Milk allergy death- should the book be thrown at the staff involved?

[mids2019]

....or if you are minimum wage staff member working in a stressed environment without English as a first language there should be leniency. Doctors are paid for life and death decisions but are Costa staff?

It will be defined in the baristas training, that will be recorded. If you work in catering, minimum wage or not, the legal requirement is to reduce the risk of the 4 food safety hazards, which is through training and implementation of that training. It's a very basic requirement for all staff preparing food and drink, nothing astounding about it.

Agree

But equally anyone having a mild but immediate reaction is at risk of having an anaphylactic one and it's worrying how many people who have allergies or care for people with allergies don't understand this.

My children's allergy clinic was always very clear about this point.

Different factors (stress, ill health, hormones, alcohol etc) can increase your risk of an anaphylactic reaction

I also had a GP try and insist (when we moved surgeries) that my daughter only needed one EpiPen as we could "just call 999" . Thankfully she had a very robust allergy consultant who wrote a swift and firm letter making it clear two pens were needed. But not everyone would question a GPs assertion

BUT the mother requested the jug be washed out completely right?

That's quite drastic. You don't request that in a busy coffee shop unless you know the reaction is more than merely an intolerance like say, rash and IBS. You wouldn't go out of your way to request that unless the reaction is potentially quite severe.

What I think is possible is that the girl has had classic quick presently symptoms in the case of allergy exposure in the past, swelling throat etc. drastic. But this time, the reaction was deceptively mild at first. My understanding is that epi-pen admittance usually requires going to the hospital afterwards as a precaution. Well that's what my sister does if my niece requires (who is 6) the epi-pen. She then has to ring the ambulance regardless of whether it has 'worked' or not that is the protocol according to her and she is a nurse.

A dentist would also probably insist on that happening after administering the pen or allowing the mother to administer the pen. Possibly the mother didn't want all that and felt the reaction was mild - no big dramatic presentation as on previous times - and thought antihistamines would suffice this time.

Ultimately I think it's unfair for random cafe customer workers to have such responsibility placed on them. Cafe baristas do dual roles, it's not even always the same as kitchen staff who may only concentrate on the food. I really admire baristas how they coordinate so much under heavy rush hour pressures is amazing frankly. Unfair really to them and this individual. It eas a mistake ultimately.

Yes, they are trained to REDUCE the risk, not eliminate it. If they could eliminate the risk of allergens I daresay they'd find more lucrative employers elsewhere.
It is rather astounding that some people can't grasp there is always a risk of allergens being present, no matter how hard people work. Millions of drinks are prepared every day, not all of them are going to be perfect. Sorry to be the one to let you know!

I don't think they should be prosecuted or locked up.

I just responded to your post where you said they could only be found liable if they intentionally tried to kill her.

In this case the server didn't either use their due diligence or wasn't trained. Going round in circles here

Not qualified to say anything about blame - only that having an allergy is really difficult to manage - especially as it can change. You can go from never needing an epipen and always managing with antihistamines to suddenly needing one… or I did and then went back again.

an absolute tragedy. updated guidance, may be online courses for parents, teachers etc. would be something positive.

@Charlottescobweb I wouldn’t say “blame”, but she was irresponsible and ultimately negligent imo, absolutely.

Yes, and that is still the only way they could reasonably be prosecuted. It doesn't seem likely to be the case.

No, but they can be expected to do the job they were trained for. If it's down to cross contamination, then that's clearly not the fault of the employee - but the allergen book would have shown that as a risk. The mother obviously wasn't too worried about cross contamination or she wouldn't have been in Costa and certainly would have asked to see the book.

If the employee was asked for soya and made the drink with dairy, then yes, she has some responsibility here. Was she careless? Was it down to a confusing communication? We don't know. Do I think she should be held 100% responsible - no, definitely not. But if she used the wrong milk, then I do think that she has some part of the responsibility to bear. This may be unfair though - maybe it's Costa's responsibility to put a system in place that accounts for human error - e.g. Pret use a sticker system.

@mitogoshi If I had an allergy that could kill me I would not be buying food in busy chains, they cannot have adequate cross contamination procedures.

Same here. Literally insane to rely on low paid staff.

"Akter told the court she had repeated Duyile’s request that the jug be washed and also pointed out that hot chocolate is made from milk. She said Duyile replied: “That’s fine"."

The mother (Duyile) sounds surprisingly laid-back about both the milk content and treatment, as she refused the dentist's offer of an epi pen.

The coroner's focus was on the allergy book, and whether Akter should have shown it to Duyile. Akter says she didn't feel the rule applied, due to the exchange above.
"This drink is made from milk"
"That's fine"

Her "That's fine" may have been absent-minded, but I really don't see the barista did anything wrong.

Do you think reducing the risk of something prevents it entirely? Or do you understand that reduce is different to eliminate? Two options there for ya.

People saying the staff should have realised that the mother asking them to wash the jugs was indicative of a serious allergy have obviously never worked in retail. People make crazy requests all the time! Like allergic to dairy but apparently fine that hot choc power had milk in it.

