Your View

Maybe the right answer is to ban all kids from school and send their parents instead. It seems most of you parents have forgotton about social responsibility, looking out for others, protecting children.

Most of all, I think a number of you have forgotten how to read other people's post before you comment on them. Not one person below identifying themselves as having a child with severe allergies has advocated total bans or denied the need to parental responsibility.

I fail to see why the naysayers still seem to ignore that fact.

It's time to close this thread.

It seems that many people are ignoring the fact that this issue is about children and keeping them safe in school, even with a life-threatening allergy.

Adults and older children can take more precautions with their allergies. Children of daycare and elementary school age need a bit more protection.

Of course I educate my child. Of course she takes responsibility for her allergy. BUT, when she was younger she needed help from the adults in her life to limit her exposure.

It is the same reason that schools put fences around the playgrounds - to keep them safe because the younger ones do not weigh out the consequences before acting.

When she needed daycare, I looked for one that was already peanut free. The provider lied to get my business, I found out afterwards when half the parents were ticked at us.

In elementary, I asked for a peanut free classroom not a peanut free school. I educated my child repeatedly about her allergy.

A medical doctor told me after thorough testing that she has a potentially life threatening allergy. I did not invent it or exaggerate it to the schools.

Now that she is in middle school, I did NOT ask for a peanut free classroom - the school did. The result was bullying. I would have preferred a peanut SAFE classroom (in other words EDUCATE, EDUCATE, EDUCATE).

So many angry people, so little compromise and common sense.

I can understand parents wanting to protect their kids, but I think the food bans are excessive.

Every new student to a school should be required to inform the school of their allergies and wear a medical bracelet stating their allergy. Its not a bad idea for schools to have epi pens available, but parents need to take responsibility for making sure that their own kids have one with them if they may need it.

You can't expect kids to live in a bubble. Even though food allergies can be fatal, I don't think that schools should ban any food. If parents are concerned, then they can make arrangements for their kids to eat in a designated "clean" room in the school.

Some parents choose not to immunize their children against infections (which is really stupid!), but you don't see the government forcing them to get immunized. So why is it that an allergy to peanuts is given a higher priority than the MMR vaccine?

Renee from Ottawa,

"Forgive me James, but are you saying that, even though I'm not allergic to the smell, it is somehow impossible for me to not get sick from my allergy in a situation that I have no control over?"

You can get killed many different, uncontrollable, more probable ways just by living your daily life. Take crossing the street, for example. You could get run over by a car. Is the solution to ban all cars? There are many situations you have no control over. In general, this experience is referred to as life.

"Do you also presume to think that it would be easy for me (or anyone else with a LIFE THREATENING allergy), to be exposed to the one thing that scares us more than anything else in the world...and on a regular basis no lessj...just because it "might" help my allergy be easier for ignorant people like you to deal with??"

Don't put your psychological hangups on me, I could be scared of cars ('cause its more likely you or I will be killed by one of those) but it is not a reasonable response to ban all vehicles. It is up to me to get counselling and to deal with it on my own, at my own expense.

I should be more tempered with my responses. I do have sympathies for those with severe allergies, but since when do the rights of the few dictate what the majority can or can not do? People are born blind, should every piece of paper be printed with text AND braille just in case a blind person may come across it?

There are reasonable, rational responses to this situation, it just seems that some of those with allergies seem hellbent on the unreasonable demand to control everyone else's diet and resort to overreaction and scare tactics to force others to agree to their position "it could happen to you" "if I am even in the room with..." "imagine your child..."

Oh, won't someone please think of the children?

Ministry of Health knows well the causes of most allergies. Their "standard solution", unfortunately for many, is to treat reaction, not the cause, on advice of the "experts".

The system cannot be compromised, no matter what! According to government's manifesto, they ask the questions, not the people!

I often wonder why we have governments? Who are they representing, people or crooks?

It seems the general consensus is although most people sympathesize with those who have allergies, those with the allergies are so hostile and demanding that healthy people change their lifestyle and diets that they end up harming their cause more than helping themselves.

Some people are deathly allergic to bee stings. Should all the bees be eliminated, or should the allergic person themself be responsible for their own safety precautions? Banning honey is a poor option to help very small minority to cope with an allergy.

Children with food allergies should carry their own epi pen.

Additionally most progressive school administrations train teachers in the use of epi pens and have them available in areas of the school where a problem might occur like the cafeteria.

Class room teachers can also discuss the issue with students in the class and as a community the school is usually aware of students with various issues like allergies, disabilities etc.

Any parent who is concerned should approach their local school administration. Any unwillingness to respond positively to your concerns should be followed up with a phone call to your Superintendent.

Anything less in this day and age in a school is unacceptable.

James from Waterloo,

Before accusing all of us allergy sufferers of being hypochondriacs, might I suggest some less selective research on your part.

Some allergies actually get worse with repeated exposure (shellfish is a common allergy for this). I've found that for every piece of literature that says allergies can be "cured" through controlled exposure, there is a piece that says repeated exposure can have the opposite effect.

I've been lucky in my own severe allergy that it's one that is easy to avoid for the most part, and that the last time I was exposed, I only ended up with hives and severe swelling. No anaphylaxis, thank goodness. Then again, the amount I was exposed to was very tiny, but it still had a profound, and frightening, affect on me.

And yes, if I'm around someone who has the stuff on them, I can potentially have an anaphylactic reaction - it's not always predictable. Trust me when I tell you, not being able to breathe is an extremely scary experience.

Lactose intolerance is not a food allergy, as some people seem to think. It's the body not producing enough of an enzyme (lactase) to digest the sugar (lactose) in milk and is fairly common (and in some medical circles considered the norm in adult populations) and there are varying degrees of lactose intolerance.

True dairy allergies are not as common. It is a very different situation for children - infants and young children are not normally lactose intolerant but as they get older their bodies produce less lactase. Infants and young children who are lactose intolerant usually have a genetic deficiency. It can be a very serious condition for these children.

And I'm not likely to take anything Chris Rock says in a comedy routine too seriously, to be honest. He's hardly a medical expert.

I have never sent any of my children to school with a peanut-butter sandwich, that has never been an option, and my oldest daughter is 15.

My main concern is not just about peanuts, but about an actual anaphylaxis prevention and treatment strategy. It is possible for people to be severely allergic to any number of things, there are nine categories of common ones currently recognized by Health Canada.

But the rate at which people are allergic is rising, and banning foods, although important on a local/individual level, does NOT address the fact that more and more foods will have to be banned. Peanuts are the thin edge.
The nine categories are the following: Peanuts
Eggs
Milk
Tree Nuts
Wheat
Soy
Sesame Seeds
Seafood (Fish, Crustaceans and Shellfish)
Sulphites

These are only the MOST COMMON reaction-producing common foods. Are all of these going to be banned? As for exposure therapies to extinguish allergies, they used to do it a lot more commonly, and abandoned it for years. Hopefully it will yield some results. In the meantime, breastfeed your kids for the first six months of life unless absolutely you cannot do it.

Maybe kids should eat in "tolerance groups" if there are a high number of food allergies in schools.

I'm sorry but James from Waterloo is the PERFECT example of what I was trying to articulate. He clearly doesn't think that food allergies are severe enough to warrant taking extra precaution and his ignorance is blatant.

Forgive me James, but are you saying that, even though I'm not allergic to the smell, it is somehow impossible for me to not get sick from my allergy in a situation that I have no control over? Did you fail to think that maybe being in close proximity to peanut butter gives me migraines and hives, but because it wouldn't necessarily kill me it's alright?

I'm really shaking my head at comments like this. Again, I really respect people like Glen from Toronto (below) who are not directly affected by food allergies and yet remain reasonable and vigilant.

I guess I should go back to hiding in a corner from my hypochondria, and reading medical and scientific journals to find out how my allergy can be cured or "mediated"...right James?

Do you not think that I've read every piece of literature I can get my hands on about this subject? I am, afterall, a journalist who happens to be trained in how to conduct thorough research.

Do you also presume to think that it would be easy for me (or anyone else with a LIFE THREATENING allergy), to be exposed to the one thing that scares us more than anything else in the world...and on a regular basis no lessj...just because it "might" help my allergy be easier for ignorant people like you to deal with??

If you've actually read said literature, you would also know that these practices are not accepted as being effective on a wide-spread scale...and that most of the patients tested in these studies REMAIN allergic to the allergen in different capacities.

I would much rather continue on the way I have: being careful about what I eat, and hoping that the helpful, kind and vigilant people of this country far outnumber the ignorant ones.

I suffer from severe allergies to bees and other insects, and carry epipens at all times. While I feel sorry for anyone with severe food allergies making schools change to peanut free, etc. is not right.

There are low income families that count on things like peanut butter to keep their children healthy. These days everyone has to be so P.C. it is enough to give you an allergy to b.s.

Parents of kids with those kinds of severe allergies should be teaching the kids the way to handle life in public, don't eat anything mom or dad didn't pack for lunch, carry the epipen, teachers should know about the allergy and the epipen and how to use it, and schools should encourage hand washing before snack and lunch time.

This not only helps with the allergies, but is good health practice. If the child is so allergic that he/she can't breathe the air if there is a peanut handy then they need to be in a bubble, because no matter where you go, supermarket, movie theater, hockey game, fairs, etc, there are peanuts in the air.

Common sense is the key to management of allergies, but I think most people have let that go out the window so that we can all swim in the P.C. B.S.

Schools are educational institutions. They teach academic subjects and nothing else!

Security and health issues are provincial government's responsibilities! Irresponsible politicians, in their corrupt 'wisdom' downloaded these to the schools and parents.

Ministry of Health knows the real causes of most allergies! Antibiotics and pesticides have become a necessary evil to do business.

Now we know the big secret! According to government's policy many must suffer, or die for the sake of jobs, revenues and taxes!

I'm amazed at the hostility some of the posters exhibit. Until you have had to send your child out into the world knowing that a completely innocent encounter with a peanut could end his or her life, I don't think it's entirely possible to understand the seriousness of this situation.

I have 2 children without any allergies and one child with a very severe allergy to peanuts. In my child's case - the amount of peanuts it takes to produce a severe reaction is minimal - and by minimal I mean getting kissed on the cheek by someone who's had a peanut butter sandwich hours earlier, resulting in his tongue and throat swelling within a matter of minutes.

This child is my youngest. Prior to his diagnosis I was careful in making sure that the lunches my older two took to school were allergy free - out of respect for the children in their school who depended on the respect of others.

What is it that makes us think it is acceptable to do otherwise? Since when is it ok to not care about those with whom we share this planet?

Are you so much more important and valued that giving a crap about a kid with a severe allergy is so incredibly painful that you can't come up with an alternative to a peanut butter sandwich or cookie?

As for the comment that there are exposure techniques that cure severe allergies - yes, I read the article in Newsweek too. Did you read the part about the solution being a decade off? Did you also notice that the exposure testing doesn't take place at the school cafeteria?

For the time being, just try imagining that it's you who would perish on contact with a nut - see what you think then. The decline of our society is being driven by people who don't care. Let's see if we can turn it around and start honestly looking out for one another.

I find it very sad but telling when reading the comments below. The majority of those that don't have kids with food related allergies are almost fanatic in their "don't impact my rights" and their "let them suffer/die, it's not my problem" attitude.

Yet the people that have kids with allergies, or allergies themselves, are not fanatical the other way by stating everything should be banned.

Instead, they advocate management, balance, education and awareness. Now which side do you want having input into our kids educational environment.

Maybe some of the radical posters below should try to understand the problem and not look at it as their God-given right to eat peanut butter everywhere and anywhere.

