448 posts / 0 new
Last post
Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 2:47am
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Quote:Originally posted by erik:
[b]
Thanks for surfacing again Cayley's Mom.... you can always put my thoughts into words better than me. I should hire you as my personal speechwriter! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
[/b]
I hear there's a position opening up for Mayor pretty soon. You can have my vote. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
**********
Eric, you did raise a good point (somewhere...recently) that peanut bans are a useful tool in young grades. With staff properly trained, and the child being taught throughout their life, they are prepared by high school (or jr.high) to have staff still properly trained, and no longer need a ban.
I [i]personally[/i] would support any peanut ban in day care, kindergarten, and primary grades [i]as long as they are willing to take the same measure for another child's allergy if it is warrented[/i]. But this does not eliminate the need for properly trained and easily [b]immediately[/b] available staff. Any ban set up with that in mind has my full support.
I live in a society where we make alterations in our lives for other people. I may be up at 2:00 in the morning, but I don't blast my stereo because maybe my neighbour wants to sleep. I don't feel asking people to refrain from sending a certain food product to be eaten during a 6 - 8 hour period is to much to ask. I'm not asking them to never eat it or make a political statement and carry a sign. Just don't eat it in this place during this time.
If my son's school tells me they now have to ban eggs for some other student (one of the few foods my picky son will eat), well then, my son will have to either learn to like something else or he'll be coming home from school hungry. But I don't think he'll starve himself to death before he learns to like something else. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
[i] My son's school does ban peanuts, but not for my child. [/i]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 3:57am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b]
I [i]personally[/i] would support any peanut ban in day care, kindergarten, and primary grades [i]as long as they are willing to take the same measure for another child's allergy if it is warrented[/i]. [/b]
How do you support something if there is no way to enforce it?
How do you support something if there is no way to define it?

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 4:21am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

99.9% eric??
some thoughts:
So far, no one has been able to lay out PPP, SoC, or SOP to enforce a "Ban" or "Peanut Free", in the truest sense of the word.
But people have pointed to PPP, SoC, and SOP in this thread (and others) as being able to effect change and therefore reduce risk.
If, as you indicate, "Peanut Free"/"Ban" needs the policy behind it to effect a difference, and does not necessarily mean what it says......
then why the label?
is it an attempt by parents to "show the school who is boss" or establish expectations?
I *personally* understand why some schools are hesitant to use such labels [i]anywhere[/i]. They *in my personal opinion and personal situation* have a [b]valid[/b] argument and one that I see little, if any recourse in changing. I *personally* also rather have the PPP, SoC, or SOP than any label any day. Maybe it's just me, but I see it as a critical factor.
Again, to quote someone else on the board, I can just see the school saying:
"Make me."
Actually, going over some literature with school officials this week, (yes, this week) any such phrase: "Peanut Free" "Ban" was quickly nixed. No exceptions. (Has it not been mentioned by Canadian members on this board recently that some similiar sentiment has surfaced in Canada??----Correct me if I am wrong.)
This does not mean they (the school in our *personal, individual, and unique situation* are not willing to limit what [b]they[/b] provide. Or ask parents not to send certain products. Or educate. Or even consider increasing the amount of time the district nurse spends at a certain school, for a variety of reasons. We may even seeing eye to eye on where [b]medication[/b] could be kept. As a matter of interest, I was told money for [b]three[/b] more nurses was recently appropriated. Of course, these examples is not all encompassing of accomodations I can forsee. But, hey, it's a start, isn't it?
In the end, I may decide it would be more appropriate to continue to homeschool.
Asking a school to do what I *personally* see them having legitamate reason to deny, over and over again is detrimental and counterproductive to my cause, in my *personal, unique, and individual situation*.
My thinking has nothing to do with thinking persons may "put their guard down" because of such a label. This because I *personally* don't think it has significant efficacy to begin with when certain PPP, SoC, and SOP are in place and enforceable.
MommaBear [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/cool.gif[/img]
Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 4:24am
Codyman's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/14/2002 - 09:00

Why do some people worry about peanut oil in laundry detergent and others buy sunbutter or peabutter, that looks like peanut butter?
I understand different comfort zones, guess I don't worry about every product. Some I never think twice about like detergent!! Has anyone had an anaphylaxis reaction to detergent due to peanut oil in the product???

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 4:25am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

99.9% eric??
some thoughts:
So far, no one has been able to lay out PPP, SoC, or SOP to enforce a "Ban" or "Peanut Free", in the truest sense of the word or even any word at all.
But people have pointed to PPP, SoC, and SOP in this thread (and others) as being able to effect change and therefore reduce risk.
If, as you indicate, "Peanut Free"/"Ban" needs the policy behind it to effect a difference, and does not necessarily mean what it says......
then why the label?
is it an attempt by parents to "show the school who is boss" or establish expectations?
I *personally* understand why some schools are hesitant to use such labels [i]anywhere[/i]. They *in my personal opinion and personal situation* have a [b]valid[/b] argument and one that I see little, if any recourse in changing. I *personally* also rather have the PPP, SoC, or SOP than any label any day. Maybe it's just me, but I see it as a critical factor.
Again, to quote someone else on the board, I can just see the school saying:
"Make me."
Actually, going over some literature with school officials this week, (yes, this week) any such phrase: "Peanut Free" "Ban" was quickly nixed. No exceptions. (Has it not been mentioned by Canadian members on this board recently that some similiar sentiment has surfaced in Canada??----Correct me if I am wrong.)
This does not mean they (the school in our *personal, individual, and unique situation* are not willing to limit what [b]they[/b] provide. Or ask parents not to send certain products. Or educate. Or even consider increasing the amount of time the district nurse spends at a certain school, for a variety of reasons. We may even seeing eye to eye on where [b]medication[/b] could be kept. As a matter of interest, I was told money for [b]three[/b] more nurses was recently appropriated. Of course, these examples is not all encompassing of accomodations I can forsee. But, hey, it's a start, isn't it?
In the end, I may decide it would be more appropriate to continue to homeschool my son.
Asking a school to do what I *personally* see them having legitamate reason to deny, over and over again is detrimental and counterproductive to my cause, in my *personal, unique, and individual situation*.
My thinking has nothing to do with thinking persons may "put their guard down" because of such a label. This because I *personally* don't think it has significant efficacy to begin with when certain PPP, SoC, and SOP are in place and enforceable.
MommaBear [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/cool.gif[/img]
Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form.
edit to add "my son".
[This message has been edited by MommaBear (edited June 05, 2003).]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 4:28am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by erik:
[b]I agree that this is a key point. A "peanut-free" school is not a guarantee as I have written countless times. But by keeping 99.9% or more of peanut products out of the school it does vastly reduce the chances of a reaction. [/b]
99.9%?
Does this constitute a definition or expectation of the phrase "peanut-free"?