I've worked in the industry for more years than I care to mention and I'm an EHO so save your patronising comments for someone else.

So reduce means eliminate then, OK. 😜

That's never been said, what has been said is the server is trained, or should have been trained, and in this case didn't use their due diligence. Showing the alleged book would have been one way to reduce risk so the customer is clearly informed. Again, if unsure, ask.

HNRTFT but I don’t think that the server should be responsible.Absolutely not that person call on what food is safe unless involved in the manufacture and prep .
These lovely people are earning the minimum wage!!!

What a tragedy.

It seems that dairy is becoming more and more prevalent as the cause of death in allergic reactions in recent years.

When it comes to pointing fingers and laying the blame somewhere, this needs to be done with the intention of preventing future deaths for those with food allergies.

Costa (and similar establishments) need a clear and consistent approach to allergy requests, e.g., Always state out loud the allergies present in the requested order, always show customer the allergen book, always repeat the order back.

For the posters stating people with allergies shouldn't trust other people with their food or drink, I think this is too simplistic.
Imagine never being able to eat at a restaurant or a café, not buying packaged foods, not trusting any food labels in supermarkets.. the reality is that there has to be accountability from the businesses.

I don't think it's unreasonable for someone with an allergy to get a takeaway hot drink from a well known chain that claims to cater for those with allergies. And to suggest it is? Well, that's victim blaming.

I do speak from experience, as I have a child with multiple severe allergies, one of which is dairy.
After the diagnosis at 6 months old, my knee jerk reaction was to say we'd never have dairy in our home, all visitors would wash their hands when they arrive, and we'd never eat out.

Well, quite a few years down the line and we have dairy milk in our fridge, visitors do as they please and my son occasionally eats out (at places 'known' for being good with allergies, placing orders with the manager). This seems to be similar to other "allergy families" I know.

We all choose the risk level we're happiest with. As a parent, my job is to set my child up for success when they reach adulthood. This includes knowing how to safely order food/drinks and to advocate for themselves. It also includes risk assessing situations and sticking to safer options.

It's easy to suggest "well just never order out", but excluding your child from that sort of experience for 18 years is anything but easy, when they see their friends and family doing it regularly and are already excluded from so much because of their allergies.

It's a bit confusing though, because the allergen book suggests that there isn't milk in the hot choc powder, but that there is a risk of cross contamination. In that case, it sounds more like the barista was saying she had to make the hot chocolate with milk, i.e. not understanding that the soya substitution had been requested. Maybe the mum thought that the barista meant soya milk when she said milk.

It does sound like a confusing conversation tbh. I do think the server should have shown the mum the allergen book or at least offered to do so. When I ordered in cafes and restaurants and say I'm coeliac, I'm always asked if I've read their allergen information and/or given the allergen book. The allergen information says that they can't guarantee there's no cross contamination. I've also had that told to me by staff when I've ordered drinks. I think that's a basic part of the server's job to make that clear to the customer.

This is a very sensible post and I agree wholeheartedly. Food allergies still aren't always taken seriously or thought of as "fads" which is largely how tragic cases like this happen. Very sad for thr family in question indeed.

I've worked as a waitress and in a fast food kitchen in the past, and I think this staff member has to take some responsibility.

Staff are trained on what to do, especially in chains,and if they don't follow the rules they know they're cutting corners. Some staff don't believe in allergies so don't bother to follow the rules on how to deal with them, or they don't follow the rules because they resent the job and customers and not willing to do more than the very minimum.

Awful thing to happen, but I don't think it's fair to blame the mother at all, obviously she'd never had such an extreme reaction before.

All well and good, but in the eventually of human error - and it will eventually happen in a fast food place, it's a matter of time -would you then expect that person to go to jail because you didn't want the admittedly difficult burden of avoiding the restaurant altogether when the restaurant states they can never absolutely guarantee that cross contamination will not happen, either through factory facilities or human error?

If you have a severe allergy and go to enough FF chains and eateries the probability is you will eventually end up being inadvertently exposed to your allergen you may have your fexofenadine, and your epi-pen but they may fail. I get the life compromising difficulties, but overall it's got to be your responsibility.

Why have a hot chocolate before going to the dentist? Surely the teeth would be covered in hot chocolate. Not nice for the dentist

It is a tragedy for the family that the child died. Like most events labelled ‘tragic’ or ‘a disaster’, there wasn’t one thing going wrong, it was actually a cascade of events.

• taking a child with allergies into a high allergen environment
• the barista either didn’t hear or didn’t understand the order correctly
• the mother didn’t double check the order either at time of ordering or at the collection point
• the child hadn’t been given an epipen (indicating her medical professionals hadn’t thought it was serious enough to be needed)
• the dentist may or may not have offered an epipen (reports are unclear) but was probably still the best place to be in an emergency
• but in any case, they left to go to a pharmacy for antihistamine tablets (suggesting they weren’t carrying any with them)
• The pharmacist administered first aid but with too low a dosage for the child’s age and weight

There were multiple chances for this not to have happened.