School telling us to remove nut trees from community orchard

[Calling]

We are in a local voluntary group and local people planted an orchard in the grounds of a school, for the school.

Now, the school has written to say that we have to remove the nut trees because one pupil has a bad nut allergy.

There are fruit and nut trees, that the local people planted some years ago and we have put a lot of work into weeding and watering. The yield was actually for the kids and we are volunteering with the school with and nature sessions outside.

Before anyone says we are potential child killers, we do understand the importance of safety. There is a management plan in place, but the school has been asked by a parent to remove our trees.
I do feel disheartened - nobody in the school said no to nut trees originally.

I really am horrified that you are insisting that your child’s lack of anaphylactic type allergy really is generalisable to all kids with milk allergies.

Exactly this. And it is this treating allergies as a 2 tier system why 2 children have died in school due to milk allergy in recent times. One from accidental consumption given by a member of staff and one from contact.

It horrifies me that people refuse to understand just how serious dairy allergies are. There was a paper published recently that said that because we’ve got better at managing allergies in the UK deaths from anaphylaxis has reduced by half for every single food allergy EXCEPT dairy! That’s the one that people still associate with an upset stomach and nothing more. It makes me terrified for my child.

Most falling from trees are in shells - is the allergy that extreme? Suppose the child sits on a bus with a person who has nuts in their bag - would the child not travel on that bus? I think this is an over reaction from the school..

"My sister is actually allergic to hazelnuts and hazelnut trees - she only has to be in the garden and the wind blowing from the neighbours tree next door and her eyes go all huge and bulgy. Painful"

I get like that with most tree, grass and flower pollen, for months at a time. I'm unable to sit down on grass without coming out in a rash, and I'm also allergic to the dust produced during farmers' harvest. I can't walk through the perfume section of a department store, and have to cross the road to avoid a branch of Lush. They tested me once, in hospital, and I reacted to well over a hundred allergens. It is pretty much impossible for me to avoid all the things I'm allergic to.
On a number of occasions I've had HCPs standing over me with a syringe of adrenalin, just in case. That was before epipens were available.

So I do have an understanding of severe allergic reactions, but this school's attitude does seem over the top to me. Hazels are extremely common in the UK and are a native species. Chances are the child walks past hazels on the way to and from school every day.

For those who despite overwhelming evidence can’t understand how serious milk allergies can be, this child died after cheese was thrown at him. Simple contact with dairy caused an anaphylactic reaction which is very rare but it happens. This child died terrified shouting ‘I’m going to die’ and yet people still just don’t get it!

I am not against taking nut allergies seriously but when we have this over the top reaction to nut allergies we act like it’s the ONLY dangerous allergy and the ONLY allergy ‘worthy’ of bans which is horrific.

Benedict’s law came about because a child died from being given cows milk accidentally, the WHOLE reason we have all these laws in schools about allergies and risk assessments was because his parents campaigned for it, after yet another child died because of ignorance around the severity of cows milk allergy and yet this thread is STILL full of people claiming it’s rare to have an anaphylactic reaction.

Just dawned on the school that if some parent of an existing or future nut allergic pupil lwas affected. Their parents couldbsue the shit out them.

Big time. Think Yankee Style.

This information could be useful in building a balanced response: https://www.aaaai.org/allergist-resources/ask-the-expert/answers/old-ask-the-experts/inhaled-tree-nut-allergen

I think there is also the question of managing an individual child now (which nuts are they allergic to specifically vs which nut trees are actually in the garden?, for example) and managing the risk in a broader sense and on an ongoing basis.

Instead of removing the trees could a local hardware store be asked to sponsor fencing and a sign so that the onus is on awareness of volunteers, staff, children, and the affected child that there are nut trees in the orchard?The risk from anything airborne is miniscule. The main risk (again small) would seem to be if children gathered nuts, managed to remove the shells and they (or traces in severe cases) were then ingested by the affected child.

you could also ask the school/council to write an evidence-based risk assessment. Personally I would not take any action until this is available.