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 4:49am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Hi Momma Bear,
Welcome back... I hope Gail will join us again too with her words of wisdom [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] How do you support something if there is no way to enforce it?[/b]
But we do have a way to enforce it. The staff check for peanut products, and if anyone does bring them in, they are not permitted to eat it. Here is a basic description on how the peanut ban is enforced at Cayley's Mom's daughter's school:
Quote:originally posted by Cayley's Mom
[b]the staff is told to intercept peanut products and has food for the student to replace such a sandwich [/b]
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]How do you support something if there is no way to define it?[/b]
I think Cayley's Mom defined it well when she stated that a peanut-free classroom/school is a classroom/school where the students do not bring peanut products with them from home.
Quote:originally posted by Cayley's Mom
[b]you vastly reduce the chances of having a reaction if kids do not bring drippy peanut butter sandwiches or crumbly peanut butter cookies to school every day... Although, in Cayley's school's 5th year of being peanut-free, I can't imagine a PB sandwich or cookie being sent in - but the staff still watches for it, in any case[/b]
And I believe it is realistically achievable to ban peanuts, as Carolyn [b][i] can't even imagine[/b][/i]a PB sandwich or cookie being sent in after all these years of successful compliance with the peanut ban. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 5:07am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]If, as you indicate, "Peanut Free"/"Ban" needs the policy behind it to effect a difference, and does not necessarily mean what it says...... then why the label?
is it an attempt by parents to "show the school who is boss" or establish expectations?[/b]
Everyone uses labels in this world. Yuppie (young urban professional). Nimby (not in my backyard). We use these terms to make it easier to refer to a specific concept than having to describe it in detail. We say a restaurant is "smoke-free". This is much easier than saying the restaurant "does not allow the consumption of any tobacco product such as cigarettes or cigars or chewing tobacco on its premises at any time due to the risk of second hand exposure to smoke which could result in illness to our restaurant patrons........ etc. etc.". The shorter terminology makes it easier for us to refer to a more complex situation and saves time. Everyone does this... you also do this by referring to concepts (PPP, SoC) by abbreviation as it is much simpler than trying to explain the entire concept every time you refer to it. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]I *personally* understand why some schools are hesitant to use such labels [i]anywhere[/i]. I *personally* also rather have the PPP, SoC, or SOP than any label any day. Maybe it's just me, but I see it as a critical factor.[/b]
If I could only have a "peanut-free" label or a PPP, SoC, I would also rather have the substance (POP, SoC) than the "peanut-free" label with nothing behind it. But why not have BOTH? If you have a successful POP, SoC, in some cases the peanut ban could be added on as well. I don't see why you can only have one or the other.. why not both? I don't see them as being mutually exclusive.
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]Again, to quote someone else on the board, I can just see the school saying:
"Make me."[/b]
That's not the experience we have had with schools in Ontario. Most schools in Ontario have been quite receptive to the idea of peanut bans, as I read on the Touche Bakery website that over 60% of Canadian schools and daycares are "peanut-free" as of 2001.
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]Actually, going over some literature with school officials this week, (yes, this week) any such phrase: "Peanut Free" "Ban" was quickly nixed. No exceptions. (Has it not been mentioned by Canadian members on this board recently that some similiar sentiment has surfaced in Canada??----Correct me if I am wrong.) [/b]
Arachide had mentioned that in Montreal, some schools had been changing the term from "peanut-free" to other term such as "reduce the risk". However, even if some schools are changing the term from "peanut-free" to another term such as "reduce the risk", the situation is still the same as there is still a peanut ban - it is just a cosmetic name change that is occurring. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]Of course, these examples is not all encompassing of accomodations I can forsee. But, hey, it's a start, isn't it?[/b]
I am quite pleased to hear that you are making some progress. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img] I wish you well in getting that school to be safe for your children. And even if you do not have a peanut ban, you can still have a safe school as you do not need a peanut ban in order to be safe. But I just think it would make it easier IMO. But everyone has a personal, unique, and individual situation and in your case it seems that a peanut ban would not be in the cards as a efficate solution.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 5:13am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] 99.9%?
Does this constitute a definition or expectation of the phrase "peanut-free"?
[/b]
The ideal situation would be that a peanut-free school would be 100% free of peanuts. But everyone realizes we are just human, and we are not perfect. So even though we strive for 100% compliance, and Cayley's Mom even stated that [i]in Cayley's school's 5th year of being peanut-free, I can't imagine a PB sandwich or cookie being sent in[/i], we are realistic enough to know that there will be an occasional lapse which is why I specified 99.9% rather than 100%.
Note: I a not claiming that the "average" peanut-free school in Ontario keeps peanut products out of the classroom 99.9% of the time. I am just stating that peanut-free schools in Ontario that follow the proper procedues (such as Cayley's) do have a very high compliance rate that can never be guaranteed to be 100%, but can be pretty darn close to it. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 5:16am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b] I hear there's a position opening up for Mayor pretty soon. You can have my vote. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
[/b]
I have no interest in that position. I could nominate you? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]
Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b]I [i]personally[/i] would support any peanut ban in day care, kindergarten, and primary grades [i]as long as they are willing to take the same measure for another child's allergy if it is warrented[/i]. But this does not eliminate the need for properly trained and easily immediately available staff. Any ban set up with that in mind has my full support.[/b]
Yes, it is the primary school children who need the ban. Older kids will be fine. Your psoting makes perfect sense to me. You have my vote! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 5:25am
anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/28/2009 - 16:42

[i]Vigilance is the only way to prevent a reaction, and sometimes even that is undermined by unfortunate circumstances. [b]However, a peanut-free school is not being touted here as the be-all and end-all of safe schools.[/b] It is a tool to help keep students safe - a cog in the allergy aware wheel, if you will.[/i]
Dum de dum... just posting this again while sitting in my Thoughtful Spot because I think it bears directly on the "99.9%" statement in a way that makes it clearly [i]not necessary[/i] for a percentage to be used. A cog in the wheel is only that - a cog. It's not a singular guarantee, nor is it meant to be, so percentages are moot. A cog can't work without all the other cogs plugging away, can it?
A peanut ban means "no peanuts allowed" and "reduce the risk". Frankly, I do not know any parents of PA children who would expect "peanut ban" to guarantee safety, nor can it ever. We get it, MommaBear!! [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
Carolyn

