Edgewater Elementary School Parents Want Student Home Schooled Over Peanut Allergy

Some public school parents in Edgewater, Florida, want a first-grade girl with life-threatening peanut allergies removed from the classroom and home-schooled, rather than deal with special rules to protect her health, a school official said.

"That was one of the suggestions that kept coming forward from parents, to have her home schooled. But we're required by federal law to provide accommodations. That's just not even an option for us," said Nancy Wait, spokeswoman for the Volusia County School District.

Wait said the 6-year-old's peanut allergy is so severe it is considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

To protect the girl, students in her class at Edgewater Elementary School are required to wash their hands before entering the classroom in the morning and after lunch, and rinse out their mouths, Wait said, and a peanut-sniffing dog checked out the school during last week's spring break.

Wait said school leaders will meet this week with parents to address concerns and try to halt inaccurate rumors that children's mouths were being wiped with disinfectant.

Chris Burr, a father of two older students at the school whose wife has protested at the campus, said a lot of small accommodations have added up to frustration for many parents.

"If I had a daughter who had a problem, I would not ask everyone else to change their lives to fit my life," said Burr.

Attempts to reach the girl's parents for comment on Monday were unsuccessful.

(Reporting by Barbara Liston; Editing by Jerry Norton)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

Comments

[clayboggess]

08:06 AM on 04/06/2011

Home schooling can definitely be the right choice for a lot of students; however, removing a student from a school because of potential life-threatening peanut allergies shouldn’t be one of them. The parents can only go so far to protect their child. Eventually the child will need to learn to make adjustments in a realistic manner. By removing them from potential hazards isn’t going to solve the problem.

Clay Boggess
http://www.bigeventfundraising.com

[fenriswolf26]

01:36 PM on 04/02/2011

Peanut allergies, ADHD, EI-problems, poverty... Schools deal with issues that create challenges in the classroom everyday--none of which are the fault of the children. Why should a child be punished (removed from the school) for something that is not her fault? These parents, sorry, should suck it up and think of the life experience and social consideration skills their children are gaining.

[OneTiredMom]

12:06 PM on 04/02/2011

(...con't) You, as a parent, are proactive & cautious wherever you go with your child. You are in charge of your child’s safety & you have the necessary training. You know what to look for, what to do & how to handle any reactions in case of an accidental exposure. However, when your child is at school, you are not there to personally protect him/her, & you need to make sure the proper measures are in place to do so. So, a 504 plan or an IEP is put in place to help protect your child. Both are commonly used legal documents that protect children with various disabilities in school.

Then, imagine that there are parents protesting your child & the protections that were put in place by the school; some that you were aware of, some that you did not request, & some that were completely made up (whether mistakenly or to rile up others). Imagine that those protesting parents also called the media to cover the story, thus bringing your family into the spotlight, which is NOT what you had ever wanted. Imagine that your child's name was then released to the public against your wishes! Imagine that this was the first that your family had even heard of the complaints.

Imagine that you & your child are now the target of bullying, harassment & written threats that parents will send their children into school with peanut oil smeared on the kids’ backpacks, which could kill your child.

[Mstngmis]

06:18 PM on 04/02/2011

So you consider protecting this child by posting PERSONAL information of GOOD Teachers and Parents appropriate so that people can send them hate mail?? The definition of Bullying can be characterized in so many ways, that is one, name calling on the "SUPPORT" website would be another. In all of the newscast, I don't recall anyone mentioning the name of this child, nor did they mention her parents names. I do however recall her parents letting her be broadcast on the News. I know some of the parents who protested and their message was not to remove this child, it was to stand up for the rights of their children too. It was said they were demanding the removal of the child, when in all actuality it was a simple question of "If they don't feel their child is safe by ALL of the measures put in place to protect her, then why are they sending her to this school?" There are other schools in the district, if these Teachers/Students/Parents are such heartless monsters who don't try to protect her, why is she still attending this school. The ACCUSATION that the parents at this school would send their children in with peanut oil on them is frankly absurd. There are Great Teachers/ Students/Parents at this school who have been more than willing to follow Protocol, and will continue to follow reasonable Protocol! To Twist parents defending their children into something else is revolting!!!

[OneTiredMom]

05:27 PM on 04/03/2011

I can only assume that you meant to post this to someone else, as nowhere in my comment did I make any suggestion that I condone bullying, harassment, name calling, nor did I mention any "support website." Are you a member of a support group where this information was specifically posted by the Baileys?

