Mothering Forum banner

Should peanut butter be banned in schools?

11K views 86 replies 40 participants last post by  SweetSilver 
#1 ·
My younger daughter's preschool has totally banned all nuts, peanuts, nut butters, and anything containing them from the schools. They don't do lunch checks but trust parents to just not send anything having any degree of nuts.

My older daughter is in middle school now and I don't know what rules they have because very few people there bring lunch - most including my daughter get hot lunch, but the elementary school she was going to had a lot of nut and peanut allergies but didn't ban anything. According to a newsletter, they said they felt that it might make kids with allergies relax thinking that nuts were banned so everything was safe, but because there were too many kids to really trust that everyone was going to be conscious and careful and not bring anything with nuts, it was better to allow them and make sure kids with allergies remained on alert as far as snacks, birthday treats, etc. go. They have nut free tables at the cafeteria and those they do monitor very very carefully. They said they'd rather have only areas actually within their control be called "nut free." They can't control the whole school so they don't claim it is nut free or attempt to make it be nut free.

I don't know what the best method is. I have gone back and forth on this. I'm fine with not bringing anything related to nuts, though my younger one is picky and one of the few healthy/proteiny things I can pack that won't go bad and she'll eat is nuts. But I am managing to not send anything with nuts so it's working OK, and I'd rather have the inconvenience then risk anyone having an allergic reaction due to her lunch.

I don't know if the school that allows nuts is just claiming it's safer to allow them and remain on alert and control those areas they can, or if that was just an excuse to allow nuts. I can see both potentials there.

What do your kids' schools do? What do you think is the best way to handle nuts and peanuts when it's such a common and dangerous allergy?
 
See less See more
#52 ·
I would also imagine that part of the reason the nut-free policies have come about is because of the ubiquity of peanut butter as a kid lunch item combined with the deadliness of the allergy. It's not like shellfish is terribly common in lunch boxes. How many kids in a class room, or a school, have to be eating pb on a given day before it becomes too dangerous (in the minds of parents who disapprove of the bans) for kids with severe allergies to be there?
 
#54 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtiger View Post

But what do we then do about other allergens? In this thread alone, we have peanut, walnut and dairy mentioned. I know people who are allergic to certain fruits, seafood, etc. Should we then ban peanuts, walnuts, all dairy products, fish sticks, certain fruits, etc.?
An important question! And some medical people say that allergies are on the increase--to more substances, and with greater intensity.

I wish more research was going into why this is happening from an evolutionary or microbiology perspective!
 
#55 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtiger View Post

But what do we then do about other allergens? In this thread alone, we have peanut, walnut and dairy mentioned. I know people who are allergic to certain fruits, seafood, etc. Should we then ban peanuts, walnuts, all dairy products, fish sticks, certain fruits, etc.?
Peanuts/tree nuts are singled out because the nature of the protein makes them harder to clean up after AND because smaller amounts prove to have a higher fatality rate. ANY of the allergens listed above can kill a person. We personally deal with peanut, tree nut, dairy, egg, banana and blueberry. I don't ever expect any place to ban all those (except for our home). Of those, the ones MOST likely to be fatal are peanuts and tree nuts though which is why the are higher profile. There are kids who do have food banned from the classroom entirely from all foods when they have long lists. This provides a safe learning environment for them. Other arrangements are made wrt eating of lunch/snacks.
 
#56 ·
I think public schools have the responsibility to make school safe for all children. And when it comes to severe food allergies I think elementary schools especially have to address this. Not every parent of a child with food allergies can afford a private school or has the ability or time to homeschool. And school is the law in one form or another.

My DS had a severe food allergy when he was in early grade school and had to have an epi pen in the classroom or on a field trip. While just touching the item did not make my DS react, I have a small inkling of what these parents must feel like sending their children to school. There are two sides to why this is so important in elementary school. First the allergy child could react, and we all know how reactive some kids are to peanut butter in the air or on their skin. And little kids are messy eaters, food gets around in one way or another and peanut butter especially is nice and sticky. Older children/teens are not always getting snack in school and tend to eat a little cleaner. Secondly little kids often do not realize that something could make them have an allergic reaction. My DS's allergy was the protein in dairy. I remember the day that he happily ate a traditional rice crispy treat at school. Argh! He was very little and the teacher was a sub. He ate rice crispy treats all the time so he thought they were OK. But he did not realize I made them without butter. Starbucks makes them without butter as do other places. Older children/teens are more likely to question food.