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 6:25am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by Cayley's Mom:
[b] A cog can't work without all the other cogs plugging away, can it? [/b]
A good point. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
COG: A tenon (a projection on the end of a piece of wood shaped for insertion into a mortise (a usually rectangular cavity in a piece of wood, stone, or other material, prepared to receive a tenon and thus form a joint)) projecting from a wooden beam designed to fit into an opening in another beam to form a joint.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 6:28am
williamsmummy's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2002 - 09:00

Have just come from 'mom of William's thread'.
Makes all I have encountered seem tame in comparison!!!
Her main problem is the lack of complete understanding/ caring that peanuts have the capacity to kill her child.
Perhaps too many horrid peanut shells have fallen in their ears,..... may they choke on their crunchy nut butter , better yet stung by a thousand bees so they get a little taste of what it feels like, thats what I hope!!!
I am of the opinon that for the majority of schools the combination of nut bans and education does work.
Williams school is allergy aware now.
But only, (cynically from my view) ,AFTER my son ended up in casualty.
My head teacher asked me if I wanted a nut ban, my allergy consultant asked if my sons school could become nut free.
I thought about it, and realised that the doc does not live with the day to day responsiblity of parenting a child with allergy.
The teacher does not live with it either, both had No idea , IMO of what a total nut ban would mean, the work that would be needed day after day.
I settled for a reminder in the school newsletter that there were children with a nut allergy in school and could parents refrain from bringing peanuts in to schools in snacks and packed lunches?.
Our local school catering company had already banned nuts from its menus, but of course william is just as allergic to all beans, eggs etc, so could not have school meals.
Then I started leaving videos, trainer epei -pens, talking to school meals supervisors, class room assistants. Making sure that I built up a good relationship with each class teacher. Even other mothers have become my allies in this, mentioning the steps that the teachers take to help william avoid contact with his allergens in leesons . It wonderful how mothers support(spy!!) for each other sometimes.!
A 'reduce the risk' attitude from school staff is a more possitive sign that allergy is understood , and accepted within a school.
That they understand that although my son is like every other child in the classroom, there is just the simple common sense need to keep him away from food that is safe for others, but a killer for him.
sarah,
who must apologise for the poor english and of course the bad spelling, but is now too tired to do anything , but has to drag unwilling body to ironing board and thump out a few shirts etc. Very tired on the go since 6.30 thisd morning............wish I could sleep for a blooming year.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 6:56am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by erik:
[b] Yes, it is the primary school children who need the ban. Older kids will be fine. Your psoting makes perfect sense to me. [/b]
Actually, I'm not sure if data supports this statement. In the Sampson study, age (teen age, specifically)is cited as a risk factor... most allergic reaction occur in teen agers. And I recall that the majority of these reactions (in teen agers)occurred in school.
I hope someone will correct my recollection if wrong.
Gail

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 6:59am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] Asking a school to do what I *personally* see them having legitamate reason to deny, over and over again is detrimental and counterproductive to my cause, in my *personal, unique, and individual situation*.
My thinking has nothing to do with thinking persons may "put their guard down" because of such a label. This because I *personally* don't think it has significant efficacy to begin with when certain PPP, SoC, and SOP are in place and enforceable.
[/b]
I agree.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 7:00am
anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/28/2009 - 16:42

You're probably right, Gail, as teens are inherently risk-takers. I would say that teens would be less vigilant about their allergy - indeed, another statistic that I can't quite put my finger on is that teens and young adults are over-represented as far as anaphylaxis deaths go. How many of us, deadly food allergy aside, have taken risks with our safety to appear "cool" to our peer group?
I don't think a ban would help these risk-takers, because a ban is nothing without vigilance, also. A ban for young children - who are very messy eaters, for one thing (!) - is a safety step, just as we don't put Bunsen burners in kindergarten classroom either.
Carolyn [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 7:07am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by Gail W:
[b] Actually, I'm not sure if data supports this statement. In the Sampson study, age (teen age, specifically)is cited as a risk factor... most allergic reaction occur in teen agers. And I recall that the majority of these reactions (in teen agers)occurred in school. [/b]
Hi Gail,
I don't think a peanut ban is required for teenagers. At that age, they should be able to avoid peanut products in schools without a peanut ban.
I believe teenagers tend to rebel and they also tend to take risks and may be in denial about the severity of their peanut allergy. The teenage years are the time of risk taking behavior for many. I believe these points are important. Many teenagers may try to hide their allergy from other students as they won't want other kids to think they are afraid of peanuts (teenagers are not supposed to be afraid of anything). Tennagers think they are [b]immortal[/b].. that's why they begin smoking (plus peer pressure)as they don't believe they could ever get lung cancer. So they may downplay the severity of their PA and take risks.
A peanut ban in schools is something I would consider important for younger children. But I do not feel it is something a teenager needs. At this age it is good for him to prepare for the adult world where there are no peanut bans as he is becoming a young adult.
In my case, I never had a reaction at school. My reactions were all at home or outside of the home and mainly due to cross contamination in baked goods.
edited to add:
To clarify, I never had a reaction begin in my home. They always began outside of the home (but never at school).
[This message has been edited by erik (edited June 05, 2003).]

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 8:22am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by erik:
[b]I hope Gail will join us again too with her words of wisdom [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img] [/b]
Just saw this... thanks, eric!
I think I understand your point(s), Carolyn's too, on age-appropriateness... it was just the "older kids will be fine" statement that I thought needed some elaboration/perspective for readers here. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
[i]BTW, completely OT (sorta), I accompanied Mariah on 2 field trips this week. (yes, two in one week [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/rolleyes.gif[/img] ) I decided to challenge the school's procedure that Mariah sit in one designated bus seat that the teacher cleans. On each day I wrote a note saying that I would take responsibility for cleaning the seat, took the cleaning supplies, and then did [b]not [/b]clean the seat. Then I allowed her to roam from seat to seat with her friends. At one point the teacher needed some reassurance (i.e. that I was accepting responsibility for any consequences). It was fine and Mariah had a great time. [b]Six field trips [/b]this year! Thank goodness they are now over! [/i]
Gail