I have 3 kids in a K-8 school and none have allergies of any sort, nor do I. However, I understand the issue and would not want to see another child caused injury by someone's fanatical sense of what a right means.

It amazes me that if parents would talk to their kids, they would find that the majority of kids don't have an issue with removing certain foods, particularly peanuts, from the classroom.

There is the small minority of kids that may have a problem with it, but they're most likely receiving the fanatical view at home that only their rights matter. These are probably the same parents whose kid is threatening to expose another kid to an allergin.

Some of you parents need to give yourself a serious shake.

I think Chris Rock said it best, and something to the effect of "There are no food allergies in Africa. When people are starving, they don't have lactose intolerance".

Point is, the number of people out there with genuine, I'm-gonna-die-if-it-is-in-the-air allergies is extremely low. Statistically so low that I can assuredly say no one commenting here is one of them. Most people who claim to be this severely allergic are self-diagnosed, borderline hypochondriacs.

Instead of society and the government taking a tempered approach, we want a nanny-state regulating and banning foods.

Heaven forbid anyone actually review scientific literature that states that the allergic response can be mediated through controlled exposure and that most allergies are curable to the point of being bearable and at worst manageable, no, instead the person with the allergy is the victim and its the rest of society that has to change.

I would like to thank Kathy and Katia for their excellent responses. Kathy really hit the nail on the head with the bullying factor. I used to get bullied a lot about my allergy.

And while I agree with Caitlin from Winnipeg that bullying is rampant in schools irregardless of how it is being carried out, I think there is still a more immediate danger when bullying an anaphylactic child is the action.

I think the adverse reaction or opinion some people have to banning peanuts in schools is simply due to misinformation and misunderstanding. As Kathy mentioned, as a parent with an anaphylactic child, she worries each day that one small thing could seriously harm her daughter.

I agree with everyone who says that educating the allergic child/adult is important...but I am telling you people - I am the single most careful and aware person you will EVER meet and I've still had situations where I grew violently ill and almost died.

I would also take offence to people saying my parents, particularly my mother, didn't educate me enough about my allergy. She drilled into me the importance of being safe, and when I was in school I was the only one with a life-threatening allergy and peanut bans didn't exist. It was truly frightening for both of us at times.

I guess I am just sick and tired of people forming such mean and exclusionary opinions about a condition that very few of you have DIRECTLY experienced.

LK mentioned something that I really respect, and that is that to make blanket statements about anyone's situation is impossible. DO NOT assume that you know what is best for me or another anaphylactic child.

Until you've experienced an allergy like that yourself...you can never know how frightening it can be.

Kathy-
Children get bullied and even killed in school, and they are not allergic to peanuts. If some children attacked your child and threatened her life, they were assaulting her, and should be disciplined as such by the school, suspended, or expelled. But the peanut allergy is just the method used.
Bullying and assault is a problem no matter what, and can be life threatening from head injuries, etc., not just anaphylaxis.

I'd like to see more research being done on decreasing the incidence of anaphylaxis. I have heard that the early introduction of foods other than breast milk increases food allergies. Has anyone else heard this?

Has anyone considered what is going to happen when Dalton McGuinty's new schooling takes effect?

If children as young as three and four are going to school all day, isn't it becoming day care?

How many more policies are going to come into effect that affects everyone? How many MORE things will have to be accommodated for these kids?

So Many people wanted the government involved to protect kids,you got what you asked for...

I think allergies and the response to them in general is getting out of hand in elementary schools, but lacking just about anywhere else.

Awareness and education are key in the adult world as well as with children.

I don't know many times a person with an allergy to wheat has been given a piece of toast by someone AFTER they specifically informed them of their allergy because our culture does not associate bread with wheat anymore!

We do have a responsibility to the rest of society. That said, it's not a blanket responsibility.

If there is a child in ONE CLASS who will die from inhaling peanuts from a few feet away, educate the child, teachers, fellow students, and their parents about that allergy.

In that ONE class, banning peanuts is probably a good idea. Banning it in the entire school is outrageous for one child, but if there are several children (proportional to the school's population), perhaps.

Making parents aware that they should not send mayonnaise in anything that more than their child will eat -- great. Making children aware that they should not share their sandwich with Little Susie -- definitely!

Reasonable accommodation may inconvenience others, but I am happy to be inconvenienced if I save someone else's life.

If my coworker in the next cubicle is going to die from being exposed to my perfume all day, or be unable to work, then I will endeavour to either a) not wear the perfume or b) figure out how to perhaps change the office arrangement if that will suffice.

I do not have a right to wear my perfume, but my coworker has a right to work and a right to breathe.

My child does not have a right to specifically eat a peanut butter sandwhich, but my child's classmate has the right to live. If my child cannot eat a peanut butter sandwich at home, then I will be concerned.

Further to my previous post.

I believe that daycares and elementary classes that have children with SEVERE allergies should ban the allergen (a rash is not severe, anaphylaxis is). Education should be provided to the parents and the children attending.

Of course a person with an allergy should take responsibility for their condition but come on people, HOW MANY RESPONSIBLE CHILDREN AGED 10 AND UNDER DO YOU KNOW!!!!! Is dying a reasonable alternative when a caring community could just take a few more precautions?

Once they get to middle school and beyond, a child can take more responsibility for their allergy - at this point they CAN read the labels, their hand-washing skills are better, they are not putting everything in their mouths and they do know not to share food. It is not necessary to implement an allergen ban at that stage.

A little common sense goes a long way!

Wow! Judging from some of the comments posted here, I no longer am puzzled why a child would shove a peanut butter cup in my daughter's face at school and another threatened to smear her with a peanut butter sandwich - the attitude must come from their parents.

Death is a terrible penalty to pay for a moment of carelessness by a child or ignorance by the adults.

My daughter is severely allergic to peanuts, I am fearful of that time when she will have a reaction (which the doctor tells me could lead to anaphylaxis and the possibility of death).

When they are young a peanut free environment is crucial. I was promised a peanut free daycare only to discover the daycare provider was handing out peanut butter sandwiches to the children when I was not there.

Elementary school was better in that they made her classroom peanut free. (Sorry, like many single parents, I must work - home school is not an option).

Once she got to middle school I no longer requested a peanut free classroom (because an older child can be peanut SAFE) but the school insisted on keeping the peanut free policy. My daughter has been bullied and threatened over her allergy.

Most of the children (and their parents), after they were educated about her condition, are understanding and careful.

I understand that peanut butter is cheap and a necessity for low income families. But, there are alternatives to peanut butter and no one should eat it everyday anyway.

A place should be provided for children to eat their lunches without putting another child at risk.

I agree that it's the affected parties [in this case, the children] who should be educated about the matter. That's absolutely the best course of action.

I don't at all agree with forcing everyone around them to change and comply in order to shield them from their allergies. The children whose parents wrap them in a security blanket until they graduate high school get out in the real world and have NO IDEA how to get on by themselves. School is far more flexible and compassionate than the real world. Hands down.

I have fairly strong chemical sensitivity. Just being in proximity to someone wearing perfume can be enough to give me a severe migraine, which leaves me bedridden for the rest of the day and often includes vomiting and other unpleasantness.

Instead of telling people around me to stop wearing perfume, I remove myself from the situation. I find another place to stand on the bus, and I walk on the other side of the mall from perfume stores.

I know what I need to do to protect myself, and I do it. I don't rely on other people to change and baby me.

I went to school with a girl who had a severe allergy to peanuts. And this was in high school, when it's a lot harder to regulate what people do/bring for lunch/etc. We were all told about her allergy, and to make sure we never ate peanuts around her.

We were careful, she was careful, and we still got to eat our snickers bars at lunch. And somehow she's made it 20+ years.

We should start taking responsibilities for ourselves, and teach our children to do the same.

A larger issue is being missed here. Lactose intolerence is 100 times more common than nut allergies.

Children suffer from it get severely ill. Schools should concentrate on banning products that are harmful to a much larger group of children, rather than be concerned about such a small percetentage allergic to nuts.

Renee:

I stand corrected.

However, you had made a blanket statement that (not getting nuts never makes people sick), and I provided a example of someone whose chosen lifestyle (for what they believe are healthy decisions) compromised their health in a way that you categorically said was impossible. That was the basis of my point. I appologize that I came on too strong.

I think though, that Sue has really hit the nail on the head. We simply can't accomodate every conceivable special need in a single environment. There comes a time when a separate or secluded or specicalised environment is more appropriate.

Just this morning I went to pack a lunch for my child - 5 healthy choices - and all of them have nuts in.Oh, well, I can just hand her $5.00 for a school lunch of fried foods right? Well, maybe not, - for alot of families nuts are a cheap source of protein (not to mention the vegan/vegetarian concerns mentioned).

Is this really a class issue? Much of our rules and laws seem to be oriented to the attitude of the privileged. A peanut ban has little affect on an affluent family - but a huge affect on poor families.

I realize how serious the peanut allergy is - but doesn't that mean that these kids would be better off at home until they are old enought to protect themselves?

The recent booster seat laws, and no-smoking in cars with kids laws are also ones that ignore the needs of poor families. They make it harder and harder for kids to get a ride from others or even from cabs.

They keep telling the kids in school that they can't have peanuts "this year" because of a kid in their grade/class with an allergy - I suspect that this is a fiction, and they have just posted a board wide ban to avoid litigation.

Oh, and when it became clear that MY kid had an allergy to a cleaning product that caused a severe reaction - did they get rid of that product? NO. Did they stop using it in her school or classroom - NO.

If this allergy is a disability - well I would say that the whole inclusion policy needs to be re-balanced anyway. How many times has my kids whole class been disrupted by a special needs kid - countless. How many times has my kid or other kids been hurt by an out of control behaviourally-challenged (probably fetal drug syndrome) kid who was supposed to be watched constantly by a staff member but somehow wasn't?

This inclusion policy isn't working for students or for teachers. Special needs kids belong with teachers specially trained to give them the help they need with special resources - regular schools just can't do this properly.

I say that the total responsibility lies with the parents and students. Let the parents prepare and package a lunch that is suitable for their child, and make it a school punishable offense for the student to share his or any other student's lunch. Problem solved.

This is not a responsibility of the Province, the School boards or the teachers and their aides. This is strictly a personal responsibility of the parents and students who are in *any way* allergic. And let them be responsible for their own EpiPens.

Maybe if some of these hyper-anti-peanut people spent some time serving for the UN in Africa, then they would realize how fortunate they are to live in Canada.

As others have mentioned, the answer is parental responsibility. If I had a child with a rare allergic sensitivity to the sun, would I insist everyone has to live in the dark? Of course not!

The solution is to EDUCATE your children to avoid things that may be harmful to them. Dumping that parental responsibilty on to a school board is inappropriate and dodging basic parental responsibility.

To quote LK: "So maybe before you make statements like you did above you should do your own research. Failure to do so only demonstrates that your ignorance of other people's issues is as great as what you accuse others of having."

LK: I AM VEGAN as are many of my friends. Researched enough for you?? The reason I found that comment insulting is because, despite what you or anyone else may personally believe, being vegan or vegetarian is a personal CHOICE. It is not something you are born with, or a condition that you are pre-disposed to have and can eventually develop.

There are many no-nut vegan options. By suggesting that just because a person cannot eat that particular source of protein for ONE meal a day, they will develop malnutrition, is wholeheartedly wrong. I never eat them and I am alive and very healthy.

Are you trying to suggest to me that a child's right to eat protein through the form of a nut product for their school lunch, is more important than protecting children who cannot even inhale the smell of a nut without going into anaphylactic shock?

