on Nov 14, 2012 @ 10:54 am|
I'm listening to a radio talk show that's in my area right now discussing this. This is the head line for the story.
A mother says she is being proactive and protective, others say she is crazy and gone too far. One mom wants trees torn down to protect kids from nut allergies. How far do we go to protect?
This is happening in Toronto and the tree's aren't on school property, but the nuts do fall onto it. The school already keeps the school ground clean just for her son. One listener that knows this story and lives in the area called in and said she's been asking the city for years to cut all of the tree's down. He said they would have to cut a city block of acorn tree's down for one child and it's crazy. Most people that have called into the show to give their opinion agree that cutting down all of these tree's is crazy. That she should have taught her child not to put things in his mouth long before he even started school. Experts have chimed in and said that just touching one of these nuts would not cause him to have an allergic reaction to the nuts and that the trees should stay put. What do you think, should we start cutting down ever nut tree out there just because a few people have an allergy to nuts? Or do you agree that this woman is going way to far? I think she going to far and would hate to see nut tree's removed just for a few.
|really depends on Nov 14, 2012 @ 11:47 am|
I have a friend whose child has a near-lethal peanut allergy. While it's true that simply touching the peanut will not trigger his allergy, if he doesn't wash his hands between touching the nut and then later eating his lunch, he could theoretically ingest some of the allergens. At least, this is how it was explained to her.
I think it's kind of crazy to chop down a whole bunch of trees for one child. Where I currently live, our elementary school is NOT nut-free; in fact, the cafeteria even sells PB & J sandwiches every day. The kids with nut allergies (regardless of severity) eat at a separate table and are required to wash their hands before eating - this is carefully supervised.
I know a lot of parents do not agree with segregating kids who have allergies. It sucks, and I would not want my kids to have this requirement! Kids are teased for enough in schools as it is. HOWEVER, in many cases this is a Life Or Death scenario and a few hurt feelings are just going to have to be the price some will pay for the good of their classmates.
I'm fortunate enough that my kids do not have any serious allergies and so it's easy for me to say "this is best" or "that is best". I don't think anyone who is not personally invested in this situation can truly understand the fear and concern that's in play here. At the same time, there are overprotective parents everywhere.
Should this mother carefully instruct her kid what to put into his mouth? Of course! And unless she's a complete twit, I'm certain she has already done that. My friend's kid ALWAYS asks to read the label of foods I offer him when he comes to play and knows exactly what to look for. When he can't find the answer, he calls his mom to confirm. Accidental exposure can still happen though! What if another child eats a peanut butter granola bar, doesn't wash his hands, then uses the monkey bars? Then the allergic child goes on those same monkey bars and later touches his mouth? Same thing if kids are jumping into a pile of leaves and fail to notice exposed nuts among the leaf litter. IT HAPPENS, even when you're being careful.
Tricky situation for sure!
|change schools on Nov 17, 2012 @ 11:14 pm|
That is a bit too much, just change school for Heaven's Sake.
|I have to agree... on Nov 18, 2012 @ 12:06 pm|
with ra143. If she can't teach her child to stay away from these nuts at that age then she should change school's. Why should all of these tree's be cut down just for her child. I'm sure if she can't teach him/her to stay away from them now he/she will know enough in a few years. If they cut the tree's down they will be gone for good and its not fare to the tree's, or the rest of the people who enjoy having them. I get that it's not the child's fault, but its also not the tree's fault. The experts have said in this case no harm would even come to the child if they where to touch them. If she's this up set with how the school and the city has handled the situation she should just move. My son was very allergic to anything that even contained dairy and dairy products and I didn't make the school tell the rest of the kids they couldn't bring anything that contained dairy in it to school. My son knew what he could and couldn't eat and knew enough to wash his hands and to keep his hands out of his mouth before he even went to school at four years old. So I see no reason unless this is a special needs child that the tree's should be removed. If I could teach my son at four years old to take care then she surely could too.