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 8:58am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by erik:
[b] The teenage years are the time of risk taking behavior for many. [/b]
I never rebelled at any age.
I have never been a "risk taker". Ever.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 9:09am
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]
Asking a school to do what I *personally* see them having legitamate reason to deny, over and over again is detrimental and counterproductive to my cause, in my *personal, unique, and individual situation*.
[/b]
Then don't ask for that MommaBear. Nobody is saying you are wrong. You are right, because you are talking about your situation.
I [i]obviously[/i] am not asking for any bans of anything. I do feel sometimes, for some people, it might be approriate.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 9:23am
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] I never rebelled at any age.
I have never been a "risk taker". Ever.
[/b]
That was true of my oldest son too. Right up until he developed allergies. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/rolleyes.gif[/img]
Wouldn't tell dentist about latex allergy (didn't want to bother him). Fortunately his reactions are not severe, but would he have acted differently if they were? I hope so, but I can't be 100% positive.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 9:26am
anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/28/2009 - 16:42

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] I never rebelled at any age.
I have never been a "risk taker". Ever.
[/b]
You, my dear, are an exception in many ways, so I'm not at all surprised. I rebelled and I still rebel to some extent. But, I'm also an inate rule follower so it's hard to for me to pursue things like peanut bans (but I have done it successfully at Cayley's nursery school). It's amazing the things we can pursue which contradict our personalities when our cubs are involved, isn't it? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
Carolyn
P.S. williamsmummy - the owner of Cayley's nursery school has since assisted many other preschools in going peanut-free. What a gem some people can turn out to be - she initially resisted the idea and turned out to be the greatest advocate for it I've ever met (without a personal reason for it).

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 9:41am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

originally posted by Cayley's Mom:
"the staff is told to intercept peanut products and has food for the student to replace such a sandwich"
I *personally* believe parents of such children in my school justifiably could object to this. I could be wrong.
I also think this may be counterproductive in my *personal, individual, and unique situation*. Don't want to shoot myself in the foot when I finally see the finish line. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
***************************
originally posted by Cayley's Mom:
"you vastly reduce the chances of having a reaction if kids do not bring drippy peanut butter sandwiches or crumbly peanut butter cookies to school every day..."
In the context this was posted, eric, are you trying to say PPP, SoC, and SOP [b]without[/b] the label "Peanut Free" and/or "Ban" results in this???????? Over and over again, this is what I am hearing.
****************************
originally posted by eric:
"And I believe it is realistically achievable to ban peanuts"
If something is not 100% non-existent, I don't believe you can really call it a "Ban" or "Peanut Free". Wouldn't it have to be at least 99%, 95%, etc, to be "significantly banned"???
Aside from this, I *personally believe there is a growing realization of what "Peanut Free"/"Ban" entails among schools, and weather it is "realistically achievable" and quite possibly a collective voice refusing to apply the label within the context of a school. Don't know if I want to waste my valuable efforts and spend what is essentially a limited resource (time) on something I that may not be available for me to purchase anyway.
Most of all, I *personally* don't want to be depicted as [i]unreasonable[/i] and unable to "see things from the other side". Because that is just not me anyway. I believe in truth in advertising. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img] Tangerine sunset nails and all.
Ya know what hubby said about me recently? He said : "You're all you promised."
[i]I like.[/i]
Not to be cliche', but I never promised a rose garden either. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]
******************************
originally posted by eric:
"If I could only have a "peanut-free" label or a PPP, SoC, I would also rather have the substance (POP, SoC) than the "peanut-free" label with nothing behind it. But why not have BOTH?"
In my case?
Because I understand the school's hesitancy (refusal) to apply it. I respect that. I understand that. I think it works both ways. Hopefully.
Quite possibly if my physician re-examined the "peanut free"/ "Ban" issue, he quite possibly might have reservations in asking for it. Who knows, I could be wrong. If he truly feels such an environment is necessary at my son's current age, it might explain why he seems pleased with my choice to homeschool. Who knows, I could be wrong.
*****************************
originally posted by eric:
"However, even if some schools are changing the term from "peanut-free" to another term such as "reduce the risk", the situation is still the same as there is still a peanut ban - it is just a cosmetic name change that is occurring."
so why the fixation with the term "Peanut Free"/"Ban"? Again, is this an "ego" issue? A social politics issue? Why not apply the more accurate label, if having a label is so important? Does "Peanut Free" lend itself to indicating what (who) has the most influence on the classroom? (for example) Just trying to establish motivation.
***************************
originally posted erik:
"And even if you do not have a peanut ban, you can still have a safe school as you do not need a peanut ban in order to be safe. But I just think it would make it easier IMO."
[i]Easier for who[/i]? And why?
*****************************
Side note:
With regards to "Peanut Bans" in the younger grades, ie: preschool, in my [b]*personal, individual, and unique situation*[/b]:
My son's physician clearly did not recommend my son
PA/NUTS/Some other Legumes/ASTHMA/Atopic in general/Some special needs,
attend preschool (garden variety). Irregardless of any "accommodations" that could have been made. It was not considered a [i]necessity[/i] in light of the "big picture". I do not feel my son *in our personal, individual, unique situation* suffered for lack of it. It was a "Risk vs. Benefit" issue. But again, this is with respect to my *own-personal-individual-unique-situation* and no one else's.
Current comparison for my *own-personal-individual-unique-situation* and no one else's:
Summer Camp. (for example) I *personally* Can't justify it with Risk vs. Benefit where my son is concerned. My physician doesn't either. But that is just us. I do believe everyone, quite possibly, has limitations in some form or another. Not necessarily saying life is unfair, either. Just, quite possibly, unique?
MommaBear [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/cool.gif[/img]
Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 9:47am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

To those concerned:
Yes, I know there are multiple, multiple, spelling errors in my postings. Also mis-usage such as:
to-too
its-it's
weather-whether
your-you're
etc.......
Boy, glad I got that monkey off my back!

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 12:02pm
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

MommaBear, I chose not to send any of my kids to any type of pre-school. Debated about kindergarten and decided individually for each of them (they did all go, but it wasn't an automatic).
When I used the term pre-school, maybe I should have said day care. Here all of the day care centres are more like pre-schools (similar routines, learning not just playing). I was considering pre-schools where both parents have to work and the child has to be left in day care. Realistically not everybody can stay home with their kids and not everybody has family or friends to care for them.
Sorry for the confusion.

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 1:09pm
arachide's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/16/2000 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]
I do believe everyone, quite possibly, has limitations in some form or another. Not necessarily saying life is unfair, either. Just, quite possibly, unique?
[/b]
Bang on! There are a lot of things I'd love to try in life but can't, either because I'm nearsighted, or suffer from motion sickness, or am physically unable, or....
I worry a bit that our new allergy committee may make staff less "preoccupied" with dealing with allergy issues at school because they figure, "there's an allergy committee to handle this now..." Kinda like MB's argument about slapping a pnt-free label on a school?

