to challenge the schools nuts ban

[pigglewiggle]

The school has a strict no nuts policy. Apparently this is because someone in a higher year has a peanut allergy. I can understand banning peanuts if the allergy is severe but peanuts are very different to normal proper nuts and reactions to these are not to my knowledge anywhere near as bad as peanuts. It just makes lunch quite difficult as we are vegan and would love to pop something like a nakd bar in lunchboxes.

Aibu to go to the school and at least establish if a total ban on nuts is needed / necessary?

Suburban, I disagree - I think the best a school can do is individualising the care a particular child may need at lunch time (ensuring they are not sitting next to someone with egg/peanut/milk in their lunch, ensuring no food is shared with that child, ensuring that child's classmates wash their hands) rather than issuing a blanket ban and then sitting back, job done.

BMO no, of course a nut ban doesn't mean not nuts. However it reduces the risk. Not all drivers will follow the rules for stopping at a red light but it doesn't mean people are saying it's pointless to have red lights.

Having a nut ban, just like having traffic lights, reduces the risk.

I don't think parents of children with nut allergies let their children become complacent, mine learnt to check product labels as soon as they could read 'may contain nuts' and would not eat anything that said that unless I had checked it. Now they are older they know which foods that 'may contain nuts' that they always eat and are generally fine and if that goes wrong then they have two different medication options. Generally we shop at stores with a better labelling policy, some supermarkets have a general "may contain nuts" message and others say if the recipe/factory/production line uses nuts.

It might reduce the risk, or it might increase the risk due to complacency. It's the school that becomes complacent. Small children in particular can do unexpected and seemingly irrational things.

BMO, I think you're getting the wrong end of the stick, I'm assuming not deliberately!

We were talking about the school's nut policy. I said I thought it would be best to describe the school as having a "no nut" policy, so parents could also do their bit to support the school's policy on nuts by not bringing nuts onto school premises.

What I didn't say is that this would then allow the school to abandon its duty of care to each individual child. The two approaches aren't mutually exclusive.

Suburban, I assume you know that no nut policies are controversial though? Because they may not make anaphylatic children any safer, in fact the opposite may be true (that no nut policies in schools increase risk).

my sons 18 year old girlfriend is allergic to nuts its all nuts and seeds like poppy seeds and the likes .they are going abroad this year and the airline won,t sell nuts on board and ask passengers not to eat there own .it can kill

My ds was anaphylactic to tomatoes. It was on the school menu everyday.
They cooked him something else if both dishes had tomato base.

Also as well as nuts some of the biggest allergens causing anaphylactic reactions are milk, wheat, soya, all legumes including peas, eggs.

I get that peanut and nut allergies are life threatening. But any allergic reaction is life threatening - schools don't ban these items.

Fwiw I work in a school that is not nut free. there are pupil and staff members with nut allergies and also some with allergies to other food stuffs. All carry an epipen.

What are the downsides of a no nut policy in e.g. a primary school? I can't see how it might induce complacency or increase risk.

Surnurban how do you think kids with sesame manage!

I can think of a number of ways that a blanket ban could potentially increase risk. You can't expect schools to police every item in every lunchbox, so you can't know whether your child will be sitting next to a kid who has inadvertently brought in an item containing nuts or another potentially life-threatening allergen (the casualness with which people on here are discussing sesame allergy is quite astonishing, for example). It is a lot easier to police a nut-free table than a whole lunchroom, and to provide extra supervision for those children who are potentially at risk.

The other issue is that you can't, unfortunately, expect automatic cooperation from all parents and this is all the more true if - as in the OP's situation - the blanket ban is perceived by some as being unreasonable.

Another concern is that being under the misapprehension that "no nuts" means "100% nut free" may lead adults to dismiss the early signs of a reaction on the grounds that it can't be a peanut reaction.

Finally I strongly believe that schools who impose blanket bans are not following evidence-based best practice and to me, this suggests that shortcuts are being taken with safeguarding. It's probably just easier and cheaper to ban nuts than to effectively supervise the small number of children involved for 30 minutes a day.

I'm not so sure that op is being so unreasonable. Only in that, as others have posted, I was under the impression that many organisations DIDNT actually support a total nut ban.