There are, indeed, newscasts that mention the names of parents and child. The child's name has 4 syllables, but I will not mention the name on here. I only heard it from the news, and that particular popular program/story is still online.

Yes, there WERE requests for the child to be removed and home schooled. The district spokesperson (Nancy Wait) specifically stated that they had received several such requests. That is not only listed in this article, but others. As she mentioned, that is not an option. The girl's right to a Fair and Appropriate PUBLIC Education is protected by federal law, as is everyone's. They are required by law to follow protocol to protect her. The school admittedly put some things in place that were not requested by the parents nor required (such as mouth rinsing).

I'm not sure where attorney(s) you mentioned elsewhere are in this, as I would assume that one would have been speaking out on their behalf by now if the had retained one. I do think they need one in light of all that is happening, although I don't know if they previously needed one to obtain accommodations.

[OneTiredMom]

06:10 PM on 04/03/2011

What some of the signs said: "Why Are We Being Kept In The Dark?", "Our Kids Are Special Too!", "Equality For Our Children", "No to Clorox Wipes", "How Much Academic Time Has Your Child Lost?", "Reasonable & Fair", "Where is our Happy 'Median'" (sic), "No Dogs", and "Ask Your 1st Grader!"

One of your protesters claimed (in writing, in what was a public location) that kids were coming home with red bumps on their faces from being wiped with the Clorox wipes, yet they were never used. That same protester said she thought the child should be home schooled, and even had a discussion that included mention that the Baileys should be investigated. From what I understand, someone did indeed call Child Protective Services to request that they investigate the Baileys.

Perhaps you should sit down with the other parents who were involved in the protest and find out what they have actually been doing and saying, if they are willing to tell you. It makes me wonder if perhaps this whole protest was actually incited by the claims of a few who might have been looking to cause trouble and others followed, thinking the claims were true.

Realize, too, that a child's 504 plan or IEP is not a matter for public record nor is it something that is up for debate. It is a legal document and is private. If someone is supposedly disclosing the contents, they are either lying or violating the student's privacy.

[OneTiredMom]

11:51 AM on 04/02/2011

Imagine for a moment that you have a child who has an allergy to a particular food, and that allergy is life-threatening (not just “could be” but “IS”, as per experience from past exposures). Imagine, too, that you are employed and your salary is necessary to pay the mortgage or rent, utilities, clothing, put food on the table, and so on. You are either a single parent or both parents MUST work to make ends meet, so homeschooling is NOT an option, yet other parents say that you should keep your child home because they don’t want to be inconvenienced.

You know your child can be kept safe if certain protocols are put into place at school, such as hand washing before entering the classroom to lessen the chance that residue from the allergen that may have been eaten earlier will not come in contact with your child (which also reduces the chance of other illnesses and is a good hygiene practice for all kids), wiping down surfaces, and making sure that lunches are not brought into the classroom. You are NOT asking that the school be free of a particular allergen (although that is something that's commonly being done by MANY schools). You are NOT asking that other parents bear the expense or inconvenience of providing safe alternative foods for everyone. You are only asking that reasonable attempts be made to keep your child safe at school with protocols and accommodations that are common in other schools. (con't)

[Joshy X]

07:44 PM on 03/28/2011

kids do not need to be forced to constantly wash their hands and rinse their mouths out in order to wash any trace of peanut butter from the world... if the kid with an extreme fringe allergy can't be with society then he needs to be home schooled... you can't cater to the obscure

[oxjr]

01:40 PM on 04/02/2011

Peanut allergies are epidemic now, no one knows why. Most schools have peanut allergy policies because of this. It is not obscure - it is policy to adapt to ever-changing health issues.

[mikey09]

12:06 PM on 03/28/2011

Not sure what the answer will be, but we have more and more cases where ONE special child's needs are either taking over a classroom or is costing the district tons of money at the expense of all the other kids.
 
 

[Plurabelle06]

09:23 AM on 04/11/2011

So what is the price of this child's life? How many kids need to have a life threatening allergy before it is enough to count? How is washing their hands and rinsing their mouths costing tons of money? Or does the money issue only apply to kids in wheel chairs or developmental disabilities?

[progressiveteacher]

11:00 AM on 03/28/2011

This is a terrible problem that lots of kids share. Really, there are a lot of foods that aren't peanuts - why don't the parents of the other kids show a little empathy and not give their kids food with peanut butter for lunch? I know there are peanut products in a lot of foods, but it's very easy to be careful. Moreover, the parents and kids have a great opportunity for a great learning experience in tolerance, acceptance, and kindness, In addition, a lesson or two could be added about how to read food labels. These intolerant parents forget that school is a right, not a privilege.