Posted on: Thu, 06/05/2003 - 11:25pm
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Quote:Originally posted by arachide:
[b]I worry a bit that our new allergy committee may make staff less "preoccupied" with dealing with allergy issues at school because they figure, "there's an allergy committee to handle this now..."
[/b]
Part of the allergy committees responsibility should be to make sure this doesn't happen. Does anyone from the committee attend staff meetings? If it is a staff member on the committee attending staff meetings make sure you get minutes of the meetings to ensure that they are discussing all things pertinent to the children with allergies. And if staff meetings don't actually have minutes (I'm not sure how formal they are) then have them document what is said with respect to allergy concerns.

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 2:46am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:originally posted by Cayley's Mom:
"the staff is told to intercept peanut products and has food for the student to replace such a sandwich"
originally posted by Momma Bear:
I *personally* believe parents of such children in my school justifiably could object to this. I could be wrong.
As I have mentioned, I believe one solution may not fit all situations. What's good for the goose may not be good for the gander. What may work in Ontario (where peanut bans are commonplace) may not work in the USA (where peanut bans are treated with a greater degree of suspicion).
***************************
Quote:originally posted by Cayley's Mom:
"you vastly reduce the chances of having a reaction if kids do not bring drippy peanut butter sandwiches or crumbly peanut butter cookies to school every day..."
originally posted by Momma Bear:
In the context this was posted, eric, are you trying to say PPP, SoC, and SOP without the label "Peanut Free" and/or "Ban" results in this???????? Over and over again, this is what I am hearing.
No, Carolyn and myself are not saying that the label alone will prevent drippy peanut butter sandwiches and crumbly peanut butter cookies from appearing in schools. We are saying that restricting peanuts from the schools will keep these products (drippy peanut butter sandwiches and crumbly peanut butter cookies) out of the schools. You could have an amazing PPP, SoC, and SOP but if there is no restriction at all upon what products are allowed into the classroom, it is inevitable that some students will bring in drippy pb sandwiches and crumbly pb cookies, and the drips of pb and crumbs of pb that will get deposited in the classroom will increase the risk, although good cleaning procedures will help to eliminate the problem. But restricting the peanut products such as these adds an extra level of safety and redundancy to the situation. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
****************************
Quote:originally posted by erik:
"And I believe it is realistically achievable to ban peanuts"
originally posted by Momma Bear:
If something is not 100% non-existent, I don't believe you can really call it a "Ban" or "Peanut Free". Wouldn't it have to be at least 99%, 95%, etc, to be "significantly banned"???
I disagree. Smoking is banned from schools here, but if a parent walks into a school and lights up a cigarette and begins to smoke, the teachers will rush over and tell the parent that this is not permitted and inform them they must stop smoking immediately. But does this mean we can not call the "smoking ban" a ban just because an individual lit up a cigarette in that environment? I do not think the smoking ban is now null and void due to this action. A ban means that something is restricted, and that when violations to this restriction occur, they are properly dealt with. A violation does not mean it is no longer a ban. The government bans driving your car over 100 km/hour, but if someone breaks the speed limit does this does it mean the ban no longer exists?
Quote:originally posted by Momma Bear:
Don't know if I want to waste my valuable efforts and spend what is essentially a limited resource (time) on something I that may not be available for me to purchase anyway.
Yes, in your *personal* situation a ban is not in the cards, so I agree it would be a waste of time at this moment to try to have one. Everyone's situation is different. What works for Cayley's Mom may not work for Anna Marie, and what works for Anna Marie may not work for Gail...... etc... so I agree you should not waste your time on something that you are certain would not work for you at this moment.
Quote:originally posted by Momma Bear:
Not to be cliche', but I never promised a rose garden either.
You should talk to Syd's Mom then.. she is quite a good gardener... I am sure she has some tips on growing roses [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
******************************
Quote:originally posted by eric:
"If I could only have a "peanut-free" label or a PPP, SoC, I would also rather have the substance (POP, SoC) than the "peanut-free" label with nothing behind it. But why not have BOTH?"
originally posted by Momma Bear:
In my case?
Actually, I think Cayley's Mom and myself realize it may not be in the cards for you at the present moment. But my point was for those that this may be in the cards for, why not? If Cayley's Mom can both restrict peanuts and have policies and procedures and training in place to protect her daughter at the school, why not have both? What possible harm could restricting peanut products from the classroom possibly do to the PA child's welfare?
Quote:originally posted by Momma Bear:
Quite possibly if my physician re-examined the "peanut free"/ "Ban" issue, he quite possibly might have reservations in asking for it. If he truly feels such an environment is necessary at my son's current age, it might explain why he seems pleased with my choice to homeschool.
Yes, at the pre-school age kids share everything, make a mess when they eat... if there are peanut products around I am quite sure it would be extra dangerous. I am sure your physician would welcome home schooling as a good way to keep your pre-school child safe from exposure to peanut products. But as Cayley's Mom once wrote, what about those for whom home schooling is not an option - the schools are obligated to accomodate their needs as well (in Ontario anyway).
*****************************
Quote:originally posted by erik:
"However, even if some schools are changing the term from "peanut-free" to another term such as "reduce the risk", the situation is still the same as there is still a peanut ban - it is just a cosmetic name change that is occurring."
originally posted by Momma Bear:
so why the fixation with the term "Peanut Free"/"Ban"? Again, is this an "ego" issue? A social politics issue? Why not apply the more accurate label, if having a label is so important? Does "Peanut Free" lend itself to indicating what (who) has the most influence on the classroom? (for example) Just trying to establish motivation.
A social politics issue? hmm.. I can't answer that - need to call in our resident social politics expert (Cayley's Mom) in order to answer that query. Why not apply a more accurate label (ie: reduce the risk?). My *guess* would be because most Ontarians realize that a peanut-free school does not mean that it is physically impossible to get a peanut into the school. Just like most FAA (or Transport Canada) officials realize that it is not physically impossible to get a weapon (even a gun) on an airplane too. You can never have absolute perfection when dealing with human beings. As for me, if they want to call the classroom "reduce the risk" it's ok with me. I don't feel it is worth the time to fight over the specific term that we use, as it is more important what the term actually represents. A name is just a name is just a name.
***************************
Quote:originally posted erik:
"And even if you do not have a peanut ban, you can still have a safe school as you do not need a peanut ban in order to be safe. But I just think it would make it easier IMO."
originally posted by Momma Bear:
Easier for who? And why?
It would be easier for the parents of the PA child. They would not have to worry as much that their child may possibly be exposed to a peanut product if these types of products were restricted from the classroom. A reaction needs an the presence of an allergen in order to occur. And the teachers would not worry as much about scrubbing down desks, doorknobs, etc for hours to eliminate traces of peanut residue.
*****************************
Quote:orginally posted by Momma Bear:
Summer Camp. (for example) I *personally* Can't justify it with Risk vs. Benefit where my son is concerned. My physician doesn't either. But that is just us. I do believe everyone, quite possibly, has limitations in some form or another. Not necessarily saying life is unfair, either. Just, quite possibly, unique?
I did attend summer camp as a child (at about 9 years old I believe). Camp Kelso in Milton ON. It was a day camp (not overnight). I attended for 2 summers. It was not peanut-free and I had no epi-pen (this was the 1970s after all). I was fine. I believe we can live quite a normal life with PA and there may be some things I miss out on (eating at a Thai restaurant) but in general, I feel I do not miss out on much of anything of importance, and I do not think that PA children should be excluded from too much either. I feel it is not that difficult to manage my allergy. Although I do believe camp could be dangerous so I would understand why parents would keep a PA child from going to camp - as an example, many years ago an Ontario teenage girl died on a camping trip to Algonquin Park due to a trace of peanut residue in her sandwich from a knife that had been cleaned, but still had a trace of peanut residue on it from a peanut butter sandwich