Again, the fact of the matter is that a child or person who chooses to eat only vegan or vegetarian foods still has that CHOICE.

I, nor anyone else who has these allergies, has a choice. When your niece got sick because of the lack of nuts - she was still able to eat protein in other forms to get well.

I stand by anyone's right to be vegan or vegetarian. But you are missing the point - this is not about someone's right to be vegan, this is about everyone's right to live and breath and be healthy in their everyday environment.

Perhaps you should think about what you're saying, before being so quick to jump in and tell me I'm ignorant.

I am used to not being allowed to send my kid to school with a pb sandwich, but that is not the only severe anaphylactic allergy.

The more things that get on the list (citrus, kiwi, strawberries, fish), no heat-up lunches, no lunch that requires refrigeration, etc., the less nutritious choices there are for ALL kids, regardless of whether they have this allergy, which is being called a disability.

Unfortunately, calling this a disability has the effect of saying that all children should be equally disabled, in order to include those who have this medical problem.

What if my child has some other disability, which further limits their food choices? I think most parents are very sympathetic, but see their children's worlds shrinking, not only due to their own limits, but being made to live within the limits of others.

Parents of allergic kids have to have some responsibility too, it can't all be laid on parents of non-allergic (or other-allergic) kids. It really is a question of what is reasonable to expect from society as a whole in order to respect an individual.

I think the greatest cause of frustration arising from blanket bans is how parents often inflate the actual risk of their child's allergy.

Allergy to peanuts can be extreme but for most children, actual ingestion is required. Yet, parents of these children cavelierly advocate a complete ban "just in case" with no regard for the burden it places on other families.

I have personally seen a peanut ban getting placed and then finding out later that only 1 child suffers from the allergy and only if he eats a large quantity does it become a problem. That is unreasonable and actually risks those with acute allergies. It's just like the fable when the boy cried wolf. People get overloaded with alarms and cautions and start to ignore all of them all together.

Most people have no problem changing their habits if it actually protects the life & security of another. But that means an honest disclosure of the risk of exposure involved.

The school should ban items if risk of exposure is high (Like from touch and inhalation.)or reaction is severe. Otherwise, the school should only need to be notified and parents should take the responsibility in educating their own child in minimizing their chance of exposure (Like eating another kid's lunch/snack).

If little Johnny gets a rash from eating a peanut butter cup, then it is Johnny's parent's job to teach little Johnny to not eat the candy. However, if little Johnny can die from smelling peanut oil, then it becomes the community's responsibility to minimize the risks.

To answer Ottawa MT's question:

"How did we get to the point that so many children have potentially fatal food allergies? "

The answer is inextricably linked to the fact that as a species, humans have become so far removed from our natural environment and are so inundated with hyper-cleanliness that our bodies are unable to cope with nature.

Since the end of the Second World War, when Japan exploded from a largely agrarian society into a mechanized, technologized society in only a few decades, the incidence of people reporting hayfever has skyrocketed. Whereas allergies were developed by a tiny percentage of citizens in pre-War Japan, in the 60s and 70s 15% of Japanese reported developing hayfever.

I suggest all those who wish to absolve themselves any societal responsibility (I'm looking your way Chris from Waterloo) read the following article published by Maclean's last year:

http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20060605_128132_128132

Quoting Renee from Ottawa:

And to be so rash as to suggest, as one person did, that us with allergies are inflicting malnutrition and eventual DEATH on children who are vegan and vegetarian? What an absolute insult!! You should be ashamed of yourself."

Without going into what I personnaly think of Vegans, I have a niece that is one. (Or tries to be). While serving in Africa with the UN, she had to switch back to eating meat. Why? Well, it seems she was not getting enough protein (very limited access to good quality nuts), and was starting to lose her teeth, as well as having other health issues.

So maybe before you make statements like you did above you should do your own research. Failure to do so only demonstrates that your ignorance of other people's issues is as great as what you accuse others of having.

I grew up with a friend who is vegan AND severely allergic to peanuts and tomatoes and mildly allergic to other foods.

We lived together overseas for a couple of years, where English was limited, and she took the initiative of having her allergies (and the consequences-anaphylactic shock) translated into several languages so there would not be an issue, and there never was while there.

Funny though, we went to a restaurant in Toronto a few years ago where she told them she has these severe allergies, very politely I might add, and she ended up in the hospital as they did not think it would be a problem to mix her food with the same spoon used in the tomato sauce.

The point is, she took responsibility for her allergies, and dietary preferences her whole life. Though it sometimes made me avoid cooking bacon at home (grrr) she never really imposed her "differences" on me and she is a happy, healthy adult who went through the public school system with all of these allergies.

Don't punish the "normal" kids by making them the bad guys, educate the allergy-inflicted students...which is the PARENTS responsibility!

Totally off topic and irrelevant..... but nowhere in ANY of my posts did I spell my name with a "ph". Wow - you ADULTS are really on the ball........ since you're making up words (or names) maybe you're making up the facts you present as well.

Chris from Waterloo - if you don't believe the whole " 'you don't need to ingest peanut butter, you can just smell it on someone's breath and a reaction will occur' " just Google it - it's the truth and I'm not the only person on the boards to point it out.

Second - I should point out that I don't have children and I know you're next remarks are that since I don't, I can't possibly know what I am talking about. But I do have nieces and newphews so I do know.

I agree that children need to be responsible when they have an allergy.... I agree that you should ban all foods especially when they need to be ingested to have an allergic reaction.... I agree that teachers can't spend all their time checking lunches

BUT

parents should be able to show a little more concern in what they pack for their children's lunches.... PERIOD! If a child in the class has a peanut allergy, show respect and don't give your kid a peanut butter sandwich. But then again, if you're too lazy to find time to find other alternatives at the grocery store (as John from Winnipeg has) then that is definately a PROBLEM.

Continue with the your stupidity and obnoxious comments.... I'm done with this board.

Quoting Sarah:

"My god! I see no problem banning a substance in which even fumes can kill."

and quoting Rock:

"Vegans rely on consumption of nuts in order to obtain much needed protein, a requirement for growth of young bones.

Why is Stephania willing to inflict malnutrition, stunted growth and eventual death on such a large child population, for her own selfish needs?"

My thoughts:

I can only hope that Sarah did not see Roch's posting before she wrote her accusations against all the posters who think this is going overboard, or she is as guilty as Stephania of being extremist.

I have no allergies, I have no children. I do, however have a friend who is chemically sensitive and also need to put in my two cents.

If some of the allergies can affect the allergic by sense of smell and touch, then by all means ban them. But for those who are affected only by ingesting them, to have these items banned is more than just an inconvenience it is stepping on the basic freedoms that we as Canadians are entitled to. T

hose who are allergic to ingested foods should be treated no differently than a diabetic, and as of yet I have not seen sugar banned from schools.

To have Teachers become food police and search every lunch that enters the school, I think that is going beyond what is required of a Teacher.

Teachers are taught how to teach children, and should not be responsible for search and seizure. I believe that responsiblity should be left to those who are paid to do so, such as police officers and other security officers.

Once the school has been notified of a student's special needs then the school should be responsible for ensuring that all the staff are properly trained in dealing with a reaction, educating the students in a classroom setting and notifying all of the parents of the school by post, that items such as peanut butter are banned and that they should discuss with their children the dangers of food allergies.

This should be all that is required of the school system, anything beyond this takes away from the reason that the students are going to school, to get an education.

As someone who grew up with a peanut allergy in a time when it was FAR less common than it is today, I have to say that I am insulted and disgusted by some of the comments made here.

Parents with kids who don't have allergies: are you saying that it is not your duty to be a little safer with your kid's lunches, because they don't have a "problem"?

And to be so rash as to suggest, as one person did, that us with allergies are inflicting malnutrition and eventual DEATH on children who are vegan and vegetarian? What an absolute insult!! You should be ashamed of yourself.

The difference between kids who don't have these allergies, and all of the kids now growing up who do, is that when you have an allergy you DON'T get to choose what you can and can't eat all of the time. Equal to that, you cannot choose what to smell.

To even try to compare vegetarianism to an anaphylactic allergy is not only wrong, it's stupid. Have your children become violently ill or even died because they couldn't have their vegetarian snack with nuts in it?? NO.

Have they been rushed to the emergency room and nearly died countless times because someone at school rubbed peanut butter on them, or they accidentally ate something with nuts in it - as I did when I was a child? NO.

I could go on...but I will conclude by saying that I appreciate those parents who take a little extra time and precaution in making their children's meals safe. It is not as hard as some people make it out to be...and those who complain are just being lazy.

It's not about inconvenience or about your right to give your kids whatever food you choose - it's about life and death, and about ignorance. Stop acting like it's anything less than that.

When you are told your child has analphylaxis allergies, you are given worst case scenarios, which, does seem to be extreme. As a parent, it is hard to believe that something as innocent as a bit of food can actually kill the little angel in front of you.

All you have to do is experience one anaphylactic reaction to realize the severity and potential for death. It's scary and traumatizing, and one scenario I would hate to see being played out in a class full of children.

I am grateful to be the parent of a child with severe allergies and live in a small, northern town. I am lucky to work with daycare centres, schools and municipal recreation programs that care enough to educate themselves and others about the special needs a child with anaphylactic allergies will have.

I am proud to say that many parents who have questions, do ask me. It shows that they care and want to understand more so that they can respond appropriately. Kids who have gone to school with my son since JK have learned to be aware, and it is an accepted way of life in their class.

Is this a perfect world? No. Will my child face potential dangers? Always. Can I prevent them? Not always, but I need to try to work with everyone to deal with things I can control. This also includes instilling the need for my child to take personal responsiblity for his health.

Some of the resentment and lack of empathy I read in these postings are sad, and don't do anything but rile up more negative feelings on this issue.

It is my hope that families that live with severe allergies will continue to do their best by their children. Not everyone will agree with the measures taken, but not everyone has to live with the consequences either.

I'm appalled by the callous comments many people are making.

Maybe, in general, parents are too overprotective these days but the fact that some kids have such a severe allergy that someone can just breathe on them and die, is a valid fear!

Have some compassion people!!

My god! I see no problem banning a substance in which even fumes can kill.

I'm not sure how common these types of food allergies are though.

But if you're saving a life, isn't it worth the trouble? Is it frustrating to have to figure out what to pack for your non-allergic kid...absolutely!

But how would you feel if your kid's lunch killed another kid?

LK...Thanks for the additional information.

Isabelle...The concern of exposure is greatly reduced as children become older because they also become more aware and appreciative of the dangers.

When Little Johnny and Susan are in JK or SK is when I think the greater danger exists.

Fortunately, at that age they should be under the watchful eye of parents when out in public.

Chris from Waterloo...wow! I really don't know what to say to someone that doesn't have one iota of social responsibility in them.

I can only home that you didn't mean to come across as blunt as your post.

My couple of posts below advocate parental responsibility for the most part, but I do believe that we as a society have a responsibility to others as well, particulary when we are talking about small kids in a crowded environment like a school.

Yes, banning all food or searching lunches is way overboard for the small numbers of people affected.

Managing the issue where it exists and with balance to the rights of others should be preferable.

Unfortunately Chris, you are completely wrong.

There are plenty of medical studies, particularly for peanuts, that demonstrate airborne particulates (what you smell) as well as touching an object that has peanut residue on it can cause severe reaction in some people.

Why do you think they banned peanuts from airplanes... because of the recirculated air and the potential for residue to be all over the interior.

If you're teaching your children to not care about anyone else but themselves, then I really feel sorry for you and them.

