents in the U.S. and written school plans are not considered legal documents in Canada, just guidelines. Stuff like that.

Best wishes! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

------------------

Cindy, you didn't look like an idiot. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img] I only knew about it because of a personal experience, otherwise I would not have heard of it here either.

I think it [i]theoretically[/i] is available throughout Ontario. But proving it's necessary could be near impossible. (Kind of like MommaBear trying to prove her son needs his epi-pen immediately available at all times.)

I do agree with you, this report should help people prove how important it is - but if the school/board is not willing to listen with an open mind it (unfortunately) won't force them to see reason.

My son's school was also very insistent that he carry his own epi-pen. They didn't force the issue initially, but I think they would have if I didn't agree. I am extremely thankful that they were so insistent, and also thankful to people here for telling me about the epi-belt.

I may have mis-stated MommaBear's problem in my last post. I'm not sure that the school doesn't feel she can prove her son needs his epi-pen immediately available. Is the problem that they feel having it readily available is a danger?

Leads me to a question I'm going to post in the Main Forum.

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b]I may have mis-stated MommaBear's problem in my last post. I'm not sure that the school doesn't feel she can prove her son needs his epi-pen immediately available.[/b]

Do you think if I could, which I think I can, that they would care? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img] That to me is the REAL issue. Maybe it's just me.

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b]
Is the problem that they feel having it readily available is a danger?[/b]

Do you think the problem is having it readily available might mean much of what is "theoretical" in practice, might have to materialize?

They might *think* more than I actually think they do. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]

ps. totally unrelated, but have you ever seen "Conspiracy Theory"?

[This message has been edited by MommaBear (edited October 30, 2003).]

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:[b] Do you think if I could, which I think I can, that they would care? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img] That to me is the REAL issue. Maybe it's just me.[/b]

MommaBear - I'm accustomed to you *thinking outside the box* (actually enjoy people who do that so well [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img] ) but this time you jumped right out of the warehouse on me. If you even suspect they wouldn't care - I'd like to strongly suggest that you consider home-schooling.

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] Do you think the problem is having it readily available might mean much of what is "theoretical" in practice, might have to materialize?[/b]

Whether it's readily available or locked in a cabinet two floors up - in an emergency they have to do what they said they would do.

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:[b]
ps. totally unrelated, but have you ever seen "Conspiracy Theory"?[/b]

[i]Guardedly answering:[/i] Yes I did. Thought it was a good movie. (Mel Gibson, right? I like anything with him or Harrison Ford.)

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
MommaBear - I'm accustomed to you *thinking outside the box* (actually enjoy people who do that so well ) but this time you jumped right out of the warehouse on me. If you even suspect they wouldn't care - I'd like to strongly suggest that you consider home-schooling.

She's already homeschooling ;-)

Last year, a little girl with severe multiple allergies started school somewhere near Montreal. A list of foods to avoid was given to the parents, and there was an uproar. One journalist, whom I usually respect, took it upon himself to make the issue public and *request* that this little girl be kept out of the school settings, for the others' freedom. ARGH! So homebound schooling does exist here.

Now I'm the first to say that home is a better place to learn than school (and yes I homeschool), but I also believe that no one should be *pushed* out of a regular school for allergies issues. What kind of a message does it send to the kid in question? "You're defective and just not good enough for us". DUH!

(oh and I have stopped reading said journalist since then)

BTW, homebound schooling is more expensive for the state than homeschooling (which actually saves money). However, there is a legal obligation for homebound schooling that schools have to meet, while they can totally disinterest themselves from homeschooling. And that's not necessary a bad thing [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

[This message has been edited by darthcleo (edited November 05, 2003).]

Quote:Originally posted by darthcleo:
[b] She's already homeschooling ;-)

Last year, a little girl with severe multiple allergies started school somewhere near Montreal. A list of foods to avoid was given to the parents, and there was an uproar. One journalist, whom I usually respect, took it upon himself to make the issue public and *request* that this little girl be kept out of the school settings, for the others' freedom. ARGH! So homebound schooling does exist here.

Now I'm the first to say that home is a better place to learn than school (and yes I homeschool), but I also believe that no one should be *pushed* out of a regular school for allergies issues. What kind of a message does it send to the kid in question? "You're defective and just not good enough for us". DUH!

(oh and I have stopped reading said journalist since then)

BTW, homebound schooling is more expensive for the state than homeschooling (which actually saves money). However, there is a legal obligation for homebound schooling that schools have to meet, while they can totally disinterest themselves from homeschooling. And that's not necessary a bad thing [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

[This message has been edited by darthcleo (edited November 05, 2003).][/b]

how did i miss this??

worth re-raising to the TOP.

Simply re-raising to compliment other discussion on the board to-day.

In my original posts in this thread, I mentioned the distance one had to run in metres (which I don't know anything about). The article actually has them in feet. I've taken the whole part of the article about epinephrine out and here it is:-

Epinephrine:
Only 11/32 patients had been prescribed epinephrine. 4/11 had it "close by" at the time of reaction and one formulation was 2 years expired. It was difficult to determine the exact timing of epinephrine administration. Two patients died while running to get epinephrine that was within a 100-200 foot radius. Only 8/32 received epinephrine prior to arrival in the emergency room. One had refused to carry epinephrine despite a history of severe reactions and one felt that that they could not afford it.

I also think, personally, that the last line was important for other discussion going on on the board to-day as well, sad to say.

Best wishes! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

------------------