I make a HUGE effort to not send in allergy food items, I think it is common courtesy. In the past year I broke with this once because due to circumstances beyond my control. And right now between my DS's classrooms our list is: no nuts, tree or peanut, no coconut, no sesame, and no eggs (baked goods OK). The egg has been a real killer for us just because we have chickens and egg salad is a favorite for us. Nutella sandwich my kids would love and it would be an easy lunch to make, but I keep in mind they are better off without all that sugar.

In our school the children have snack in their classroom and lunch in the cafeteria. If a class has a food allergy then that item is not allowed in the room. Lunch bags are left in the hall. The nurse looks at each one and any children with the allergy food in their bag has to eat snack in the hallway with a friend. In the cafeteria there is an allergy free table. I am pretty sure preschool does have a nut free room due to the ages of the children, ages 3-5. All hot lunches are nut free but I believe they still offer PB&J as an extra.

The above policy worked for a while. But I believe the nurse spends a good hour + going through lunches these days. I am surprised they have not started a school wide ban. More and more food allergy kids are coming to school every year. I keep expecting to hear even snacks will only be eaten in the cafeteria. But for now it is used for gym class which may be the only reason this is still going on.
 
#57 ·
My 3 year old is allergic to peanuts and was formerly allergic to eggs. On diagnosis I spoke at length to her pediatric allergist and read a lot of research. You cannot have an anaphylactic allergic reaction to peanuts by touching them. You can only have an anaphylactic reaction to ingestion. Touch may cause a surface reaction (it does in my daughter, she gets a small red welt if she touches peanuts but only if the skin is already broken, such as in a skin prick allergy test) and because there is no protein in the "smell" of peanuts a reaction to the odour alone is always psychosomatic. [Citation: Relevance of casual contact with peanut butter in children with peanut allergy. Department of Pediatrics, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY] There has been a few cases of "smell" reactions, but those were in employees in peanut processing plants where there was significant particulate in the air.

I'm all for banning peanut/nuts in preschool if there are allergic kids. The kids just don't have the executive function to be trusted not to share food. But we totally have peanut products in our house and my 3 year old allergic kid eats lunch right beside her 5 year old sister who is a peanut butter fanatic several times a week. To keep my kid safe, I educate her about how to exist in a world that may contain peanuts.

I feel like once the kid is in elementary school she should be fully prepared to manage her allergy. Peanut allergy has shown all the signs of a mass psychogenic illness with the public reaction grossly overstating the true risks. I'm against wholesale bans in elementary schools. I would support an allergy table for concerned parents and children, but I'd let my daughter choose whether or not to sit at it.
 
#58 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucyem View Post

I think public schools have the responsibility to make school safe for all children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scsigrl View Post

1) Food allergies are protected under the ADA- schools and parents need to work together to protect these kids who are entitled to a free and appropriate education. If that means a ban, ban them. If everyone needs to wash up when they get to school? So be it!

2) No, the world is not nut free. BUT these kids/parents can avoid places (ball parks and the like) if they choose. School isn't a choice in most areas. See statement 1.
:twothumbs


If the child was in a wheelchair and in need of accommodation, or severely disabled so they need one-on-one assistance in a special classroom, it would be obvious that the issue of a child's right to be accommodated might not be questioned as much as kids with hidden medical conditions. Maybe because it's relatively new (on such a widespread level), and definitely because the affected kids otherwise seem so normal and healthy, that the idea of taking extreme measures to protect them is disregarded as unnecessarily overprotective. That's unfortunate.

I'd like to comment on teaching kids to handle "real life" in a school setting, but my homeschooling status in the Learning at School forum prevents me from being the one to engage in that conversation, though I do think that others with kids in school need to discuss the issue. Should a school be a safe haven? Or should it emphasize "real life"? Even when for some kids "real life can be downright deadly?
 
