free fruit in schools. but no nuts allowed

[stitch]

another rant i'm afraid.

dc school has decided that they dont think the chidlren get enough veg and fruit, so will be providing evry child with a free piece of fruit. the school is a state school, in an affluent area, so full of poncy wannabe, organice lentil weaving moms, who frown on jam sandwiches and fruit as being not healthy enough for their lo's. needless to say that ballet lessons and gym memberships are almost derigeur.

but the same school declares itself a nut free zone. yet nuts are an extremely healthy snack. they are full of essential oils. minerals, etc. tiny packets of energy, they will be far better at keeping the kids going, than half an apple, or whatever.almonds are chock full of calcium, essential not only for good bone developement, but boossts immune systems wonderfully. etc etc etc.
the kids come out of class at least twice a week clutching crappy sweets full of artificial flavourings andcolourings becuaes it is someones birthday. a practice theschool positively encourages. and of course, the siblings also get given the artifical crap by the birthday childs mother.
surely a bar of chocolate would be healthier than the crappy chewy maom they come out with?

Exactly bundle. While I can't and don't expect other parents to be responsible for my child I do expect the school to be responsible for her. In fact they are responsible for her, that's why they, responsibly, try to avoid her dying while she's at school.

My son has nut and seed allergy before people have a go at me

Can I just point out that the Anaphylaxis Campaign in it's advice to schools DOES NOT RECOMMEND A NUT BAN

There are various reasons and I will post link later

I would be interested to see that cw.

What I'd like to know is how there are so many parents whose children will "Only eat peanut butter sandwiches"? This is the second we've had on here in a week iirc.

Anyway, you haven't asked but YABU. If your child is so desperate to eat nuts, you can take some with you when you pick them up from school and they can eat them on the way home.

According to reports 1 in every 60 children in the UK are allergic to nuts.

The allergy specialist dd's under told me that nut allergies are increasing loads by the year.

I just don't believe a child will only eat peanut butter sandwiches and the parent of that child doesn't have enough imagination to put together something for their lunch. It's a problem in itself, maybe a good excuse for tacking a child's eating habits.

And I never said they shouldn't banned - I was just trying to see both sides of the argument.

As wannabe says - what about all the other things in lunch boxes that may contain traces of nuts? It would be impossible to ban all the things that may contain traces.

I have no issue with the school providing a fruit snack over a nut one - why would I?

ANAPHYLAXIS ADVICE TO SCHOOLS

ANAPHYLAXIS ADVICE TO SCHOOLS

That's interesting Christy.
"2. If you ban peanuts, what happens when other parents say they want similar policies implemented in relation to milk, egg, sesame, fish, fresh fruit and latex? One day other serious food allergies may emerge as being as common as peanut. " is basically what I was thinking.

"3. Parents who demand nut-free zones may risk possible confrontation with other parents. In such an atmosphere, the risks may actually increase. " is terribly, terribly sad though.

Interesting article. I agree being a nut free school is impossible in reality.

To suggest that people do not care about the welfare of other children because they don?t want certain foods banned is ridiculous. Of course no-one wants someone else?s child to come to harm as a result of an allergic reaction, but IMO the answer is education not ilimination.

It?s all very well banning nuts because it?s quite easy to not give your child a nutela/peanut butter sandwich, but where do you draw the line? What if a child had a severe dairy allergy, would you happy for dairy to be banned? No milk/cheese/butter/yoghurt? Or a gluten allergy, no bread/cake/biscuits. And what if you have children with all the allergies mentioned above in the same school, do you ban all those things?

I understand that nut allergy can be so severe that a child can have a reaction if they touch someone who has been in contact with nuts. So what happens if a child has had peanut butter on toast for breakfast and then comes into school and touches a child with a nut allergy, should the school be dictating to children as to what they?re allowed to eat at home too?

The more you iliminate the source of the allergy, the less a child learns to take responsibility for it, and IMO the more likely it is that child will eat something containing nuts because he has never learned to look out for nuts because they?ve always been taken out of his way, iyswim?

I'm with wannabe, as I was in teh other thread that absolutely exploded with everyone who expressed any sort of reservation about blanket bans basically being labelled a person who didn't care about childrens' welfare at all.

I do think it makes to have blanket bans when there are small children involved - all very well to except a 15 year old to take responsibility, but a 5 year old?

However I still think banning anything you don't absolutely have to is weird. Suppose you have a school with a nut ban but no children with nut allergy and a child comes to that school with a dairy or sesame allergy - do you have a situation where nuts are not allowed but the thing they are actually allergic to aren't?

sorry, last word of that post should read 'are' not 'aren't'

The difference is that nuts can be avoided. It would be almost impossible for a school to avoid dairy products as many children depend on them, particularly vegetarian children.

You contradict yourself wannabe as you say that a child should be responsible for themselves. That's all well and good when they have a choice but if a child does eat a peanut butter sandwich then hold a nut allergy child's hand, they can't be responsible for the reaction can they? How could they possibly know?

Although schools can't be guaranteed nut free they can go a long way towards helping children with severe life-threatening nut allergies. For children with other allergies it's very hard indeed.

The report was interesting but raised many questions for me that I don't have time now to go into. But one struck me - they suggest that children with peanut butter sandwiches be segregated to a different table. I wonder if they would like that? Probably not.