I hope that you or them never have a friend with a peanut allergy, then again, I doubt you ever will.

Qouting Eric from SJ

"The margarine tub was always a danger so I started making my own lunches for that way I could inspect it for peanut butter contamination"

Let's look at that comment. It means that if I, as an adult, have a PB sandwich (or someone else in the house), and then one of my schoolage kids ( I have 3) makes a sandwich (using contaminated butter) without peanut butter, and sits beside a classmate, it can trigger a reaction.

OK. I guess that to keep some of the rabid "You have to keep all allergins away form my child" posters on this topic we need a more radical solution. (Keeping mind that their kids will also go to malls, playgrounds, and other public places. LET'S JUST BAN ALL FOOD.

In about 80 days there will no longer be an issue.

Either that, or they, like so many other posters have done (myself included), need to take responsibility for their own environment, as do their children.

As for the "may contain nuts" over-frequency: that's what happens in an overly-letigeous society where people do not accept that accidents happen.

Based on some of the comments posted here, if an employee in a plant eats PB, their breathe can contaminate the food.

Of course manufacturers put that label on it there is the slightest chance of contamination.

Failure to do so can land them in court. (Probably in front of one of the rabid "You have to keep all allergins away form my child" posters.)

Stepania's logic is flawed in that there are many, many more vegetarian and vegan children than children who are allergic to peanuts.

Vegans rely on consumption of nuts in order to obtain much needed protein, a requirement for growth of young bones.

Why is Stephania willing to inflict malnutrition, stunted growth and eventual death on such a large child population, for her own selfish needs?

Stefania from Woodbridge,

You've got a lot of nerve to tell us parents of children without allergies to change our lifestyle because of a problem with you child.

Additionally, I'm not buying the whole 'you don't need to ingest peanut butter, you can just smell it on someone's breath and a reaction will occur'. I'd like to see some scientific studies proving beyond a reasonable doubt that this is the case.

On top of that, if you don't like how things are at school, why don't you consider home schooling? Or why don't you pick your child up at lunch?

Segregation is the absolute only option I would ever support on this issue because I am NOT EVER changing our lifestyle because of someone else's problem.

If I were you, I would start looking in the mirror and focus on your and your child's own responsibilities because pointing your finger in my direction will get you absolutely nowhere and the school system, government, or any other interest group WILL NOT change our lifestyle. PERIOD!

One of my daughters doesn't like meat sanwiches, so the only thing she will eat consistently is tuna or peanut butter sandwiches.

Since too much tuna is unhealthy (find me something nowadays that isn't), I had to find an alternative. Through an uncle of mine who developed allergies later in life but loved his peanut butter, I found out that at Superstore (and other stores I assume) they have a no-nut peanut substitute call Pea-butter that tastes almost the same as regular peanut butter.

Try it, your kids might like it.

Glen wrote:
Little Johnny eats a peanut butter cookie and then touches a door handle.
Little Susan comes by a couple of minutes later and touches the same door handle.

I understand this is why they have banned peanuts and most tree nuts.

The issue here is that yes, the child is safe while at school is this ban is enforced, however, what will Little Susan do when she goes out in public (malls, transit etc), where there is no such ban?

THAT is why many people are emphasizing education and self-responsibility for the child with the allergy. Because while they may be safe in school, the real world awaits.

Suggesting that they don't ask society but to trust only themselves to be vigilant and responsible about their allergy isn't being mean, it's being realistic.

Quoting Glen from Toronto

"The one thing that people are forgetting about severe peanut allergies as opposed to shellfish, wheat gluten, dairy, is that even the residue or smell of peanut can cause a reaction.

Someone with more knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong, but most other food related allergies require ingestion of the substance versus simply touching it or its residue"

Not correct. My brother has a severe alergy to fish, and the smell of fish can set it off. He once had some (about 3) fries done in the same oil as fish, and was in bed for three days with stomach cramps.

I also had a severe alergy to citrus fruit peel. One tiny piece of grated zest in a cookie would result in may face swelling up yo yhe point that my eyelids closed over my eyse, and I was effectively blind for a day or so.

That being said, both of us were educated from very young ages that we COULD NOT eat these things, and learned to ALWAYS question the contents of food.

If in doubt, DON'T EAT IT. Stay away from environments where yu can be exposed to it. (My brother has to avoid food courts in most malls).

We make our own jam, and some recipes call for Almond Extract. We ALWAYS use artificial, just in case we want to give some to friends that have a nut allergy.

I don't know what the solution is for the microscopic portion of the population is that have an airborne intolerance to nuts. Making every other child in Canada suffer is NOT the answer. Peanut butter is one of the cheapest sources of protein around.

Just want to add to my previous post as some people thing kids with peanut allergies are defenseless. While I can only speak for myself as I don't know anyone else who is afected I was never defenseless.

Even as a very small child if I ate a peanut, my mouth felt like it was on fire. And whatever I'd put in my mouth come out faster than when it went in with no allergic reaction.

Just an unpleasant taste left in my mouth. Just recently I was in a small room talking to a friend when he open a jar of planters peanuts and started pigging out. Even though I was about 6 feet away it took less that 60 seconds before I felt myself starting to swell and my eyes were watering.

I left the room and within 10 second I was fine. But I am completely defenceless against anything frozen with peanuts, I think maybe it freezes my taste buds. Because of this I almost died in my teens and yes I didn't read the label.

And for Allan; everytime I eat icecream it's like playing russian roulette. The packaging always says " may contian trace of..." well it either does or doesn't.

This doesn't just apply to people with peanut allergies but all allergies. If the manufacture can't maintain his food processing to a point where he can guaranty what is in it then we are all at risk.

Perhaps the reason allergies are on the increase is because we have distanced ourselves so far from nature that we're becoming allergic to it.

Regardless, allergen containing foods such as nuts, grains, eggs, milk products, fish, fruit etc. are not only considered health foods but also essential foods by many.

The suggestion that children without allergies eat hypo-allergenic foods like french fries and cold cuts doom them to future health problems. So the onus should not be on the schools to deny non-allergic students of their food. Rather it should be to ensure that the allergic ones come to school with their Epi-pens. If not they should be sent home.

This whole situation is an example of irresponsible parents trying to pass the responsibility of taking care of their children onto others. Maybe hoping that in this litigious society where one can often successfully blame others for one's own failures, an "accident" while in the care of others will result in a profitable lawsuit.

Fellowparent of Woodbridge points out, "Every child has the right to feel safe when they go to school. And every child has a right to attend school."

I think it is "every child has a right to an education". And education begins at home. The fact is, children with allergies are at risk throughout the day and not just at school. And any parent who doesn't suitably equip their allergic child is irresponsible and the real threat to their child's safety.

Basically, it comes down to "Your child is YOUR responsibility". The reality is there are many dangers in this world and it is your responsilbilty to ensure that your child is reasonably prepared for them. Failure to properly equip them is negligence on your part.

To those parents who are requested to restrict their child's diets, do instead as Michelle of Calgary suggests, and attach a "may contain traces of..." to their lunch bags.

Actually Stephanie, I have teens, who from a young age were taught personnal responsibilty.

A four year old understands no and do not touch - trust me I know this from experience.

The biggest problem today is that parents want to be 'friends' with their kids and abdicate their responsibility to anyone else (school boards, coaches, club coaches, even other parents) instead of being a parent themselves.

These are CHILDREN - some as young as 4 years old - not adults. I take neither of you have children because if you did you would understand that kids are more concerned about playing and having fun then worrying every minute of every day that they could die.

And Roch - get a life. Your statement that says you "suggest they try to suffer a little more quietly" is the rudest, more abnoxious thing I have ever heard.

You must be a lazy, couch potato who has no contact with the outside world if that's what your response to this is. And if you're not one now, you will be one day.

Well, if indeed "PEOPLE WITH ALLERGIES DO NOT HAVE TO EAT THE FOOD TO SUFFER", then I suggest they try to suffer a little more quietly, and allow others to enjoy their lunch.

The fact is less than 0.1% of people have severe nut allergies, the 8 of 21 number you refer to in isolated case is likely sympathy allergies, a form of hypochondria.

I'm sorry - why is it the schools's responsibility? Where are the parents and why aren't they assuming responsibility for thier children?

And what will these children expect of others in the adult world in their later years? Do you honestly believe you are going to keep peanut butter off public transportation?

Teach these children the appropriate response. Let them learn something their parents have obviously not taught them - PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY

I cannot believe how insensitive and rude people on this board are. Here's a reality check and it's been said on this board already: PEOPLE WITH ALLERGIES DO NOT HAVE TO EAT THE FOOD TO SUFFER.

My mother works in a kindergarten class at a school in Woodbridge. Out of a class of 21 kids, 8 have some sort of peanut/nut allergy. This is not a small percentage. They have called the paramedics to that classroom alone 4 times since September.

My mother came home crying the first time because she had never seen a child suffer anaphylactic shock before and she realized how little time it really takes for a child to suffer from an allergy.

And the reason, one parent decided to ignore the school's requests, sent peanut butter cookies in their child's lunch, sat NEAR the child with the allergy in an assembly, and had peanut traces on his breath.

The child with the allergy knew what was happening and notified a teacher. Now the child knew they had an allergy, they knew they couldn't eat peanuts, maybe they could have been segregated for lunch, maybe the child who ate the cookies washed their hands - but none of this mattered except the pure STUPIDITY of the parent who packed the cookies in the lunch.

Segregating the child with allergies is NOT the answer. Even if you did...the child returns to the classroom after lunch and touches a toy or book that another child who ate peanuts touched or sits near a child with peanut breath ... and BOOM! so much for segregation.

Let me guess.... let's just separate the children completely. Let's make a classroom for all ages and lock them up for the day, teach them what they need to know and send them on their merry way.

People who recommend such ludicrous ideas should put yourselves in another parent's shoes and see what it's like.

I don't believe that inspecting every child's lunch is the answer - but PARENTS need to take more responsibility in providing lunches and snacks that do not contain these items.

I,like Peter,had a problem with the smoking ban protecting kids.
The same for the bans of junk food etc. in schools.
The same problem with the protection of ALL kids under 18 by the government according to UNICEF reccommendations.

Whether it is because of my disease,I am allergic to foods,medications and many things in the environment.I have also been WARNED that they will become worse the older I get.

I still believe it is the parents responsibility NOT the governments to ensure my safety.

That being said,I believe in education for the student with the allergies,their parents,their classmates,the school and teachers to be AWARE of the problem,know the possible symptoms AND what to do in the event of a reaction!

When the smoking ban came into effect,there was warnings raised what would be next.Perfume was cited as an example.

Now everywhere is becoming scent free places because of allergies and asthma attacks.

I also believe it is up to product manufactures to list PROMINENT WARNINGS to the BIG ALLERGIES such as milk,fish,shellfish,eggs,chocolate,peanuts,etc

In mine and my husband's stupidity,we bought a salad dressing we had bought forever that we had quit checking the ingrediants on.
In less than 15 minutes I was having a major reaction.

When you have allergies,you automatically go into a double check mode in your mind of anything different.He checked the salad dressing,they had added anchovies and we had gotten too comfortable with NOT checking this product because we knew it.

Also I have had major reactions to drugs BEFORE the public was ever made aware of the possibilities or it was pulled off the shelves.Does the name VIOXX ring a bell??

It is also listed that I have alot of ENVIRONMENTAL ALLERGIES which are also creating the paths of almost ALL of the newly diagnosed kids with asthma.

In a nutshell[pun intended] MOST of our allergies are CREATED BY MAN!