[mikey09]

12:11 PM on 03/28/2011

I would bet their are a few hundred kids in this school. I don't feed my grandkids processed foods, like lunchmeats and they don't eat school lunches for the same reason...so mine should be forced to eat beans for lunch everyday because of one child's allergies. Why not cancel recess for all kids if a child is allergic to a bee sting

[Muriella]

01:34 PM on 03/28/2011

A bee sting allergy and a peanut allergy are not the same thing. But there are schools that ban food on the playgrounds, because snacks attract the stinging insects that are a danger for the students that are allergic.

I'm guessing that there are roughly 1200 - 1500 students at this k-5 school. That's a lot to monitor for a no peanut policy. I'm assuming that is the reason for not having a blanket ban on peanut products for the entire school, even though it is common in many schools to have such a ban.

Keeping the smaller area, where the child spends most of her day, as clear of peanut residue as is reasonably possible is not that great of a request.

But if there were a ban.....? You don't feed your grandkids processed foods, I'm assuming because processed foods might kill them, in the long run.

You want them to live long and happy lives.

That's what the parents of a child with severe allergies want for their children.

You can't find it in your heart to limit your grandkids peanut intake to before school, and after school, and weekends, and Christmas Vacation, and March Break, and summer vacation, and any other days off during the school year, so that the child who is deathly allergic to peanuts can have the same opportunities as your grandkids?
.

[JazzoRenee]

02:05 PM on 03/28/2011

I have to agree with Mikey, as much as a feel toward the little girl and her family, as my nephew was a server allergic reaction to milk, it is asking a bit much for every other kid and their family to change their eating habits to accommodate 1 child.

The real issue that needs to be addressed, is Why Are So Many of Our Child Allergic to Peanuts?"
I don't remember any kids being allergic to peanuts when I was growing up, and I'm in my late 20s'. There has a be a systematic change in either vaccine additives or something, to cause such a raise allergic reaction.

[grimeball]

01:12 PM on 03/28/2011

Well said, but here's where you get a little off target. A child bring a PB&J sandwich is in no way preventing the girl from attending school. The girl can attend the school.

However, the world does not revolve around this girl. OK...we make peanuts banned in elementary school. I assume it continues to middle school. And then to high school. The girl goes to college...I guess a university needs to ban peanuts from campus. After college, it goes to a workplace.

All the while, restaurants in this girls town are made aware of her condition and restaurants have to stop serving anything with peanuts.

I feel awful for the girl, but it is unreasonable to expect the environment where you are to adapt to ensure your survival. A basic principle is people need to adapt to their environment, and not expect the environment to adapt to them.

While school might be a "right", it is subjected to mother nature.

[grimeball]

01:25 PM on 03/28/2011

Correction on the banning of peanuts...just read the article on child parenting. Doesn't seem out of line and minimal impact to other kids.

Parents of other kids need to get a clue.

However, I do think a majority of my post is valid still. All these accommodations are being made in elementary school. Is the girl learning that every setting she's in will change to adapt to her? Or will she take responsibility to own her survival in the environment rather than look to other to create an environment for her survival?

[ironicisntit]

08:03 PM on 03/27/2011

I feel sorry for the school employees. No matter how careful they are, they cannot control completely all possibilities, especially with 6 yr olds. Peanut products are used in soo many food products, many you would not expect. If anything happens, you know the parents who insisted their severely allergic child go to this school, will sue the school in a heartbeat.

[Justin Stamper]

07:59 PM on 03/27/2011

Wow so this is a liberal conservative issue?
Never a met a conservative family with allergies then?

[steppenwolfsayshi]

02:13 PM on 03/27/2011

Parents these days are nuts. Pun intended.
If this little girl has such a bad allergy that's really scary. I hope the best for her and that she ages out of it a bit or that there are some better treatments available for her when she gets older.
Regarding the parents at this school: people act like their child is the center of the universe and throw tantrums like a toddler if they must share the instructors time with other children. Obviously a disabled child takes extra time. It's a horrible horrible lesson to teach your children they are always so important, since in the real world no one will pay attention to them.
They are unique and wonderful but not special. The world can never live up to the expectations you're setting, so it just gives kids low self esteem.