Do you have documentation in place such as a Memorandum of Understanding between the school/council and the volunteer group
that provides any guidance about when there is divergence of approach? I am a community garden volunteer and committee member and we often experience changes in the needs of our members and the community that our garden is in.

I’ve not read the entire thread so apologies if I missed items relating to similar suggestions.

Just to add, I have close friends with severe nut allergies so I have sympathy for the concerns of the parents about what could happen to their child while they are at school.

If they were on school grounds, quite possibly yes

So you have just said that the risk assessment and balance of risk should be taken yes?

And you know that dairy accounts for far higher severe reactions, deaths and allergies yes?

And that no children have died of nut allergies in schools.

So you advocate for a dairy free school yes?

I haven't fully RTTT but...

A child is school is trapped. They have to go where they are told when they are told. They don't want to seem different to peers by avoiding areas others go freely. They live with anxiety over their allergy in places they can't control.

School is a huge part of childhood. Massive. Can you imagine what it does to a person to have that fear and worry in childhood? And in this case, it is avoidable in the scenario you are in.

It's not the same as being on a bus. You can get off a bus or move places. But kids can't ignore a teacher's instruction about an area or control other kids bringing stuff into the classroom from outside that they have access to. Imagine days thru childhood not being able to join in playing with friends just because they went to an area that might kill you. That is their reality.

Get rid of the tree. Forget the background and just focus on a child living the life of constant awareness of things out there that could be fatal to them, and do your little bit to help them feel less worried and more like the other kids.

Have a heart & some humanity.

Hi, the school has said, effectively, just nuts.

I mean the easiest thing to do is for the parent to arrange for their own volunteers to remove the tree, or do it themsleves, or pay the school to remove it.

OP's group shouldnt be involved. You cant 'instruct' a volunteer to do anything in any case.

Not that I agree with that course of action, but if the school want to take that action then they'll have to arrange it with the parents/professional tree surgeons.

So you haven’t bothered to read the thread but your opinion is so special that you feel the need to lecture the posters who have?

Good point; we did that, but Squirrel Nutkin and his friends got underneath and into the net!

I would push back - do the school ban milk if there is a kid with a milk allergy? Are strawberries banned - no the kid has to avoid them and the school should help with that. Even allergy uk don't want school to say they are nut free as it breeds complacency. Individuals do need to take responsibility for their own allergies and that has to start young- with thebhelp and support of the school and a strong supportive care plan in place- but removing nut trees- that's a step too far in my opinion! I would seek advice from the local hospital allergy nurse specialist and also from the charity allergy uk to help get a rounded view of what is acceptable.

RTFT first and opine after that.

I seriously doubt you could dig up a four year old tree? The school want you to dig it up and replant it elsewhere? As a volunteer?

I'm a environmentalist, but hazels grow like weeds everywhere you'd need to fell and poison the stump ( coppice).

But as a volunteer you can refuse to. "I'm sorry that's going to need a mechanical root bore thingies, I have no where to plant it, that isn't what I signed up to do, im not a professional"

The reality here the trees logically need to die to be removed.

The school are responsible for keeping the child safe while in their care. Not allergy uk or any other advisory group.

it isn’t particularly hard to understand why they would rather remove the tree completely rather than ‘risk manage’ it. Schools are underfunded, staff are absent etc. Well meaning risk assessment measures might not withstand the nature of daily school
life.
schools have very young children in their care without parental supervision. I too would prioritise removing the tree from the site over trying to manage it.

I've checked the Mumsnet t&c's.

There's no requirement to read 24 pages of other people's opinions before giving my own response to the OP.

I hope that saves you some time in future too.

No, it’s common courtesy which you seem to be lacking,

Touché

But you’d leave dairy which has caused actual deaths in schools!

Again, they really need to be more specific. As if it is peanuts those are not nuts.