I think that there is also a bit of over-reaction in many of these posts and this issue in general.

The one thing that people are forgetting about severe peanut allergies as opposed to shellfish, wheat gluten, dairy, is that even the residue or smell of peanut can cause a reaction.

Someone with more knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong, but most other food related allergies require ingestion of the substance versus simply touching it or its residue.

The fact that peanuts can cause severe reactions without ingestion is why most schools have banned nut products outright.

I do think though that they may be going overboard on other allergins that need to be ingested.

One thing that really only a parent can feel...I don't want to be responsible or have my child be responsible for the severe illness or death of another child.

In fact, in our school it's mostly the parents that have problems with food bans not the kids.

When kids were asked, they fully supported bans if it meant that their friends were safe.

Once again, children prove smarter than us educated adults.

Little Johnny eats a peanut butter cookie and then touches a door handle.

Little Susan comes by a couple of minutes later and touches the same door handle.

Little Johnny then sees Little Susan lying on the ground with an epi pen being jammed into her leg. I wonder who is more taumatized; Little Susan who's had reactions before or Little Johnny seeing the result.

People, children and adults, with allergies need to do what those with diabetes do.

Manage it, make others aware, have epi-pen/insulin on hand.....

I don't consider diabetes a disability and I don't consider an allergy a disability (except in those extremely rare cases where children truly have to live in a bubble and I don't think that is correctly called an allergy.)

I don't know of anyone with diabetes who says, can't have any sugar in this place because little johnny might eat it.

I recognize that some allergies are a bit more complicated than eating, that touching can create a reaction or, as in perfume, the airbourne particles. In the case of perfume, because the particles can be airbourne, banning the use of seems to be the most reasonable thing to do.

There is a limit though and I believe some want others to go way past that limit.

I say, manage the allergy just as those with diabetes have to manage that life-threatening disease.

Annemarie said: "Try explaining to a six year old why they can't eat the chocolate bar that their friend is eating."

I had a milk allergy when I was a kid and wasn't able to eat chocolate until later on in my teenage years, yet somehow I managed to get through all those Halloweens, Christmases, and Easters just fine!

Eric, Good for you for getting into the habit of personal safety when you were still young.

That is the best safety system a parent can instill in a child.

Relying on others to be cautious opens the doors to all kinds of error.

Encourage him or her to take charge.

Most probably do anyway but their parents are unable to let go.

I do however, have to question why you are against candy manufacturers stating clearly their product "may contain" peanuts or other nuts.

While we may picture all products being made separately from other products the reality is that one run of candy may be followed by another onto moving conveyor belts.

Perhaps they should be completely cleared and sanitized between batches, but I would imagine the time it takes to catch every last tiny bit of nut that just might end up on the supposedly nut-free batch running next.

If the manufacturer deems it too expensive to guarantee no nuts what-so-ever, then I'd think the next best thing is the "may contain" warning.

I do admit I speak from the point of view of someone who doesn't suffer from allergies and no doubt the view from your side of this debate takes in considerations I'll miss.

Annemarie wrote:
Try explaining to a six year old why they can't eat the chocolate bar that their friend is eating.

Just before my friend's child turned 7, the child was diagnosed with a food allergy (milk protein). It's not anaphylactic, but it would cause bleeding ulcers if eaten in amounts typically found in the Canada Food Guide.

Since then, this child has been made to understand the problem and is VERY aware of what can and cannot be eaten. In fact, the child carries a list of the "hidden" names for it in processed foods (for instances where they're at a party or other similar situation). Anytime food is offered, this child will ask "is there any milk or milk ingredients in this?" and will explain why you're being asked.

It is obvious that school is too dangerous for children. bully's, algergies, attention deficit stress, anxiety, viruses. not to mention peer pressure, sexual tension, fashion statements, religious misguidance, vending machine obesity.

it is time to ban school. Keep the kids home where the parent can mould and model them, comfort and coddle them, protect and pamper them.

of course every child has rights...excepting of course those whose rights might infringe on your kid's rights.

We are slowing becoming a society of nurtured neuroses.

I have a severe peanut and tree nut allergy and grew up in the 80s when the standard reaction to my allergy was: "you can't be allergic to peanuts, you're a kid!"

I like to think I did a good job telling people about my allergy and refusing food that I couldn't eat, but I still had many reactions growing up.

It is every parent's responsibility to teach their children about how to deal with their allergies, however young children cannot be expected to follow the rules 100% of the time.

Try explaining to a six year old why they can't eat the chocolate bar that their friend is eating. Try explaining to them why they have to eat lunch in a different room away from all of their friends.

While I think searching every school lunch is not feasible, I am in complete favour of school wide bans. Is it so much of a hassle not to pack peanut butter for your children if it means that another child could die?

To an anaphylactic child that peanut butter is poison. What if I decided to send my child to school with rat poison shaped like candy? Is that okay because the other children should know not to eat rat poison? Why should it be MY problem that YOUR child can't identify rat poison?

I too have food allergies (shellfish). But this is where the victimization stops!

I (and my parents when I was a child) do not expect others to take care my problem. It's up to me to be safe!

And I've known this since I was a child! I have never expected anyone other than myself (and my parents) to ensure my safety.

People today want to be risk and responability free when it comes to the everyday's of life. Many of us are growing extremely weary of this continuing attitude (and bombardment) of irresponsability.

I pay my taxes of which a large portion goes to the care of our society's young. And this is where I (and many, many others) want it to stop.

I do not want to be finacially and morally traumatized for every skinned knee, broken arm, school yard fight, or allergic reaction.

Schools (and teachers) should be busy teaching and parents should be busy caring and raising. How did we ever get to such a state of ongoing political correctness whining?

I have read through a lot of the comments posted here and cannot help but wonder at the lack of common sense displayed by some.

I must say that the post made by Natalie from Kingston struck a chord. I think that, in a truly Canadian fashion, we apply common sense and work together (allergy-parents and non-allergy parents) and figure out something sensical.

I have no problems changing what I put in my son's lunch for a year if I hear at the beginning of the year that there is a dangerous, or potentially dangerous allergy in the class.

As a parent I would want to know that the same would be done for my son if there was a serious problem. I don't think that it is necessary to police lunches, and if it becomes that much of a problem, then find another alternative no?

I think that the creation of an allergy-lunchroom is not a bad idea if there is a serious problem but would hope that it is a last resort.

I also think that we need to take into consideration the plight of parents of picky eaters before we go instituting across-the-board bans on everything we normally eat. I heard of one on Kiwis caused by one allergic child. I know this may seem naive but I don't think there are any serious problems that could not be solved by keeping good communication lines open between parents and schools, not to mention educating children...

My mother spent a few years as a lunch room supervisor in Calgary, and in 10 years, she had one student have an anaphylactic nut reaction.

The allergic student stole a peanut butter cookie from another student, and popped it in her mouth. When the girl's upset mother demanded action from the school, my mother, the supervisor, recomended the girl be suspended for endangering herself by knowingly breaking the rules.

The other students KNEW the girl had a peanut allergy, and warned her that the cookie was a peanut butter flavour. And the other students warned her of that fact.

At that point the parent decided to drop the issue with the school, and educate her daughter on why she couldn't have nuts. Apparently, she'd never actually gotten through to her daughter WHY she couldn't have nuts.

Sometimes, you just have to let nature take it's course. Thats why we have the darwin awards.

Could someone please explain to me the difference between this, the proposed banning of certain foods, levying responsibility to the teacher from the parent; and the proposed smoking ban in NS with children in vehicles?

Stay with me. This time, people are saying 'enough' to 'reasonable accomodation' and stating that it's the parent's responsibility to ensure adequate education and responsibility is assumed.

With the smoking in a vehicle, the goal of protecting the children is the same. However, rather than rely on the parent's and children to be responsible (the way it was in the past) we are stating that people shouldn't ever engage in the activity, avoidable like foods and asking police to enforce it.

Responsible people on both sides take care of their kids.

I'm just curious why this time it's 'enough' and a 'slippery slope', when to me on the subject of freedom & personal responsibility both issues have equal merit. Parents be responsible for your kids welfare. If you aren't your children will suffer.

So if I post stating that this has gone to far, will people retort with wild baseless accusations like they did when I didn't support a smoking ban in vehicles because of my belief that there are responsible and irresponsible people and society cannot watch over them?

I am one of those people who is alergic to peanuts and it is no joke, and must at all times be taken very seriously.

It is also a huge mistake to ban peanuts from schools as it will only creat a false sense of security for those alergic kids.

I grew up in a household where everyone else ate peanuts, nuts, and peanut butter.

And as much as I hated it, it taught me to ALWAYS be vigilant. I learned at an early age to use my sense of smell and taste to protect myself.

As I got older I watched very closely when ever family members ate these items, if they dropped a crumb I saw it.

The margarine tub was always a danger so I started making my own lunches for that way I could inspect it for peanut butter contamination.

If allegeric children are to survive, they need to rely on themselves and to trust no one when they say "there's no peanuts in it" because it is surprising how often people get that one wrong.

Two thing that irritate me are how is it that manufactures can get away with saying "may contian traces....". And you parents of kids with allergies should start pushing for a cure!!

While I can see the sense of being hyper-vigilant for the grade one and two kids, after that, policing the entire school population and keeping it free of all offending substances will eventually do a disservice to the allergic kids.

Kids with serious allergies have to learn to protect themselves with their own efforts, and not depend on or trust that the rest of the oblivious world will do this for them.

Also, since kids with life threatening allergies are a tiny minority in the great scheme of things, they should learn early that the world largely ignores them, once they're out in it. It is they who must adapt to the great big world, not the other way around.

In my opinion, Darcy and RJ have it right.

I agree fully with saying that it is the parents responsibility. Not the entire community or school system to worry about.

Not to sound like a child eating monster here but from what information I read, TWO DEATHS since 1994 is not something we should even be making changes for.... We are aprox. 36 million in Canada, two deaths ? Get real.

So these life-threatening allergies are considered a "disability"?

Well, guess what - having a disability means having some limitations. It means you can't do what others may be able to.

So maybe it means eating your lunch alone, or at a nut-free table, or perhaps eating at home or at a neighbour's or a caregivers home.

Let's please just let our school's get back to teaching our kids, instead of worrying about who's bringing what in their lunches.

Our entire preschool and elementary school curiculums seem to revolve around snacks and lunches these days!!

D'oh, in my last post, I made mention of cats (and realised it had nothing to do with peanut and calamine lotion allergies) because when I was editing my post down somewhat from a longer one, I had originally mentioned my nephew also has a severe allergy to cats. It's pretty nasty, he has severe asthma attacks when he encounters them (and has been put in the hospital once as a result).

He avoids cats as much as he's able (it's actually funny to see what he does at the pet store when we go to look at the birds and puppies). If he does encounter them, he takes his asthma meds and knows how to do so.

So yeah, even with this allergy, he understands that cats are a bad thing, and does what he can to minimize contact.

Doesn't help that Auntie has three of them though, but I religously clean things to minimize contact when I'm going to see him.

How have children survived this long in our education system? My god, by reading some of these posts you'd figure that this problem is claiming thousands of lives each year.

I know that something can be said for preventative measures, however not everything can be prevented. There's ALWAYS going to be "one-off" situations that cannot be prevented.

I say, segregate the kids with allergies at lunchtime only and there will be no problems. (In a perfect world, where these ‘students’ obviously live)

Also, ensure that every kid who leaves each lunchroom wash their hands before leaving. This will curtail the problem at the schools, but won't help with those students who go home and don't wash hands and come back to school, or those that sneak in treats, ect.