What about the youngster who buys a chocolate bar with nuts on the way to school and eats it in the presence of the class-mate with the allergy?

And as Upandatem said - people can take what they like on the bus and eat it.

And if I go ta restaurant and order beef, thank you, but I expect mustard to be on the table without asking the people on the next table whether they mind.

There are limits to what can be done, aren't there?

BMO, I know some people think "no nut" policies are controversial, but it's not clear whether those people believe, as you said you did upthread, that schools with such policies do not excercise their duty of care towards each individual child on top of having a no nut policy and consider simply having a policy is "job done".

I've only worked in four schools, but in all of those, the commitment of the school to the care of every child with an allergy compliments the no nut policy. One is not a substitute for the other.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect parents to comply with school policies, but I'm not stupid enough to think they all do.

I'd just be interested to know how schools could be expected to ensure parents comply with the no nut policy without checking every bag and every lunchbox of every child every day.

So what actually is the point of a no nuts policy if you can't ensure it is adhered to, and schools have to supervise those children anyway? What does it add?

mistigri

See my posts to BMO.

Just because a school has a no nut policy doesn't mean it doesn't supervise the children who are known to have an allergy. You clearly have no idea about the duty of care a school has towards all individual children, regardless of whether they have allergies or not.

And to say a member of school staff would dismiss signs of anaphylaxis in a child on the basis that the school has a no nut policy is equally ridiculous.

Upandatem depending on the severity of your son's allergy and his age, you may not need to exclude all those foods from the house. I don't buy peanuts, mainly because I don't like the smell, but we have foods containing mustard in the house and I just don't eat them.

If one of your sons had been severely allergic to dairy products would you evict those too? My daughter was severely dairy allergic but we always had dairy products in the house

The point is that any measure anyone takes - school, sports club, out-of-school activity group, party venue - to minimise the risk is worth it. A no nuts policy will also help reduce the risk for children who have yet to be diagnosed with an allergy.

If you are saying there is no point in putting anything in place unless you can guarantee a 100% nut-free environment 100% of the time, you may as well say those children with allergies should never leave the house.

If your dc had a nut allergy you would think very differently OP. Any measures that the school could take to keep your dc alive you'd grasp with both hands.

The Anaphylaxis Campaign does not support a nut ban but my dc's school felt that this was the best way of protecting her. She is allergic to all nuts, milk and eggs. The staff are far from complacent to any signs of her allergy.

I am frankly sickened by the suggestion that your desire to pop a Nakd bar into your dc's lunch box trumps another child's need to stay ALIVE.

Ok so SuburbanRhonda how come you require a ban on nuts in order to meet your duty of care to a child with nut allergy, but you can meet that duty of care without a ban if the child is allergic to sesame or mustard (seeds are also commonly associated with serious, potentially anaphylactic reactions).

The position just isn't logical. I don't doubt that many schools with bans in place work hard to fulfil their duty of care, but unless they are following evidence-based best-practice then arguably they are not doing the best for their pupils.

I never banned nuts or sesame from the house. Ds knows too check the ingredients. He didnt have any allergies until he was 4, but even then he was more than capable of asking. We went to burger king and i forgot they had sesame on the buns. I found him at the counter telling them that he couldnt eat the bun .

The ban on nuts is extra to the duty of care we provide for all children, it is not a substitute for it.

Maintained schools follow local authority procedures for best practice on all aspects of safeguarding children in school and would no doubt do exactly the same should a child present with an allergy to another food substance.

I can't say what would happen in academies, free schools or private schools.

My child has a life-threatening allergy to peanuts and brazils. The sort that makes allergy doctors go pale when they see her reactions to skin prick tests.

Her elementary school did not ban nuts but instead put in place sensible practices to ensure her safety. There are no nuts eaten in her classroom, they have nut-free tables at school and all the children are educated about washing hands and faces after eating peanut butter (which they almost all do as we are in the US).

They have various other policies in place to protect the children when out on school trips etc. It's worked fine.

She's now at middle school and is increasingly taking responsibility for her own safety. They don't have nut free tables there but they do continue to educate all the children about allergies generally (not just nut allergies but also egg, dairy and other allergies).