Nut Allergies and Children: How Others React Is Causing a Call for Increased Regulation.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

** you and your breathing. I have a right to smear peanut butter all over myself any time I want to ever. If you don't like it, then go die you librul whiney punk.

Yeah that seems to be about the size of it. If a child has a potentially fatal allergy to nuts, that shouldn't stop you eating a peanut butter sandwich wherever you like.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Are you getting that it's not only about what the child eats? If that was the case, most here would agree and say, yes, the parents have to educate the child and the child has to learn to be responsible what it can and cannot eat.

An actual nut allergy can cause a severe, if not deadly reaction if the child just gets in contact or even close to nuts/nutproducts.

How do you want to teach responsibility to these kids if they have no control over what their schoolmates have in their lunchbox? What happened to common sense and courtesy?

common sense and courtesy would be keeping these kids away from other kids and homeschooling them, or perhaps having a seperate class for them (like special-Ed kids do). Forcing everyone else to adjust is absurd.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

So everyone is supposed to change their life style, eating habits, etc... for a few individuals who want to infringe on others rights. Again I say stick them in a plastic bubble until they learn to shut their yaps and stop screwing with other peoples rights.

[Zero Sum 305]

Now all we need is for schools to actually HAVE nurses... remember some around here want to cut funds from schools!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

common sense and courtesy would be keeping these kids away from other kids and homeschooling them, or perhaps having a seperate class for them (like special-Ed kids do). Forcing everyone else to adjust is absurd.

So, what you're saying is that we need to create a separate forum for you since forcing normal people to put up with you in normal fora is absurd.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

SCNR - so Paul, just curious: Let's say little Skylar was allergic to hamsters, enough to trigger his allergies by just being in the same room as the animal, without touching it but being in danger of anaphylactic shock (which can be deadly) if actual contact happened, even by second degree, i.e. being touched by someone who had just touched a hamster. At the school it's normal procedure for classes to have a pet gerbil in the classroom.

Would you then argue it is Skylar's parents' responsibility to teach him not to breath in the air that carries the allergens? What about if other kids think it's funny to first pet the pet gerbil and then go touch Skylar - is that also his parents' responsibility? Or the kids? And trust me kids would find it funny to "try out to see what happens"?

I think the big factor is - it's not the kids choice to go to school. Before smoking was banned in public places going out always was a drag for me as a non-smoker because of the passive smoking but I guess you could argue that it was my choice to go into the bar / restaurant / club. Children up to a certain age however don't have a choice to attend school - if the state requires attendance somewhere I think it is only fair to get the state / government to insure physical integrity for everyone is guaranteed. Don't you think?

You don't 'have to' enroll your child in school. There are other options.

[Zero Sum 305]

common sense and courtesy would be keeping these kids away from other kids and homeschooling them, or perhaps having a seperate class for them (like special-Ed kids do). Forcing everyone else to adjust is absurd.

Pro-segregation in school based on allergies? That's rich. No, not absurd at all.

[The_Dude 1,142]

So everyone is supposed to change their life style, eating habits, etc... for a few individuals who want to infringe on others rights. Again I say stick them in a plastic bubble until they learn to shut their yaps and stop screwing with other peoples rights.

It's funny, I suggest the same thign for criminals, who are a danger to good americans, yet feel comfortable shoving kids in it over a PBJ sandwich. Nice Kip.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

So, what you're saying is that we need to create a separate forum for you since forcing normal people to put up with you in normal fora is absurd.

normal is individualism and personal responsibility. What you all are advocating is authoratarianism/conformatity.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So everyone is supposed to change their life style, eating habits, etc... for a few individuals who want to infringe on others rights. Again I say stick them in a plastic bubble until they learn to shut their yaps and stop screwing with other peoples rights.

A genuine medical condition is a genuine medical condition. Trying to position it as a desire for someone to infringe on the rights of others , just because, suggests that it isn't a genuine condition. The article is saying that people are being stigmatised for something beyond their control, which you would know if you had read it.

Edited August 17, 2011 by fishdude

[Zero Sum 305]

I advocate for responsibility that kids are kept safe from health risks. Paul contends that the risk be mitigated by segregating the kids out of the school population.

Paul, since this is a school, are you willing to pay for school districts to retrofit lunch areas for allergen-free zones?

That can give you fuel for your next whinefest ya know.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

normal is individualism and personal responsibility. What you all are advocating is authoratarianism/conformatity.

You are advocating clichéd slogans.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

normal is individualism and personal responsibility. What you all are advocating is authoratarianism/conformatity.

No, Paul. Try to grasp the meaning of normal. Normal is not an absolute.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I advocate for responsibility that kids are kept safe from health risks. Paul contends that the risk be mitigated by segregating the kids out of the school population.

Paul, since this is a school, are you willing to pay for school districts to retrofit lunch areas for allergen-free zones?

That can give you fuel for your next whinefest ya know.

Kids can be kept safe from health risks. That's the job of the parents to do so, not anyone else.

There's no reason for 'allergen-free' zones if parents take proper steps to keep their child out of the public school in the first place.

[N&S 32]

Could someone please assure me that Paul is just trolling to provoke an argument?