#59 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetSilver View Post

:twothumbs


If the child was in a wheelchair and in need of accommodation, or severely disabled so they need one-on-one assistance in a special classroom, it would be obvious that the issue of a child's right to be accommodated might not be questioned as much as kids with hidden medical conditions. Maybe because it's relatively new (on such a widespread level), and definitely because the affected kids otherwise seem so normal and healthy, that the idea of taking extreme measures to protect them is disregarded as unnecessarily overprotective. That's unfortunate.

I'd like to comment on teaching kids to handle "real life" in a school setting, but my homeschooling status in the Learning at School forum prevents me from being the one to engage in that conversation, though I do think that others with kids in school need to discuss the issue. Should a school be a safe haven? Or should it emphasize "real life"? Even when for some kids "real life can be downright deadly
Federal law guarantees every child an education in the least restrictive environment possible, and the onus is on the school to provide that. I didn't respond to the post where a mother felt that her child's right eat exactly what she wanted to for every meal trumped another child's right to be safe a school because I thought it was so absurd.

School is real life. It is real. It is life. It is one context with one set of rules, just as home, the park, church, work, the grocery store all have their own rules, even though in some places the rules are not clearly stated, just understood. So the argument that school should be like "real life" is bogus. What someone is really saying is that a 5 year old should have to fend for themselves because what their own child *wants* is more important that what keeps another child *safe*.

There are MANY aspects of school life that are different from ways things can be done in other contexts because of the number of children in close proximity. For example, in the cafeteria, kids have to ask to get out of the their seats, and they have to raise their hands to do so. They are pretty much always told yes, but having to ask limits their requests to actual reasons to get up rather than just running around the room, which would be chaos. Even though I require kids to follow this rule, I can't imagine another context where it would be necessary.

Anyway, I think that the younger the child, the more responsibility rest with the school to ensure that the environment is safe. What is necessary for a Kindergartener is very different than what is needed for a junior high or high school student. I'm fine with peanut free preschools or elementary schools. Schools make accommodations to keep kids with special needs are safe. Sometimes those are obvious, such as a child with a physical disability, and sometimes they aren't, such as a kid with a heart condition. Sometimes kids are required to modify how they play on the playground to keep another child. The only difference with peanut butter is that it requires a minor sacrifice from other parents.
 
#60 ·
My daughter's school has 3 first grade classes, roughly 60 kids that eat lunch at the same time. I have a list of 10 foods that are banned from her class periods because of specific allergies. I had no problem with the tree nut bans until this year; now I'm feeling cranky about it. As it is, we're vegetarians, and now we have these additional limitations on what we can send. The school lunches are generally crappy and meat-based. The only good that has come of this is the lack of any sort of food-based celebration, I guess.

I really do understand the gravity of a nut allergy. However, while one person is thinking of their kid with the nut allergy, start adding up the other kids with their allergies and watch the cumulative effect on the rest of us. Where's the middle ground?
 
#61 ·
I bet many of you would be saying something different if it was your child with a deadly allergy! Peanut butter is not even good for you! It contains mold and that is why so many allergies are arising from it. My children do not have a peanut allergy but there is a child in their class that does. It never even upset me for one second that we could not bring in peanut butter. I would hate to be in that parents situation fearing for my child. Yes it makes options difficult at times but your picky eater kid is not more important than someone's child who could die!
 
#62 ·
My kids are not picky eaters, that's the irony. As I said we are vegetarians, which is our choice and I do not expect anyone else to cater to that at any time. I was game, for three years, to avoid tree nuts. It has only been this past year, when I was presented with a long list of foods that I had to avoid - mango? my kids LOVE it - that this scenario began to seem unreasonable. We have four kids with different allergies, all of which every child must avoid. I am asking, in all seriousness, what do you consider reasonable?
 
#63 ·
My comment was not directed at you In particular. I was saying it to everyone who was complaining about no peanuts in school. To me reasonable is avoiding the foods that kids can die from! Mangoes? I'm not sure you can go into shock from an allergy to them but if that child's allergy is that serious then yes it should be avoided in the class IMO. I also want to add that my son has a dairy allergy, it is not a life threatening allergy so In this case I would not expect dairy to be avoided by all kids in class, only in life threatening situations.
 