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 3:07am
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Overall, I don't feel the name is important. I don't care if there is a name. But, I shy away from *reduce the risk*. It says and means nothing about allergy. [i]Reducing the risk[/i] of any type of injury should be automatic in schools.
I'm voting for *allergy aware*.

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 3:12am
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Sorry, double post. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/redface.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by AnnaMarie (edited June 06, 2003).]

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 3:37am
anonymous's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/28/2009 - 16:42

Social politics expert, Erik?! Moi? LOL! You and my mom should talk sometimes - she wants me to write a political commentary column for a living (except when she disagrees with my opinions, of course). [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]
Anyway, for me the school's motivation for "peanut-free" is not power, or "I made you bend", but simply extra safety for allergic students couched in clear terminology (peanut-free = smoke-free as in "no peanuts allowed"). I can't remember if I mentioned that Cayley's school has been peanut-free since the year she was born - certainly before peanut allergy had any effect whatsoever on my life. I remembered thinking "how kind that the school is willing to go so far to keep those children safe!". My son attended that school, so it meant no more PB sandwiches, our old standby, but no big whoop. I don't think I was in the minority with that line of thinking, either.
A posted this plan below almost 3 years ago. My sister teaches in a school in a large city which is called "Nut Aware". Although peanuts/nuts aren't banned, per se, the discouragement is quite obvious. I'll post the plan here, for any comments or questions you might have. I particularly liked the way the teachers got the students on board through brainstorming for ideas to keep their fellow students safe. Kind of like the student who says "Mom! You can't send that juice box for my lunch today - it's 'litterless lunch' day". Students will often help other students before parents will help the children of other parents, sadly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is not an actual plan, because this school has decided to do this on their own, without following any sort of School Board guidelines. My sister gave me the following information:
There are signs posted at the front entrance and on each classroom door:
THIS IS AN ALLERGY AWARE SCHOOL - NO PEANUT PRODUCTS PLEASE
The principal called a staff meeting and handed each teacher a copy of "Anaphylaxis in Schools" (a US school might use something from FAN instead).
He presented the issue of PA and other allergies in a very serious light. At this point the teachers were given Epipen trainers to practice with.
The teachers were then asked to present the issue of PA and other allergies to their classroom. They were to "brainstorm" ideas for alternative snacks - this got the children very involved right from the start. The kids were taught to wash their hands after lunch and recess and a different child each day had the responsibility of washing the desks with soap after lunch. They were taught to open snacks outside, thus eliminating "airborne" issues, or residue on the handrails or doorknobs.
The children who need Epipens have their pictures posted in the staffroom, the main office (in a discreet location to protect privacy) and the nurses office. The nurses office is where the extra Epipen is kept, right beside the child's picture. Teachers who have allergic children in their class keep a kit in their desk in the classroom, containing the Epipen, antihistamine, salve or anything else the child might require.
Every teacher has a booklet in a prominent location on their desk called THE ALLERGY EMERGENCY BOOKLET. It has the anaphylaxis report in it, as well as emergency procedures, etc.
I hope this has been helpful to you. Good luck!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the link to the above thread: [url="http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/000221.html"]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/000221.html[/url]
Carolyn [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
P.S. MommaBear, I know your eyes jess 'bout popped outta your haid when you saw "the nurse's office" written up in the plan. This may simply mean "the medical office" where students go to lay down when they have a tummy boo-boo - it may not mean it's actually staffed with a nurse. Remain calm, and when I speak to my sister tomorrow (we're going to visit for the weekend) I will ask more about this anomalous reference and report back to this thread ASAP. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 5:11am
McKenziesMom's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/05/2001 - 09:00

I'm NOT a debater, but this "PEANUT-FREE" thing interests me because I look at it differently. At my DD's school, there are signs on all the exterior doors with a big peanut with a big red X through it, that says PEANUT FREE. (There is also another one, saying NO LATEX products). I never took it to mean that there were no peanuts or latex in the school. I took it to mean that these products should NOT be brought into the school. These signs are on all 6 sets of entrance doors. There are then signs outside each of the classrooms with an allergic child, stating the same thing. And every news letter has a reminder for parents about peanut and latex allergies.
Nowhere is there a sign that says "GUARANTEED PEANUT-FREE".
I would never ask for a GUARANTEE. I just ask that the school makes a sincere effort to limit the risk. And so far, we've had 8 years of NO reaction at school, so I think it works.
I'm sure someone already has said it, but in primary school, you have to keep things SIMPLE and PEANUT-FREE is a lot easier for KIDS to understand than "SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED RISK AREA"!!!!