Like I said, if you want a solution in the schools, segregate the kids, but don't inspect lunches b/c it won't make a difference b/c of the "one-off" situations. There are too many ‘what-ifs’ to start checking lunches.

With all the accommodations I have to make in my life, I’m starting to feel like MY freedoms are being taken away. I can’t even wear cologne at work anymore, for you scent sensitive people.

Ah…I never thought I’d say it but I miss the good ole days. When people weren’t afraid to LIVE.

People have become so afraid of death we’re sacrificing our living and expecting everyone else to do the same.

I have one of the strangest life threatening allgeries any of my doctors have encountered - calamine lotion. Turns out I'm allergic to the main ingredient and this is used in several products.

Even being in close proximity to someone who has the stuff on them can trigger an attack. Sometimes I swell up like a balloon and break out in painful hives, sometimes I go into full anaphylaxis and that, my friends, is a very scary experience.

I'm also allergic to soya. Now, my allergy on this front is nowhere near as serious as my calamine allergy is, but it's bad enough and makes life very uncomfortable for me.

As a result of this I real labels, I check ingredients in everything. I avoid calamine based products and am very careful what I eat and keep myself educated.

My nephew also has severe allergies to nuts. He's seven and knows that he cannot eat them. Yes, he goes to a peanut free school (other nuts are allowed, though), but it's a big world out there and he knows it.

He knows how to use his epipen, he knows to say no to food offered him and he is very careful when encountering cats. He knows what to do.

Schools can only do so much, the rest is up to parents to educate their kids and for the kids to understand what is permissible and what isn't. I knew from a young age that I could not come into contact with calamine lotion or products made with calamine. I was six when they discovered it and from that point onward, I knew to avoid the stuff. If I come into contact with it now, it's usually by accident.

Babies, toddlers and pre-schoolers are one thing, but kids aren't as delicate or as stupid as many adults think. If a six or seven year old can understand that peanuts or cats or calamine lotion can kill them and they need to take precautions and can learn how to use an epipen, then I'm sure older kids an learn to take care of themselves on that front as well.

It's not a human rights issue at all, it's a health issue and practical one.

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The kids don't need to EAT the food they're allergic to for a bad reaction to happen. Exposure can happen by touch or even inhalation in some cases.

Kid has peanut butter for lunch, doesn't wash his hands, passes a pencil to a kid with a severe peanut allergy, and bad things happen.

Also, an epi-pen doesn't "cure" the attack, it just provides a longer window to get to the hospital.

Maybe lunch inspections aren't the answer, but there are very few other suggestions.

So then each morning the teacher is going to examine the lunches. 30-35 kids, say 30-45 minutes. Now what happens if the teacher misses something? Maybe a homemade cookie with peanut butter, that you can't really see.

A kid in her class steals or trades for another kids lunch. Eats a peanut and dies. Is the teacher now the one responsible criminally? I sure wouldn't want to be a teacher.

Seems like a lot of wasted learning time, for a tiny problem, 2 kids since 1994?

I like Jean's comment about her child's "Allergy Free Lunch Room"... that sounds like a marvellous idea.

Perhaps there should be a differentiation between allergies that could cause death (anaphylactic shock) and those that cause more minor irritations/reactions.

Home Schooling could be considered in some cases. Or an Allergy Free Private School? Maybe a "no-food-at-all" policy? Water only?

Some federal government departments are now "Officially Scent Free". No scents at all: total accomodation for the few.

I think as a society we're going a little to far. Soon it will be the cities fault when someone gets hit while crossing the road because they didn't do enough to prevent it.

I suffer from allergies and my younger sibling has the penut allergy that is extremely deadly. All through school we had to be careful but we never relied on others to be careful for us.

We made outrown lunches, didn't share utensils etc. because our parents taught us how to avoid situations that could lead to an allergy attack. We can only supervise our children so much, teach them the best ways to keep their food safe from allergies, but an out right ban is silly.

Educate the children on allergens in the class rooms as well as at home. We can only bubble wrap our kids so much before we suffocate them.

I would really like to play hockey for an NHL team. Unfortunately, through my genetics, my body does not have the physical capacity to play for an NHL team. It sucks.

Children with alergies would really like to eat all the foods that other children eat, but are just not able to through their genetics, and their bodies not having the physical capacity to eat all those mouthwatering, delicious, appetizing, exquisite, tasty, flavoursome, savory, succulent foods. It sucks.

Are children really being bullied through not being able to eat these foods, or has society already accomodated these individuals through creating medical means of keeping these people alive and equally enableing them to become contributing members of society like any other individual in Canada.

In my oppinion, it would be more of a human rights issue if all these foods are banned, as people who would normally be able to do something they enjoy, would be banned from doing so due to their genetics. It would be discriminating against all individuals who do not have allergies.

If it is the other way around, then what type of human rights issue is it? Through banning foods, kids with alergies won't be able to accomplish anything that they could already do. Who is the culprit? Should we all file a civil law suit against mother nature?

Get real.

Absolutely ridiculous! Why should we always make accommodations for the few? Peanut butter is a childhood institution! I grew up with a kid that was deathly allergic to peanut butter and he learned at a very young age to ask what was in everything he touched.

The school didn't ban peanut butter, no one check our lunches at the door and he grew up just fine. The responsibility should be placed FIRMLY with the parent.

As usual, parents expect everyone else to cater to the special needs of their little darlings - raise your own kids!

How absolutely ridiculous.

So they want to check lunches now do they? Well here’s a scenario: My child loves candy and it was just Halloween.

Now, he knows that when he goes to school his lunch is going to be checked for peanuts, and whatever else may be on the list of shame. So he decides to pocket a chocolate bar (with peanuts) in his jacket.

Now, I, being the responsible parent I am, have counselled my child on what these candies may do to another child if that child comes in contact with it, but kids will be kids and he pulls it out at recess and there just so happens to be a child there who is allergic to peanuts and has a reaction.

What now? Did making it mandatory for having my child’s lunch checked do anything to alleviate this problem? No.

Who’s responsible? Me? For having a child at school that brought a peanut ridden chocolate bar? The school? Because the school did what it was supposed to and checked my child’s lunch for toxins?

What a slippery slope this is and I hope this is just a lot of hot air because it will just never end. There needs to be a line drawn on how much society is responsible for concerning the ills or the minorities.

I say schools are doing a great job of educating students and parents on the effects of allergies, but checking lunches is just stupid.

Pretty soon I’ll have to send my son to school and hope he doesn’t get strip-searched, for potential allergic food of all things. It’s going that way.

This is completely insane - I agree with Roch - the children should eat in a "nut free" room - what happens when this child get a little older - do you think the general public is going to accomodate them - maybe the subway in Toronto during rush hour???

They should be taught to be responsible for themselves until they are able to it is the parents responsibility!

So, when this policy of lunch-bag inspection get enacted, who is going to actually search the lunches every morning? Hmmm, sounds *YET ANOTHER* job for the teachers.

Yes, every morning the teacher will have to inspect 20, 25, 30+ lunches for "banned" items. And when he/she gets distracted by disruptive kids (remember we've integrated them all now, behaviour and learning disabilities included!) and misses an item, who is going to get the blame? Oh ya, it's going to be the overworked teacher. Brilliant plan, parents of allergic children, simply brilliant.

Looks to me like yet another wonderful display of parents *NOT* taking responsibility for the welfare of their children and putting the onus on the school system.

Fellowparent states that "Any person with a disability has a right to be accomodated under the Human Rights Code."

What about 'accomodating' the rights of everyone else? When does 'reasonable accomodation' become entirely unreasonable?

Here we go again with the nanny state wrap them up in bubble wrap for 18 years attitude then turn them loose on the world where they will have to look after themselves and will not be able to attitude.

I went to school in various parts of Canada and Europe. We were told of our peers with certain allergies and as well they were made well aware of them.

As Jerome mentioned about his teacher friend in Europe she/he had not heard of one incident over their, I went to school for 7 years in England, Scotland and Germany as my dad was stationed their with the army and never heard of any of this untill we returned to Canada in 1961.

In response to fellowparent or others who share his/her view:

No, we have no idea what they are going through.

I can empathize with you on this, however, I still believe it is not the school's responsibility to monitor all food that comes and goes.

It is normal that young kids will forget about their allergies or not understand what needs to be done to prevent the allergy to break out.

Therefore, for young children aged 3-6 who are going to elementary school or to a daycare centre, it would be a good idea for teachers/babysitters to take extra precautions on what food/utensils the children is using and being aware on how to use the epi-pen, etc. That is, if they are not already taking these steps to ensure the children's safety.

After a certain age, though, the children are old enough to understand what to stay away from and not to share food with other students.

They have to be educated about their own allergies from the start, but this rests with the parents. The school should ensure teachers and students are aware of allergies and have a program in place that teaches the use of epi-pen or about allergy emergencies.

Food banning takes this too far in my opinion.

I have seen my brother almost die because no one thought (even he) of checking what was in the pie we were about to eat. He also forgot his epi-pen at home. This did not happen in school, and not at home either. It was very scary and horrifying to see him rushed to the emergency and see him plugged to a dozen of wires on a hospital bed.

Everyone was aware of his allergy, therefore this ensured that when he said his throat started hurting, we immediately rushed to the hopsital.

My brother blamed himself, not the person who made the pie, after the incident for not bringing his epi-pen and for not checking on the ingredients of the pie.

I do not wish this to happen to anyone, but we cannot impose a ban on everyone else in schools.

My brother agrees with my point of vue.

felloparent from Woodbridge:

I respect your position, however you are fighting a losing battle. Under no circumstance will the entire school system or for that matter, most of society, be inconvenienced for something that is ultimately a responsibility of the effected parties.

This is coming from someone who is lactose intolerant, so when I went to school, instead of asking everyone to stop drinking milk from a cow, I simply didn't drink that milk and drank soy milk instead. Simple, easy, and inconvenienced nobody. There is a lesson to be learned here.

The solution here is more education, not more restrictions. Teaching your children that you can force people to change their ways if you complain enough is not something I would ever teach to my children.

Once the school agrees to search lunches it then voluntarily accepts the legal responsibility if it neglects to find something that hurts or kills another child.

This is a very slippery slope that the schools should not be attempting to walk.

Just another example of our "naany state" turning into the "nagging state".I don't want to minimize the importance of taking care of students with allergies,but surley this is going to far.

Just look at the list of banned foods.Most of them have significant nutritional value for most children.It's just plain unreasonable for the vast majority of students to have their diets controlled my a minority.

There have to be other effective safeguards we can employ.And for those who require constant monitoring,perhaps a public school is not the best option.

But then again this is Canada.Probably the only country on the planet where,thanks to lobbyists and soecial interest groups the majority are dominated by the minorities.
Hmmmm.Reasonable accomodation???

There is a basic principle called "reasonable accomodation". When a person has an allergy to common foods, what is the reasonable accomodation?

Maybe a child that has a food allergy should go home for lunch. I know our lunch supervision program is a paid service that has a waiting list. If you don't pay and go to that, and you don't go to an out-of-school care program, you go home for lunch. Lunch time is your own time, whether it is at school, or, for an adult, at work.

Parents should take some responsibility for this. Also, once a kid has been allergic to something, it doesn't always mean they are permanently allergic. Because of fear, parents say, okay, no more peanut butter (eggs, dairy, wheat......), instead of saying, what are the treatments for my child's illness? Anaphylaxis is not healthy, okay? It is an actual medical condition, and looking for treatment, and teaching the allergic kid to be careful, have an epipen, etc., makes more sense.