#64 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by cadydid View Post

My kids are not picky eaters, that's the irony. As I said we are vegetarians, which is our choice and I do not expect anyone else to cater to that at any time. I was game, for three years, to avoid tree nuts. It has only been this past year, when I was presented with a long list of foods that I had to avoid - mango? my kids LOVE it - that this scenario began to seem unreasonable. We have four kids with different allergies, all of which every child must avoid. I am asking, in all seriousness, what do you consider reasonable?
This was my point EVERY parent feels their child is the center of the universe. I would do anything to protect mine for sure. HOWEVER... When every child these days seems to have a LIFE THREATENING allergy and you are given a laundry list of items your child must abstain from because jonny is alergic to x and suzzy is allergic is z it just catapults out of the realm of reasonable! As I have stated in this thread I have a LIFE THREATENING allergy to latex do you know how many people let their children run around wildly with balloons in public or how many pencil erasers are in a classroom? There is no reasonable way to censor the world in which I live in so I love around it most days just not caring because I am so used to seeing the threats. As for children not being able to be their own best advocates you sell your kids short. My 5 year old on her own examines toys and places where we are before I can even look at it she knows if its latex or not. Its not her allergy and I didnt train her to do that. Personal advocacy will always win over trying to MAKE people care about your child.
 
#65 ·
I think its a tricky and complex one. If there was a kid who was that seriously allergic in the vicinity of mine I would have no problems not giving them nut related items, I'd hate to be the cause of a serious health issue in another kids.

Can I make a point though, if we are talking, say, preemptively avoiding nuts? My eight year old daughter goes through phases of quite serious lactose intolerance. Its absolutely not life threatening but very unpleasant for her. Its not a small inconvenience, she really does need to avoid dairy. She always has it to some degree but it waxes and wanes. Now the point for me is that there are limits to the food she can easily carry about with her. Cheese is out and bought sandwiches are often out, Its hard to pack her a lunch. Peanut and other nut butters are great, calorie and protein dense (she's very active) and we use them in cooking as a butter substitute. I can't rely on grabbing her her a snack when we are out, and often our only remotely healthy choices are nut based. I don't really want to use margarine and coconut butter is stupidly expensive. And its never going to be produced locally to me, unlike certain nut butters. So while I'd absolutely be happy to find a substitute in a situation where there was child at serious risk of anaphalactic shock, I would be less happy with it as a preemptive measure, because it has health implications for my own child. For kids who can't eat dairy, nuts are an important protein source and that has to be considered, I think.

ETA just to be totally clear, I am happy to exclude peanut butter in a specific situation, where an allergy is that severe. My difficulty would be with a blanket, classroom ban, where that might be out of all proportion to the needs of the child involved-or even where there was no actual child with a nut allergy present. All I am saying is that given that you will also have other children are already limited in the other protein sources open to them, a ban does need to be well considered, rather than being automatically implemented. Nuts and nut butters do tend to be important sources of protein for kids who can't have dairy, as they are widely available and work in sweet and savory dishes. While eating dairy won't kill a lactose intolerant child, it does have actual health implications. My daughter would certainly be missing school and unwell if she had dairy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: swede
#66 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by apeydef View Post

My comment was not directed at you In particular. I was saying it to everyone who was complaining about no peanuts in school. To me reasonable is avoiding the foods that kids can die from! Mangoes? I'm not sure you can go into shock from an allergy to them but if that child's allergy is that serious then yes it should be avoided in the class IMO. I also want to add that my son has a dairy allergy, it is not a life threatening allergy so In this case I would not expect dairy to be avoided by all kids in class, only in life threatening situations.
but what if between all the kids there's nothing left to eat? I think it should be limited to foods that are deadly if eaten only.
 
#68 ·
Those of you in schools that ban multiple foods - are these schools with the school lunch program? How does that work? During a recent vacation I spent time with a young child who has anaphylactic reactions to all nuts, dairy and egg with lesser reactions to soy and wheat (and even that shows up as severe excema). I am not sure how it would be possible to ban all nuts, all dairy and eggs from a school (and possibly soy and wheat). That would clearly eliminate a lot of the school lunch program foods. In his particular case, he sits at an allergy table at lunch and there is an epi-pen in the classroom.
 