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 5:29am
McKenziesMom's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/05/2001 - 09:00

I'm NOT a debater, but this "PEANUT-FREE" thing interests me because I look at it differently. At my DD's school, there are signs on all the exterior doors with a big peanut with a big red X through it, that says PEANUT FREE. (There is also another one, saying NO LATEX products). I never took it to mean that there were no peanuts or latex in the school. I took it to mean that these products should NOT be brought into the school. These signs are on all 6 sets of entrance doors. There are then signs outside each of the classrooms with an allergic child, stating the same thing. And every news letter has a reminder for parents about peanut and latex allergies.
Nowhere is there a sign that says "GUARANTEED PEANUT-FREE".
I would never ask for a GUARANTEE. I just ask that the school makes a sincere effort to limit the risk. And so far, we've had 8 years of NO reaction at school, so I think it works.
I'm sure someone already has said it, but in primary school, you have to keep things SIMPLE and PEANUT-FREE is a lot easier for KIDS to understand than "SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED RISK AREA"!!!!

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 6:33am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Erik,
the son I reference will be 8 in July. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 6:40am
McKenziesMom's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/05/2001 - 09:00

Hey ERIC, more coincidences!
I learned to ski at Glen Eden at Kelso. I think they had my picture on a wall as a hazard. I couldn't use the rope tow because it had no paddles, so my leather mitts couldn't grip and I kept sliding down the ropes, knocking over anyone behind me!
Then when I graduated to the bigger lifts, there was a railway track right at the bottom of the hill, so I'd always swerve to avoid it and again knock over everyone in the towline, waiting and minding their own business!
I used to swim and picnic at Kelso, I think there were no daycamps when I was a kid. And I used to pick apples at Chudleigh's, before they became a giant commercial empire!
Sounds like we shared an old stomping ground. I grew up in Oakville.
Okay, 'nuff said, has NOTHING to do with peanuts!
Just another strange coincidence!
Linda

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 6:51am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]the son I reference will be 8 in July. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img][/b]
Happy Birthday! Will you be baking a peanut-free cake, perhaps? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 6:55am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by erik:
[b] Happy Birthday! Will you be baking a peanut-free cake, perhaps? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img][/b]
More like buy him the world. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
Thank goodness he and his brother share well.

Posted on: Fri, 06/06/2003 - 7:02am
erik's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by McKenziesMom:
[b]I couldn't use the rope tow because it had no paddles, so my leather mitts couldn't grip and I kept sliding down the ropes, knocking over anyone behind me!
Sounds like we shared an old stomping ground. I grew up in Oakville.[/b]
Hi Linda,
That's funny! haha I can imagine the domino effect as you knocked down the other kids! Well, I am sure you're a better skiier than me anyway...
It was a day camp called "Camp Kelso" and we did all the fun stuff.. a way for my Mom to get a couple of weeks of freedom from my brother and I in the middle of the summer, plus we had fun too. I was lucky to not get any poison ivy (unlike a few of the other kids).
I still love that area... my friends and I go hiking up there in all the conservation areas (Rattlesnake Point, Mt. Nemo, Crawford Lake, Kelso...).. it is a great place for hiking not too far from the city.. ( [url="http://www.hrca.on.ca"]http://www.hrca.on.ca[/url] ) [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
I grew up near to Oakville... in the Sheridan Homelands neighbourhood by Winston Churchill Blvd and Dundas Street (highway 5). The area along Dundas has really changed a lot since the old days (the farmland has been replaced by residential and retail developments).
I was just talking to Anna Marie about Oakville last week, as she thought all of the drive-in theatres were gone, but I told her about the "5 Drive-In" ( [url="http://www.5drivein.com/homepage.asp"]http://www.5drivein.com/homepage.asp[/url] ).
Well, I guess I've veered off-topic long enough - now, back to your regularly scheduled thread [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by erik (edited June 06, 2003).]

Posted on: Wed, 06/11/2003 - 4:51am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b]... what a fabulous idea! Is there a way anyone with children could get their schools to co-operate with this? The parents here could start a thread listing reactions that occurred at school, and listing whether peanuts are banned in school/class/not at all, etc. But that would include only their own children. Some schools have more than one pa child.
If people think this is a good idea we can start a new thread, or, if rather than a thread you would prefer graphable info, I'm willing to set up an e-mail account and keep track.
[i]If I'm chasing my tail again, just tap me on the nose and send me back to the thinking chair[/i].[/b]
AnnaMarie,
I thought your offer to do this was very generous. I'm thinking that this is a vast undertaking that, ideally, could be centralized through Anaphylaxis Canada and FAAN. I would like to see FAAN and AC do a better job of [i]requesting[/i] information about reactions, discrimination, teasing, etc.
Just wondering if you had contemplated this any further in your "thinking chair" and came up with any other ideas...
Gail

Posted on: Fri, 07/18/2003 - 8:38am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

reraising for Tando.

Posted on: Sun, 07/20/2003 - 7:56pm
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Apparently this thread has somehow missed my detection lately. Go figure [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]
Gail, actually, no I haven't been thinking about my past offer. As you may (or may not) know, my son who's in school does not have any food allergies (just bugs). I was offering to try to set something up if the pa parents wanted it, but, at the time none seemed interested.
****************
Raised to further some discussion with Cindy. I hope you understand, I'm moving here to avoid upsetting people by go off topic. Not sure it's actually going to be a debate though, more that I'm looking for clarification.
Alt to M said in another thread:
[b]Anna Marie, in referencing the TDSB policy, no PA students do not have the *right* to a "peanut free" school. However, they do have a *right* to a "peanut free" classroom.
The same as with your previous posts:-
A "milk free" classroom
A "chicken free" classroom
A "red dye free" classroom
Throughout the province of Ontario, whether a school goes "peanut free" (that would also include "peanut safe", "reduce the risk") is entirely up to the principal of the school (and I'm sure that principal in consultation with the school board and the superintendent in charge of health *issues*).
I truly believe that "peanut free" classrooms and schools are more common because it has only been documented that PA children have DIED in school.So, I think that's why "peanut free" is more common and more heard about than say "milk free".
[/b]
Question #1: Where does it say in Ontario that students have a right to an allergen free classroom? (I'm assuming not TDSB document because you are talking about the whole province.)
Question #2: Where does this info come from [b] Also, the thing with peanut residue and it's lifespan (i.e., six months on a surface that HAS been cleaned). [/b]
*************
I am asking these questions because I truly want to know. Seems silly to have to say this, but there are no ulterior motives.