I think we've thrown up our hands. Instead of looking for treatments to help people with this condition, we restrict the activities of everybody else?????

How did we ever manage to survive when there were no food bans in our schools?

Back when my brother, who is highly allergic to nuts, was still in school, there were no bans on nuts. He carried his epi-pen wherever he went and was aware not to eat anything that "could contain" or that was unclear. He went through school just fine.

We also made sure at home not to buy ice cream that had the "does not contain nuts" text written on the container, etc. When someone would bake something with nuts in our family, we would always make a "no nut batch" before so that he would enjoy the same food.

The problem here is that some parents/families either do not take the time to teach their children on their own allergies, what measures to take, or are too afraid that their child will come in contact with the allergen in question when they are not around to protect their children.

The fear of your children coming in contact with what causes their allergies to flare up is normal, but you cannot always be there to control what they will do every day. You need to educate them on their allergies.

If you do not educate them and always fear for their safety, this fear will probably also pass on to your child.

It should not be the school's responsibility to monitor all the food that comes and goes. Anyone can sneak in a chocolate bar containing peanuts.

Society today tries too much to protect children for any reasons.

If you educate them properly at home, then there would be no need for all these bans.

Even though it's the schools responsibility to provide all children with a safe & respectful learning environment, I think these students & their parents have gone too far.

If the Human Rights commission were to proceed with this inquiry & it got traction, then there would be a precedent set that would have no end.

BTW, all these allergies are a by product of our North American environment which has too many causes to go into here.

A teacher I know very well that works in Germany has never heard of even 1 child with peanut allergies-it simply doesn't exist in Europe.

No disrespect intended, but give these kids a bubble to keep them safe & not penalize all the rest trying to figure out lunch ideas that need to fit into a strangers framework of what's safe.

Yet another example of the government trying to place the responsibility onto society as opposed to the parents of the child who has allergies.

I don't care what laws or legislation is out there, my kids WILL take peanut butter and jam sandwiches to school until the government subsidizes the cost for more expensive lunch alternatives such as cold cuts.

Additionally, why aren't these people with allergies responsible for themselves? If they're young kids, the school should employ a dietician to educate them. Once they get to be about, say 10 years old, I think they should know enough not to eat the item that causes an allergic reaction.

Finally, where will the line be drawn? There are kids allergic to the grass and sun, so should be get rid of the school yard and all windows into the building? Get friggin real, time for the parents and all these know-nothing organizations to take responsibility for themselves and their own kids.

Again I will guarantee that our kids will NEVER follow any ban of food due to an allergy of another child. Why is their child eating my child's food in the first place?

Perhaps Ontario should look at developing a 'School for the Allergic' along the lines of a 'school for the deaf'. That way, all their cute little policies can be put into action and 99.9% of the population will not be inconvenienced.

-continued-

There are parents at this school who have intentionally sent Mayonaise to school, knowing full well this item was an alergic trigger. This parent told their child to tell the teacher it was sour cream! The Principal served egg based pasta salad in the school library. An area all children have access to on a daily basis. This disregard for a child's life and safety is immoral.

I have heard remarks from a parent who's son is bullied because he is overweight. She wants the bullying to stop. But she has also said she feels that these allergic kids should just get used to their lack of safety or Home School. Well I say, she should just get used to her son being bullied for being overweight, or SHE should just homeschool!

Every child has the right to feel safe when they go to school. And every child has a right to attend school. Any person with a disability has a right to be accomodated under the Human Rights Code.

This administration only believes in "one size fits all" education and accomodation. This is an unhealthy attitude.If it takes 6 children going up in front of a Human Rights Tribunal to show that children and those with disabilites have rights and a say as to how they are treated then SO BE IT.

I was in elementary school in the 80's and 90's.

It was during grade 7 or so that I first heard about a peanut allergy and we were told not to bring it to school. I heard of 1 case.

Now, it seems everyone who is anyone has some sort of problem that must be bowed down to.

I can tolerate specifics, say, if one school has children that has peanut allergies and another one doesn't, why ban it across the entire province?

Do children really need to give up foods they like because someone is allergic to it? Is it their responsibility to watch out for everyone or the specific individual who has the issue?

Since when has a few peoples problems become everyones?

I do not understand this. If these problems exist in schools then SURELY they exist in general public.

Why is it this issue is non-existent or seemingly dead outside of school? What about work places? General public areas?

I brought (peanut butter) it to college, no issues. I don't get it. I just see this as a minority's problem that they should learn to deal with.

Sorry if you have an allergy but don't dare blame me or make me deal with it. And if you think that's fair, get in line behind everyone else with a problem.

My problem is the fact I have no problems except for everyone else's.

Listen: Do you hear it? The sound of selfish, self-rightgeous, non-accomodating people. Did you recognize the sound? It was your own voice.

Unless you have walked in the other persons shoes, you have no idea what they are going thru. I happen to be a parent of a non-allergic child attending this very school.

I understand the inconvenience that food restrictions place on the making of kids lunches. I do. However, I find this situation can be a benefit. How much time do you spend actually reading the labels of the processed foods you are sending with your children? Most of this stuff they shouldn't be eating anyway.

This accomodation is one that has successfully taken place for over 5 years! 5 years!. This may have started out as an informal school policy, but when one lasts 5 years without incident, it becomes a FORMAL school policy.

Why don't they just eat their lunch in a seperate room, safely away from all the evil peanut butter and jelly consuming monsters?

I cannot believe that some parents expect schools to examine children's bagged lunches. The mandate of schools is to educate children, not dictate or police dietary choices.

The parents of severely allergic children need to inform those children about how to manage their allergies. Those who are fearful or over-protective have the option of home-schooling their kids.

The peanut butter sandwich is a sacred tradition in Canadian and American schools and must remain so. Hail, Skippy!

We seem to be forgetting that these are Children. I'm not saying that I agree on checking lunch bags at the door.

All I ask is you read this from a parent who has almost lost her 3 year old son, 3 times all ready in his short life to anaphylactic shock.

If you every see someone who is allergic go into anaphylactic shock because of their allergies you then can see that there are two sides to every story. If you go into anaphylactic shock and are not treated with your epi pen you will die.

As a parent when you see this happing to your child, you can do everything in your power, you can give them their epi pen you can hold their hand and you can pray that the ambulance will make it to you in time to help you child make it.

But the one thing you can not do is turn back the clock and find that one surface that you child touched. Yes touched, that still has active oils on it. Some children don't have to ingest the food they are allergic too, to go into anaphylactic shock.

I know that it is a pain to find lunch ideas for school that do not include peanuts, I will have to do that as well for both sons as neither of them are allergy to peanuts, but there school is peanut free.

My son is allergic to beef and eggs I do not expect his school to ban these. All I hope is that people are able to keep an open mind to have their children wash their hands and their desk after they have ate their lunches. Just like I would assume that they do everyday in their own home.

I do not expect everyone to be happy with what I wish for, just like I do not expect not to be told off by people that, do not have a child with life threating allergies, or whom have never seen a child go into anaphylactic shock. I can also understand that you feel we are asking too much, but all I ask is a few minutes of your time to just think that I'm able to celebrate another Christmas with my son because I was able to, give him his epi pen and the ambulance made it in time.

I agree students have to educated about allergies, and how dangerous they can be to some people. However, searching lunches, banning any and all foods that my cause an allergic reaction does seem to be a bit extreme, especially in the higher grades.

At some point people have to stop making everyone else responsible for what may happen to them. That being said I can't beleive how cold some of the comments have been. I think the whole thing has reached the tipping point, and the frustration has boiled over.

Now off the topic a little bit. Why are there so many people with so many different allergies these days, and why does it seem that no one in authority seems to be the least bit interested in finding out?

Maybe we should be demanding the banning of all the crap manufacturers are allowed to put in our food.

Writes RJ:

My stand on food allergies has always been that it is your problem, not mine and therefore YOU and YOU ALONE must deal with it.

Do you honestly believe that allergy sufferers don't take ownership? (I do, as do most that I know - it's a matter of survival)

Shall we return to the days of allowing smoking everywhere too? After all, if I don't want to smoke, it's "my problem" isn't it?

Food labelling that identifies risks of cross-contamination is relatively recent, and reduces the risk for those with allergies.

We make all sorts of accommodations for conditions like asthma (e.g. no perfumes which often trigger asthmas), what is so unreasonable about asking people to take enough care to not include obvious hazards such as Peanut Butter from their lunches?

Apples, raspeberries, kiwi, beans, peanuts, tree nuts, rice, oatmieal, pineapple (1 child in the school), eggs, fish, garlic, milk. Can someone tell me what to feed MY kids. It is getting absolutly ridiculous. By the time you take out all these items, some I fail to remember now and the foods my children don't like, what's left?

I am not a bad person but my kids are missing out on decent lunches due to someone eles issues. I too have been told that they cannot segregate those with food allergies but if I send my child with banned foods it's off to the office to eat. All the kids in the class think Little Johnnys bad and his mom is stupid.

Do these kids not go to parties, fairs, restaraunts? What do they do, call ahead to warn of the products that can't be on the menu that day? What about the school bus, it may be contaminiated.

Soon kids won't be able to eat what they like for breakfast because a trace of something is taken to school on their hands or clothing.
Give me a break.

Teach you kids to be safe parents. Teach them to use their medication. Pray.

The majority should not be forced to accept a penalty because of a problem that a small minority is experiencing.

If these kids are in that much danger then maybe their parents should consider taking them out of the public schools system or they could be made to wear a protective bubble suit rather than endanger these fragile little angels.

Just out of curiosity what do the parents of these kids do if they want to take them to the mall or to a ball game, ask that no peanuts be in the stadium? or a 100 meter eclusion area be place around thier child in the mall?

This is getting idiotic, what about if a child has an allergy to cats or dogs, should the clothing of fellow students be inspected to ensure a stray hair doesn't enter the school.

There is always going to be someone in the school allergic to something be it eggs, milk, cats, dogs, perfume, deoderants, fruits, animal products, rubber, latex, on and on.

Are we ready to ban everything?

This is a bit sad for those involved, but if your child can die because another child ate a peanut butter sandwich yesterday, then I'm afraid your child is just not going to make it.

The school can ban as much as it likes, but that child will be exposed to all sorts of hazards just walking home at the end of the day, and the only difference will be that everyone else had to be miserable during that child's brief existence.

I have a rare allergy to coffee. This doesnt mean I dont go into a Starbucks or Timmies (I drink tea), or make people keep their distance if they have a cup of coffee in hand. I simply dont drink it. I certainly cant ask my employer to remove all coffee makers at work and ask all employees not to show up with a cup of java in the morning. I am responsible for my environment!!

My daughter attended a school is Cambridge that had an allergy free lunch room. It was a room where all children with food allergies could eat lunch. They were each allowed to bring along a friend (whose lunch was in compliance as well). This enabled all of the other children to bring whatever dietary choices they liked for lunch. Some may argue that this is segregation but its merely 20 minutes out of the day when a child eats in a safe environment with a friend and other children who also have allergies. They still have plenty of social time in the classroom and during recess.

I agree with others that have written that this is being taken too far. What about travelling to another country that doesnt worry about food allergies? Do you expect a whole Carribbean resort to change their ways because you're showing up with a child with allergies?

The onus is on the parents to educate their child about their allergies and the safe boundaries within which they must live.

My stand on food allergies has always been that it is your problem, not mine and therefore YOU and YOU ALONE must deal with it.

Yes, we all need to be educated about food allergies and school staff do need training to deal with allergies. But banning foods in the entire school is not the answer. Kids with allergies need to be taught to take responsibility for their own allergies.