I have to collect dd now but I just wanted to ask how anyone who is against the 'nut ban' could keep peace of mind leaving their child at school knowing that there was something around that could kill them in a very rapid moment of time? That's what I struggle with, not wanting anyone to feel guilty or to seem to have a knee-jerk reaction. But as long as I know dd's school meals are guaranteed nut free and that children aren't 'supposed' to bring nuts into school I get some peace of mind. I can only imagine how stressful it is for mothers of children who have multiple allergies.

I thought that suggestion - the separate table for the children who bring in nuts - was rather brilliant. It makes them aware of the seriousness of the issue but ultimately gives them a choice. Because they do have a choice, unlike the child with the allergy.

okie, havent read any of the posts since i left earlier in the day except the two immediately following mine.
bamboo. i am very clear on this. nuts are extremely healthy, unless you are allergic to them. the fact that i choose not to make a fuss about the schools nut ban, to the school, does not mean i dont think nuts are not healthy. it merely means that i recognise that it is the only viable option. a poor poor choice, but the only workable choice.

cov, you read my opinion about the child correctly. which is why it was kept in the deepest darkest recesses of my heart andmind until recently. well this thread actually. i did feel that my childs nutritional needs were moreimportant than the other childs. but feeling something, and acting upon it are two very very different things.
if a child were to have an anaphylactic shock, i would not be able to live with myself for lobbying the school to allow nuts. but that doesnt mean that i dont think the school is incorrect in not allowing children to benefit from such a healthy snack.

right, school run time

Imagineryfriend
My son has nut and seed allergies and I have always believed he should be responisble for his own allergies, he was very good at asking from the age of 4 when his allergie started.
I have never asked a school for a nut ban and his friends have always been careful of him.
It was very sweet to see one little boy age 7 say to him "make sure that doesn't have nuts in S"
He is secondary now and they don't have a nut ban either, at that age it is impossible to police.

?The difference is that nuts can be avoided. It would be almost impossible for a school to avoid dairy products as many children depend on them,? so what if you have two children in the same school, one is allergic to nuts and one to dairy, to the same degree, i.e. severely allergic. Is it fair that you ban the nuts and not the dairy? That you only take the nut allergic child into consideration because taking the dairy allergic child into consideration would be detrimental to the other children who depend on dairy?

Let?s be honest here, schools don?t ban nuts because of the welfare of one child, they ban them because they don?t want the responsibility of ensuring that that one child doesn?t come into contact with nuts. It is entirely possible to ensure that children don?t come into contact with nuts, parents do it all the time, at home, in restaurants, in public places, as parties, you can?t tell me that nut allergic children live in bubbles and never come into contact with other human beings for fear of having an allergic reaction. But it?s much easier for the school to put a blanket ban on nuts than to essentially shadow that one child to ensure he/she doesn?t come into contact with nuts. With a dairy allergic child however, the school will monitor the child more closely because banning dairy is impossible. So while it is possible to keep nut allergic children away from nuts schools choose the (for them) easiest way out by banning them.

?You contradict yourself wannabe as you say that a child should be responsible for themselves. That's all well and good when they have a choice but if a
child does eat a peanut butter sandwich then hold a nut allergy child's hand, they can't be responsible for the reaction can they? How could they possibly
know?? but equally a child could have peanut butter for breakfast and the nut allergic child wouldn?t know that. No-one is downplaying the seriousness of nut allergies, but if it really is so easy to die from a reaction to nuts then nut allergic people would be dropping dead in the streets, on busses and trains and aeroplanes, anywhere where someone might have been in contact with a nut, and that is simply not the case. In fact death due to allergic reaction to nuts is incredibly rare.

The earlier children learn about their allergies and how to manage them, the easier they will find it to cope with them as they grow up. Banning nuts from every nut allergic child?s immediate vicinity is not going to teach that child about avoidance of food that contains nuts, and consequently they are far more likely to be complacent about the food they eat because the risk has always been taken out of their way.

The fact that it is seen as easier to avoid nuts than dairy just reflects the fact that in general in the west, we eat too much dairy and too few nuts. Vegans don't eat dairy but would have more trouble avoiding nuts; most vegetarians I know could probably manage either. It just depends what you're used to.

Wannabe
My Ds has had a nut allergy since he was 1. he started reception a few weeks ago and though we thought we had trained him to be very very careful within a couple of weeks he had shared another boys food. It was crisps, it was unlikely that they had nut traces but it could have been a peanut butter sandwich and he could be dead now.
We had started the process a long time ago of making him responsible for his allergy but we missed something. (He did ask...the other child...who assured him there were no nuts.) I am very grateful for the 'nut free' status of the school even if it doesn't actually mean 'nut free'
4 years old is far too young to expect a child to take responsibility and I need the school to do the best that they can to protect my child.

going to the OP only. i do understand what you are saying.

dd1 is allergic to food colourings. to the point where it could bring on an asthma attack which in turn could kill her (not being over-dramatic, she has had two attacks in the last months, and its bloody scary!).

when kids give out sweets i have to check labels so carefully and see if dd1 is allowed the,m 9/10 times she isnt, so have to find soemthing else.