Posted on: Sun, 07/20/2003 - 11:15pm
tando's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/13/2003 - 09:00

MB
Thanks for raising.
On your point of the drowning child in the river, I think you've missed a key link in the logic of your legality question. Responsibility. Is the the "adult" who fails to save the child the lifeguard? Is the child otherwise in the adult's charge? Is this a mere bystander?
What are the conditions of the river? Is it storm swollen? Is there a fast current or undertow? Or is this a designated swimming area?
All of these circumstances would impact the question. Also, I think more physical skill and risk are involved in leaping into a river to save a child than injecting an epipen or changing a menu and food preparation SOPs.
Having said that, I wasn't arguing for mandates or legislation in the other thread. I was simply stating that in the "higher" (morally, ethically, socially, coompassionate, whatever higher would mean) society, people would be internally driven to accommodate others needs.
To answer your question, will I go out on a limb and say this society doesn't exist now? As a whole, no, this isn't the society I live in -- but there are many individuals in our society that are this way, at least some of the time.
T.

Posted on: Sun, 07/20/2003 - 11:31pm
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Tando,
Thank you for replying. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]
I guess (with regards to "responsibility") it may depend on what you are employed to do.
Chances are, you might be surprised to learn what people can are entitled to refuse. Based on Moral/Ethical principles even. Many times, this is [i]for the protection[/i] of the protectee.
Would you say that such refusal can be instrumental in developing PPP and SoP?
[i]free association at work here:[/i] Would you say "designated swimming areas" with lifeguard(s)have a higher level of "responsibility" (moral/ethical issues aside) than those that don't?
MommaBear [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
? "responsibility" = "duty" ?

Posted on: Sun, 07/20/2003 - 11:56pm
Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified)

Hope this isn't a private discussion.
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]I guess (with regards to "responsibility") it may depend on what you are employed to do.
Chances are, you might be surprised to learn what people can are entitled to refuse. Based on Moral/Ethical principles even. Many times, this is [i]for the protection[/i] of the protectee.[/b]
[i]Sounds familiar![/i] Actually, I wouldn't be surprised. Discussions with my son regarding responsibilities due to his training. [i]This comment actually is on topic[/i]. Previously there was a thread regarding whether or not ambulances or fire trucks had epi-pens. In my city ambulances - yes; fire trucks -no. Why? Because all though fire trucks may be the first to answer a 911 call [b]they are not trained to diagnose anaphylactic reactions[/b] so they cannot give epinephrine. Therefore, for the protection of the protectee, they can refuse to administer an epi-pen.
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]Would you say that such refusal can be instrumental in developing PPP and SoP?[/b]
Yes. IMPO
Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b][i]free association at work here:[/i] Would you say "designated swimming areas" with lifeguard(s)have a higher level of "responsibility" (moral/ethical issues aside) than those that don't?
[/b]
Yes. IMPO

Posted on: Mon, 07/21/2003 - 12:17am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by AnnaMarie:
[b]Hope this isn't a private discussion.
[/b]
[i]Not at all.[/i] [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
As long as you are prepared to buy a round. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/cool.gif[/img]

Posted on: Mon, 07/21/2003 - 12:25am
tando's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/13/2003 - 09:00

MB,
Yes, people have the right to refuse. And the injured party may refuse help (there's been some discussion of this in other threads, too).
The original thread was about the moral, ethical, social issues and the direction society may or may not evolve -- I find myself now off track. I'm going to stop here and retrace my steps.
I'll continue discussing the original thread if there's interest. ("Morals" thread)
T.

Posted on: Sat, 12/06/2003 - 1:45am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

reraising to compliment a thread in Media.

Pages

More Community Posts

Peanut Free and Nut Free Community

create a new community post
Latest Post by carrollavey8894446 Thu, 11/14/2019 - 5:31pm
Comments: 0
Latest Post by lillianaivr238753 Thu, 11/14/2019 - 3:22pm
Comments: 0
Latest Post by lillianaivr238753 Thu, 11/14/2019 - 3:22pm
Comments: 0
Latest Post by lillianaivr238753 Thu, 11/14/2019 - 3:22pm
Comments: 0
Latest Post by lillianaivr238753 Thu, 11/14/2019 - 3:22pm
Comments: 0
Latest Post by Italia38 Tue, 11/12/2019 - 2:43pm
Comments: 2
Latest Post by absfabs Mon, 11/11/2019 - 1:28pm
Comments: 2
Latest Post by absfabs Mon, 11/11/2019 - 1:23pm
Comments: 3
Latest Post by Italia38 Fri, 11/08/2019 - 12:10pm
Comments: 4
Latest Post by Italia38 Fri, 11/08/2019 - 11:47am
Comments: 6
Latest Post by sunshinestate Thu, 11/07/2019 - 3:43pm
Comments: 4

More Articles

For people who suffer from anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction that can result from an allergy to...

Anaphylactic shock (A-nuh-fih-LAK-tik shok): A severe and sometimes life-threatening immune system reaction to an antigen that a person has been...

In 1963 the American Medical Association designed a special symbol that would alert emergency medical personnel of special medical conditions when...

Finding allergy-free foods for an office potluck may seem impossible, but more options are available than you might think. Eating foods prepared...

One of the most difficult things for a parent to do is determine whether his or her toddler has a cold or a...

More Articles

More Articles

You no doubt have your own way of teaching people about your child’s food allergy, a way that suits your temperament, and style of communication....

Reliable peanut allergy statistics are not that easy to come by. There is a lot of available research on food allergies in general but not too...

Most people know that to enjoy whatever food safety accommodations an airline offers they need to inform the airline of their allergy prior to...

A 504 plan* documents food allergy accommodations agreed to by parents and their child’s school. Plans are typically created during a 504 meeting...

If there is a child at your children's school allergic to peanuts, the school probably discourages or may not allow peanut products to be brought...

If you are on a budget, but you need to wear some sort of notification that you have a peanut...

Unless we consciously carve out time for self-care, constant food allergy management can slowly erode our sense of well-being. Signs of allergy-...

Peanuts cause more severe food allergic reactions than other foods, followed by shellfish, fish, tree nuts and eggs. Although there is only a...

If you avoid peanuts, it’s likely you know the joy of cashews. Slightly sweet and smooth in texture, cashews provide not only relief to those with...

The prevalence of food allergy has dramatically increased over the past two to three decades, and not just among children. Preliminary results...

When someone in the family is diagnosed with a food allergy, a choice must be made whether to ban the problem food or foods from the home. The...

Looking for a fun way to share what you know about your own food allergies? Or are you hoping to educate the people around you in a fun way about...

According to the results of a new study, children lacking Vitamin D may be more susceptible to food allergies. Researchers working at the Albert...

If you or your child has a peanut or nut allergy, identifying the presence of nuts in food becomes a priority, but what if the written or spoken...

Soap allergies can cause a lot of discomfort and itching. If you suddenly develop a rash or bumps on your skin, you may suspect that you have an...