What are these kids who have grown up with food bans in the school going to do when they enter the work force, demand that their place of employment ban certain foods, I don't think so, because they're all adults and can and should take responsibility for their owns actions. Why can't we start this at a young age???

I understand the desire of parents to keep their children safe, but at the same time, a person's allergies, whether they are a child or an adult, are their own problem.

I myself have severe anaphylactic reactions to perfume and apples. Yes, apples. And not just unwashed, unpeeled apples, but any apple. But I have always considered this my own cross to bear.

I would never consider asking my workplace to ban apples on the possibility of my coming into contact with them. Nor perfume, for that matter. When properly medicated, someone else's Chanel is just a few moments of sneezing and itchy eyes for me. But again, that's my problem.

Now granted, I'm not a child, so there is little risk of someone forcing me to eat apple or inhale perfume, but I don't really know how parents of such children can expect schools to do more than educate their students about such dangers in relation to particular children.

Quite frankly, if your child doesn't know that he can't trade his lunch with his friends, then there isn't much a school can do about it. Schools are for learning, not daycare or babysitting, and certainly not for lunch examination.

Let’s place them in bubbles, put them outside where the other children can play with them, which might also cutback on bullying. Another possible solution might be to strip search every kid coming into the school by authorities wearing red arm bands, possibly the police who could also then look for drugs, guns or cheat-sheets.

Wake-up parents, short of creating a Guantanamo Bay Elementary Camp where everything is scrutinized, children will always find a way to sneak a “Snickers” in.

Another problem; once we start, where will this end? There's a student in my child's class that's allergic to oranges, so on top of the peanut butter and mayonnaise restrictions, we can no longer pack citric fruits in our kid’s lunches.

Here's a novel idea; put those children who represent less than one percent of the schools total population, in a special lunchroom where their intake can be properly monitored or better yet, let the parents take their special needs kids home to address their special needs in their own special way.

Too bad this can't be carried over to the workplace! I hate the smell when people decide to microwave their popcorn or fish (who eats popcorn for lunch anyways) telling people it stinks the office does nothing.

Maybe claims of a deadly allergy will allow me to impose my will on the coworkers. Oh I hate the smell coffee too, even though I drink it all day, I will have to think on that one.

The common theme seems to be personal responsibility - but as we all know that is no longer an acceptable rationale.

We have created a society where there is no personal responsibility - we are all responsible for the actions of others and we are expected to pay through the nose for that right.

I don't know how I ever made it through childhood - rode in cars without seatbelts, rode my bike without a helmet, played in my Dad's workshop with heavy and dangerous equipment, cooked with my mom and never got burned, didn't ingest cleaning fluids - I could go on and on.

The difference - my parents made it absolutely clear from when I was a small child that no meant no, and that the world was dangerous - you should watch out. Maybe it is time for all parents to assume that responsibility.

I think that our schools our doing more than enough to help manage the situation and should be commended for it.

Teachers are all made aware and can identify students that have these severe allergies. In addition, teachers and most administration staff are trained in the administration of the epi pen.

As Pat Bingley stated below, parents hold the responsibility to ensure their children are aware of their allergies and take appropriate steps to eliminate exposure. In the case of primary aged children, schools have rightly gone a step further and banned peanut substances in classrooms that have allergic children. This, because kids that young may not be fully aware of the importance to protect themselves.

I shudder at some of the heartless comments below about majorities and minorities, and the "who cares" attitude. If all of our health care took that approach, we would be in a very sad state as a society.

I think the solution is management and awareness, which is already taking place, and not banishment.

While I think that inspecting lunches is a bit over the top, insisting on no nut products in lunches isn't a bad thing.

I have the very allergy being discussed here. For all those who are dismissing such allergies as "trivial" and "an insignificant minority", consider a few facts:

(1) Anaphylaxis reactions change - without warning. Exposure that results in a sore mouth one day can be a hospital trip (or worse) the next. (Don't laugh, I almost lost a dear friend that way) The person with the allergy doesn't get any warning.

(2) Next time you are in the supermarket, look for 'may contain' warnings on product labels. You'll be surprised how many places you find warnings.

(* additional exercise for the reader: When you see "may contain traces of ..." mentally substitute "may contain arsenic" and then ask yourself how much of your day to day diet you would actually be able to eat - safely *)

It's not just a matter of "being careful". For some, it is a matter of life and death - literally.

How far that needs to be reflected in public policy? Perhaps not to the degree of "inspected lunch bags", but it is not unreasonable for schools to insist that lunches exclude known allergens. (especially things like Peanut Butter (or other "nut-butter" products))

I for one would like to know that when children go to school that they only have to be "careful", not fearful.

Like Joe from Halifax, I also believe it's possible that *some* children's allergies are made up to be more severe than they medically are, by well-meaning parents who are scared of what might happen to their child at school. This is understandable, but frustrating for others.

I am all for giving the allergic child the knowledge and means to deal with their allergy. Parents like Pat Bingley should be applauded; Children with severe allergies will have to face situations where they are in proximity to their allergen; they MUST Be given the tools to deal with it.

Will we stop selling shellfish and peanuts in grocery stores? What about the guy on public transport who had peanut butter on toast for breakfast? Will that be banned?

I'm a mom of 4 children, each of which has a list of "banned" foods for their classroom. I can't keep track.

Given the current list, I can't send kidney beans, peas, kiwis (but I can send bananas?), raspberries, nuts and peanuts (and I've probably forgotten a few; we had eggs and *marshmallows* -?!- a few years ago). Given that most of these foods must be ingested to cause a problem, it is frustrating that it's become everyone else's problem too.

To be blunt, why have the allergies of 4 kids --not my own-- become my problem? I don't mean to sound evil and insensitive, but there has to be a limit and some sort of responsibility taken on the child & his/her family's part. Epi-pen on them at all times, spare in the school office, some sort of barrier during lunchtime (a piece of cloth or paper towels brought from home to put down under their lunchbox to ensure a "clean" surface).

I've been told by the school office that it's not okay to ask that the severely (ie life-threatening) allergic kids be segregated; however, if there happens to be a "banned" food in a non-allergic kid's lunchbox, that kid gets the honour of eating their lunch in the office (ie segregated).

Why are we as a society constantly changing our ways due to the vast minority??? Its pathetic. Whatever happened to the needs of the many out weigh the need of the few?

Its called Darwinism. Let things happen.

I grew up with PBJ as a standard lunch staple, and am now caught in a positon of what to send because of one child's allergy in the entire school.

I agree wholeheartedly with all the comments posted to date. Where will the madness end? Will it be eggs, wheat, milk? After all, if we cater to one allergy, we must cater to them all.

Yes, it can be a dangerous allergy. But it is the responsibility of the parent - not the school - to teach their child not to share food, use other's crayons etc. It is also their responsibility to see that their child has their medication on them and know how to use it.

Fair enough - the teachers should know how to react to the condition and administer the medication. But it is not the duty of other parents to babysit and restrict their own child's food.

I currently have two children in school and a third going next year. I cannot give my kids nut products, egg products, fish products or sesame seeds for lunch.

I'm running out of ideas. Perhaps a lettuce leaf will do. Or maybe the school board or the families of those with allergies would like to help me out.

Kudos to Pat Bingley for her sensible reaction. Unfortunately, common sense is not always so common.

Why should society adapt to and pay for the needs of a small minority? Peanuts today, but what tomorrow? Wheat, eggs, milk, tree nuts, perfume, soap, deodorant, toothpaste, synthetic fabrics - all valid allergens.

Written lists of what's in lunch bags, plus inspections of lunch bags. Elimination of certain food stuffs in your home (tried, unsuccessfully, at my son's daycare!). Where will this madness and unreasonable accomodation stop?

This pushing of responsibility on to others is ridiculous and typical of Canadian nanny-statism.

Take personal responsibility and teach your children responsibility as well. No sharing of foods or utensils. No eating anything that is not brought from home. Carry your Epi-pen and know how to use it. Ensure caregivers (teachers, coaches) also know how to use the Epi-pen.

If someone is so handicapped that they cannot interact in without imposing major disruptions on the society and individuals around them, institutionalization should be considered.

Live with your affliction, but don't make it everyone else's problem.

By all means, take teaching time away to search lunches. Kids don't need no learnin'.

Lethal allergies are rare and blanket policies for rare conditions do little to help in a reasonable way. We will end up with extremely restricted lists of what is permissible and what is not to take to school for food. We will also see time (and frankly freedoms) lost to the searches. Will a PB&J; sandwich get a kid expelled under a zero tolerance weapons policy?

The only way to provide 100% protection is segregation of the affected students. That is not reasonable to me though for a number of reasons.

What is reasonable is for the parents to take precautions (provide medications needed) and for the school to educate the teachers who come into contact with these kids as to what to do in case of trouble.

In reality, how many adverse events are we talking about here? You mention 2 kids since 1994 (13 years).

Please don't start the "if it saves just one life" argument. You can save 1,000's banning cars, work on that.

Also, with the searches for contraband peanuts, what does the school do with all the other contraband it finds (pot, weapons, etc) as a result of these efforts?

Feed all kids a standard food (solient green!)

Inspect all bagged lunches!?! That is beyond ridiculous. If a child has allergies then make sure the kid knows what they can/cannot eat and if necessary, alert the school.

From what I can tell, schools seem to already be doing a fine (perhaps even over the top) job of prevention and raising awareness of conditions and that’s all they should be responsible for.

Perhaps though, I am wrong and some sort of concerned parents group with too much time on their hands will win the right to inspect the kitchens of all of the families who send their kids to a particular school just to make absolutely sure that turkey sandwich didn’t come into contact with last night’s Thai take out.

Slightly off topic, just what the heck is up with all of these allergies, etc anyway? Peanut butter was a near staple of elementary schools across the country not that long ago for example; most all of the kids could drink milk without having to take lactose intolerance medication and so on.

I don’t have the numbers but I’m confused as to if this general issue is simply due to “liability creep”, overly protective parenting, doctors catering to created illness or if there actually is a concrete reason why one generation seems to have so many serious or even deadly allergies when one or two before didn’t.

To expect the school to inspect the contents of lunches is not only unreasonable it is unenforcable.

Teachers are not dieticians or nutritionists. Parents do not always know all the ingredients of the products placed within lunch bags.

I have a child allergic to rice and oatmeal. Yes it does create anaphalyatic shock. I would never expect the classroom to prohibit these substances.

Instead, I have trained the child, his peers and teachers to always ask the contents of food and other subtances. If the complete list is not known the only acceptable response is "thanks, but no thanks."

They want all lunches to be searched, and presumably seized if they contain any offending substances?

These Woodbridge students are nuts!

What about students who get severe hay fever? Will they insist their school strip out all the grass from the playground and substitute it with concrete?

Peanut butter police.... good grief

These nutty kids should buy a bubble to live in, rather than change the world outside.

How did we get to the point that so many children have potentially fatal food allergies?

Granted, it’s been a little while since I left the school system, but I really don’t remember allergies being that big of a problem. Yes, every once in a while, you would meet some kid that couldn’t eat peanuts, but it really didn’t change MY lunch at all.

Those kids simply knew that they had to be careful, and they were! But really, there didn’t seem to be very many of them anyway. Why are there so many now?

In any case, our school systems are completely over-burdened with too many students, too few decent teachers, and too little money – and these problems are affecting the quality of education for our young.

Why would we want to spend extra money, time and resources manually verifying every kid’s lunch? Tell the peanuts kids to sit at the other end of the cafeteria and use that extra money to by decent textbooks instead!