#69 ·
That's a good question. The bans are all in my daughter's year; I have no clue how they handle the school lunch issue. My son's grade level has no issue outside of tree nuts, as there is an allergic child in their level. As I said, I've never had a problem with the food bans prior to this year.
 
#70 ·
We have had kids with allergies (or other food-related issues, like severe celiac) in our kids' classrooms, but it was handled on a case-by-case basis. Over 60% of the kids in our school qualify for free or reduced lunch - probably that is why we have no outright bans.
 
#71 ·
The cost is a big issue here. Peanut butter is a cheap source of shelf stable protein. If a child who would otherwise have brought a peanut butter sandwich each day is required to switch to sunflower seed butter or another substitute the cost would have to be shouldered by their parents. I don't think it's right to require parents to spend more money to feed their child because another child has an allergy.

My two older kids have peanut butter sandwiches just about every day. We use a jar and a half of peanut butter a week just for them. I get jars of natural peanut butter for $1-1.50 by stocking up during sales and when I have coupons. At 1.5 jars per week, a 40 week school year, and an average cost of $1.25 I spend approximately $75 per year for their weekday lunch protein. If we were to switch to sunbutter at the $5.99/jar they charge at our grocery store that cost would go up to $359. That's a difference of $142 per child per year. If we did that for each of our six kids for the elementary years of preschool to fifth grade the cost to our family alone would be $5,964 at current prices.

I want other kids to be safe just as much as everyone else but that is an expensive precaution, the numbers could easily add up to tens of thousands of dollars per year spread out across a large elementary school. The point is that although it would be expensive for a parent and a school district to homeschool that might be what should be done to avoid passing the costs on to the other families in the school.

Schools do not have any obligation to educate every child in a school. The obligation is to educate every child in the least restrictive environment available. For a child who might not live past an encounter with invisible peanut butter residue or airborne peanut dust that least restrictive environment, in my opinion and for their safety, is their private home with a visiting tutor provided by the district. I do think homeschooling must be considered by parents with severely allergic children. I get the argument that it would be too much of a burden for them but why is it thought of as ok to simply spread the burden around by forcing families to change their eating habits?

I'm concerned nut bans will create a false sense of security. Kids could have had peanut butter for breakfast, have peanut residue on their person or their backpack/library books/etc.. There is just no way to keep it all out of a school.

I'm also bothered by the fact that peanut bans are in place but not bans for other allergens. A close family member had a huge problem with a school not being willing to 'entertain' accommodations for a dairy protein allergy. This school had banned peanuts but didn't care less about kids with non nut allergies. If schools are willing to ban peanuts they should also ban everything any child has a severe allergy to, fair is fair.

Explaining to kids the reason behind a ban is great but, at least with my picky eaters, it won't change the foods they're willing to eat. These kids are also the same age as the allergic child. If the allergic child is not old enough to be expected to carry their own epi pen how are other kids he same age expected to have a mature sense of empathy and be able to just change their eating habits overnight?

Before everyone thinks I'm being unreasonable I want to say that I do support many of the non ban accommodations made for allergic students. A nut free table is a great idea. I'm totally ok with classrooms banning treats and snacks that contain peanuts so any nuts consumed in the school are confined to the lunchroom. Not sure how that would work if kids have to eat in the classroom but it's good for schools with cafeterias.

I think what it comes down to is that parents need to accept that every kid doesn't get to do everything they want all the time. Kids with allergies might have to eat in a separate room or miss out on going to a public school all together. It's not possible to say in one breath that a child is so allergic as to be disabled, therefore requiring hundreds of other children to change the way they eat to accommodate them, but in the next breath say they don't want their child to have to do anything different than everyone else. The reality is that when you have a disability it means you might not get to do everything you want to do. Kids in wheelchairs would like to run around during gym class but, unfortunately, they are not able to. This doesn't mean the school should require all parents to buy a wheelchair for their child so the disabled one won't feel different or left out.

There are a lot of parents who feel this way. Our kids used to attend a private school. The school put it to a vote if a child who would require a peanut ban should be admitted. The overwhelming majority voted 'no'. The child was not admitted to the school. This a hot button issue for some parents, what you feed your child is a very personal thing and parents don't like being forced to change.