[a17sanchez]

09:36 PM on 04/17/2011

So this 6 year old girl is at fault? You think this is teaching her the world revolves around her? Perhaps the threat of a 6 year old dying can be a little more important than your precious kids getting PB&J for linch. WOW show some compassion... this is ludicrous that you cant toilerate a 6 year olds life threatening illness and want her banned.... isnt that showing the other kids that they can do whatever they want and dont have to show any compassion??? Get a clue.

[GrandmaInOhio]

01:53 PM on 03/27/2011

As a grandparent, I feel very sorry for both sides. I do understand the severity of her illness, but when one person's disability takes away the rights of another person , then the line has been crossed. And that seems to be heart of the issue for the parents of healthy children.

It seems to me that there should be some level of compromise. The child with the allergies must be protected because one mistake could lead to death. So, If home schooling is not an option, then perhaps the child should provided one-on-one training at the school. Granted, the school would have to enforce the no-peanut policy but if she was provided one-on-one schooling, then that should help minimize any possible contamination for her; and lessen the frustration for the other students to have to be subjected to having to have their bags checked, mouth washing and hand washing.

Hopefully, though the parents of all the children are not happy with the current arrangements, I would hope that no one has been directly cruel to the child with the allergies. That is a life-threatening illness that she will have to deal with possibly for the rest of her life.

[Plurabelle06]

09:33 AM on 04/11/2011

What you mean to say is as long as one person's disability doesn't inconvenience you, then it is okay for them to have a life like everyone else, but if they cause you any trouble, then they should be hidden from sight and out of your way. I think you should be thankful that as a grandparent and parent you don't have any children with disabilities or serious allergies. Washing hands and rinsing mouths (shouldn't children be brushing after meals anyway?) and not bringing peanuts isn't a serious infringement on their civil liberties. Shouldn't we be teaching children to be compassionate and try to help their fellow man? Why do you think it is wrong for healthy people to make small accommodations for people who have an illness or disability through no fault of their own?

[GrandmaInOhio]

05:04 PM on 04/12/2011

Well, I'm not picking sides here. I'm simply saying that I understand what both sides are saying. Obviously the parents of the disabled child must take every precaution to ensure their childs health, thats their number one priority. The parents of the healthy children are also taking care of their children, who are their number one priority. So the question is, how far can you go before before a 'small accommodation' goes over the line and becomes an infringement? I don't see any clear answer for everyone, but my guess is that this will likely be taken all the way to the courts.

[a17sanchez]

09:38 PM on 04/17/2011

Ok but all they are doing is protecting their childs desire for peanut butter sandwiches. I think one side who has their life at stake and the other having their taste buds at stake is a little ridiculous. Peanut butter is full of trtans fat anyway, it should be banned for obesity concerns...

[Madmac]

12:33 PM on 03/27/2011

What is this country coming to? Are Ignorance and Intolerance the values that we want to teach our children? Here's to America...the muscle bounded id10+. We're better than this...

[BabyMed]

12:13 PM on 03/27/2011

My child has 2 kids in her class with SEVERE peanut allergies..

I personally trained staff with epi-pen administration.
My biggest grip is the parents are afraid to train their children.

The children cannot sit next to the kids during lunch if they have a peanut product in their lunch box, my daughter is best friends with one of the kids and refuses peanut products in her lunch so her friend "won't feel bad"

Sounds to me that the parents of this child are not very informed and a tad paranoid.
They need to teach the CHILD about her/his allergy and make the CHILD own the problem. I have seen children with these severe allergies get so "protected" in their environment that about 3rd grade they get very relaxed that they "share" that Oreo cookie not realizing that it was made in the same factory that had peanuts.
This happened at my children's school, the child started having trouble breathing I happened to be on campus that day (field trip). After the teacher asked a ton of questions they assumed he had flu. I interrupted and asked "Did you share your lunch today?" the child sternly answered "NO", then I asked "did someone share their lunch with you"? BINGO...an Oreo...epi-pen out!... This child had been told never share lunch...how about Never eat anything that is NOT in your lunch.

Protecting the child like this..will be a mistake

[Andman0121]

09:55 AM on 03/27/2011

These parents should be ashamed of themselves. Their kids don't seem to be going out of their way all that much to accomodate this poor little girl at all. These parents should be the ones attending this elementary school as their kids seem to be a heck of a lot more mature than they are.

[hawhite2000]

04:01 AM on 03/27/2011

What kind of example is being set for children when their parents want to have a child removed from a class based on making a child more considerate of their fellow classmate. I would think this would be a good thing for a child to learn. Maybe that child will grown up and continue to be a considerate human being.