An aside:
Yes, epi pens can be dangerous for some people. If a child with a known or unknown heart condition is injected with one it would have serious consequences.
 
#72 ·
@elus0814- I totally agree with you! I have a picky eater and while I agree reasonable accommodations should be made if a child is "deadly allergic" it makes more sense that their parents shoulder that responsibility not the rest of the school. I also agree that unfortunately not all kids get to do all things. Life is not equal and it isn't fair its just the way it is.
 
#73 ·
I see both sides of this. While not a nut allergy, we struggled with years with DD2 and a severely decreased immune system. Until she ended up on 4 different prescription meds that has made life better, it was a constant struggle. The child near her with a sniffle would lead DD2 in the ER two days later. I was constantly telling people to stay away from us and questioning everyone that came within a foot radius. It was exhausting. I also couldn't prevent people from sending their children out while sick, even just a minor cold in someone else could be a death sentence for her. We spent a lot of time hiding her away from public it felt. We still have to be cautious and I question some but not to the extent I used to have to do. And she is able to go to school though she is usually out a day a week because of illness. This is still a vast improvement over how our lives used to be.

And then I had DS1 in a classroom last year where eggs, dairy, nuts, and bananas were banned. And he has ASD with a very limited diet range due to ASD issues and another neurological disorder that affects his muscles and ability to chew. He essentially starved all last school year because of the bans because from 8-3pm, he couldn't eat his limited preferred foods. He lost massive amounts of weight and I truly chalk up this classroom experience to setting off a even more severe eating problem then we already were dealing with.

This year we moved to a private school where allergies are not accommodated at all. There are no nut allergy students. DD2 has 7 children (really!) in her class that are gluten free and one with a dairy allergy with a epi-pen. I know dairy allergies are different then nut allergies. I asked about bringing in gluten free/dairy free cupcakes for her birthday and was instructed that it was not my job to accommodate them, that their parents either brought in special snacks for the students or they did not partake in the eating. I was curious after that and paid attention during the various holiday parties and those students came with their lunch box that they pulled food out for themselves during the celebrations. This is a 1st grade class BTW so still young children.

I'm not entirely sure what the answer is to this important problem.
 
#74 ·
That's a great point you made about picky eaters being stuck without anything to eat. How is it fair for kids without allergies, who are not asking for anyone to do anything for them, be made to go hungry all day and miss out on educational opportunities because of it? No child can learn well while hungry.

If a nut ban went into place at their school I would likely go back to homeschooling, at least for our pickiest eater. The school has banned food on the playground because of allergies. I'm totally fine with it, kids can eat in the cafeteria then go out to play when they're done.

I want to respond to the loaded gun comment since its a common argument in favor of bans. Peanuts have the potential to harm a small minority of the population. For others they are good option since they are an inexpensive source of protein that is easy to pack in a lunchbox. Guns have the potential to hurt everyone, they are not something that any child should ever be around.
 
#76 ·
While peanut butter is not as healthy as vegetables it's a major protein source for picky kids. What are the other protein options? I know for my pickiest eater protein is limited to peanut butter and dairy. She's only able to eat milk, yogurt, or cheese without gagging if it's ice cold and a thermous doesn't keep it cold enough. She will not eat meat, beans, tofu, quinoa, or any other proteins. I'm not comfortable sending just plain slices of bread as a meal. Her food issues are for us to deal with, neither the school nor any other student has to do anything to accommodate her. At home she has yogurt, cheese, milk, or peanut butter as protein at every meal. If I just give her 'apples and vegetables' she will be hungry for half the day, miss out on that part of her education, and be a distraction to the other kids.

I know it's a hard road to travel but I really don't think a child who might not survive sitting next to someone who ate peanut butter at home that morning has any business being sent to a public school. If a school tried to dictate what I may or may not feed my children in our private home or say I have to shower before attending a concert I would write a letter stating that I am not comfortable with those sorts of demands and that we will not be doing those things. The school and the parents of that child have a right to know we (and many other parents, I'm guessing) are not going to be bending over backwards for that child so they can plan accordingly.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top