How Should Restaurants Accommodate Allergies?

Two thought-provoking blog posts have recently been published about how restaurants should, and can, deal with severe allergies. Paolo Lucchesi from the San Francisco Chronicle's Inside Scoop blog asked yesterday, "When It Comes to Diners’ Dietary Demands, How Much is Too Much?" and today Phoebe Damrosch on Grub Street asked, "Are Restaurants Responsible for Your Food Allergies?"

Lucchesi details an experience had by Douglas Keane, chef-owner of Cyrus in Sonoma, Ca. A diner had presented a card that listed many items he could not eat: no nuts, nut oil, wheat, chocolate, cow’s dairy products. After some debate, Keane ended up accommodating the diner, which wasn't easy.

Then, there was the case of another Bay Area restaurant which received an email that said in part:

No sugar, very low or no carbs, no wheat/gluten, no dairy, no vinegar or alcohol and mostly only green vegetables (tomatoes and red peppers are OK too) – and only grapefruit, lemon/lime, green apples, some cantaloupe and strawberries for fruit…all meat, fish, shell fish and poultry are fine as long as they are fresh and plain; not marinated and no butter. We don’t eat anything from a can or anything that might have additives or preservatives; that includes any and all ingredients used to prepare anything.

The restaurant planned out the meal ahead of time, and then the couple cancelled the reservation just a few hours prior to dinner.

On Grub Street, Damrosch writes:

The proliferation of restaurants that say, in no uncertain terms, they won't accommodate food allergies is relatively new. Of course, so is the proliferation of diners who travel with food-sensitivity cards that explain in strongly worded language exactly what they can and cannot eat.

It gets more complicated from there, thanks to diners who claim to have allergies when they really just don't like something. Restaurants like Momofuku Ko will not accommodate vegetarian diners, since they only serve a prix fixe meal without a la carte items.

Neither Lucchesi nor Damrosch offer solutions for restaurants and perhaps that's because there is no obvious choice. It's challenging for kitchens to accommodate special requests that require significant time (such as scrubbing down prep surfaces, dishware, etc.). But people with severe allergies deserve an occasional meal out of the house as well. It's a messy situation, and with food allergies potentially on the rise, it sounds like it is only going to get worse.

Comments

[Mary Hamel]

07:09 PM on 10/08/2011

My peanut-allergic daughter is only 4, so she is too young to go to a really upscale restaurant. When she's old enough, however, I wouldn't necessarily expect a chef to change the ingredients on something to make it safe.

I would hope, however, with allergies being so common, that they would at least know what ingredients are in their food, and be prepared with some suggestions on what menu items are safe to order.

If it was a really nice place, I would definately ask questions before making a reservation in the event that they didn't have anything on the menu that was safe.

The eight most common food allergens are: peanuts, tree nuts, eggs, milk, soy, fish, shellfish, and wheat.

Most inexpensive "chain" restaurants have had their corporate offices check ingredients on menu items and can give you menu suggestions on what to order if you have a common food allergy. I know that's harder for independent restaurants to do, however.

[GourmetK]

02:49 PM on 09/26/2011

As a chef, few things annoy me more than people making me jump through hoops trying to guess what they're allowed to eat. Some people have legitimate allergies, and for this reason, I clearly list ingredients and my staff and I are prepared to answer any questions regarding the contents. However, I am sooo over people with self-imposed dietary regulations that are designed to drive people in my industry up a wall.

Yesterday I spent 10 minutes going around in circles trying to help a customer with all kinds of issues, only to find out that she follows the 'blood type diet'. The HCG, South Beach, Atkins Diet, etc., are designed to further drive us nuts. Anything ending in 'tarianism' often spells trouble, too. Vegetarians, pescatarians, what I call 'chickentarians' who won't eat red meat or pork, and whatever other variation I missed. Of course, there are vegans who make it impossible to serve even 'vegetarian' meals because it has cheese, butter, or an egg in there somewhere. (I will NOT replace the eggs in my beautifully delicate crepe batter for flax seed meal just because YOU decided to be vegan). Let's not forget religious dietary restrictions, either.

Designing menus with something for everyone is complicated, and quite frankly, I'm over it. I do my best to accomodate everyone, but if you have an unusually complex dietary need whether self imposed or medical, it is up to you to keep it simple and plan ahead whenever possible.

[nottomwaits]

03:04 PM on 09/24/2011

What's a restaruants liability if they try to accomodate one of these allergic diners, and something goes wrong? Wouldn't it be safer just to say they won't accomodate special diets, but explain things in detail on the menu, so the customer can roll the dice if they choose?

[luvs2eat]

09:28 AM on 09/24/2011

As one who has biopsy diagnosed celiac disease... eating something with wheat, rye, barley, and sometimes oats will make me really sick for 3 days with lingering symptoms for a week.

It's amazing what friendliness, manners, and a good tip will get you in a restaurant. Talking to the manager helps a lot, but unfortunately I am at the mercy of the person who actually prepares the food and my friendliness and manners with the manager or server often become a moot point between the order and the preparation.

We don't eat out anymore. I sure do miss it.

[pitciarn]

03:50 AM on 09/24/2011

This is a case of the MINORITY pushing the MAJORITY. I have Asthma, which can get severe and carry my Abutral inhaller and my meds. MY issue , My health, I avoid were possible situations that will trigger my asthma. I avoid the over perfumed and Aqua-Velva crowd.

I am truely sorry YOU have issues, but that does not mean the rest of us need to cater to you. Stay home and cook your gluten free, low carb diet peanut allergy. There are people missing limbs that whine less than you do , or children with cancer that smile throught the pain.

[Cheri Cameron]

10:37 AM on 09/23/2011

Restaurants have training available to them for how to provide service to people with special needs. Typically, they do want to accommodate their customers, and if they don't, they are in the wrong business. Both the National Restaurant Association and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network offer training and guidelines. It's there for the taking so it doesn't have to be such a pain.

That said, as a food allergy family, I feel that we are responsible for our safety. That's why I stick with chain restaurants which can provide the information I need, I call ahead, and I avoid places where it's obvious that my family can't eat (e.g., Texas Roadhouse, the peanut trap). It's important for families like mine to be informed and aware, and there are resources for us, too, like FAAN and KWFA.

I just don't see how this is an issue that raises such ire. Of course, we're all entitled to our own opinion. We are also entitled to demonstrate our utter lack of compassion, which is, unfortunately, a skill that we seem to be improving upon lately. If you find it disruptive when people with special needs are accommodated, perhaps you should get a card to offer the manager that reads, "Easily irritated. Please sit me as far away from other people as possible." Or perhaps you should avoid going to restaurants altogether. It may be safer that way.

[Stephen Thorpe]

12:55 PM on 09/22/2011

The burden needs to be on the person with alergies. They need to be their own food cop. It is their own problem.

[Cheryl Correia]

01:18 PM on 09/22/2011

Hi Stephen, I do appreciate your honesty on this very topic. As a mother of a child w/a food allergy I can assure you we take it very seriously. We realize individuals who do not have an allergy do not understand the complexity of managing the allergy and ensuring our child's safety. While you may eat at your leisure, we are checking every food label every time. So yes, we are our own cop and its "our problem."

But on a compassionate note, our son did not chose to have a food allergy. We are raising him to be independent and empower him to take charge and be his own cop as you state. 1 in 13 children have a food allergy so the problem is growing and and we only hope tolerance from those w/out an allergy rises at the same level.

Be well and of course eat well!

[Stephen Thorpe]

01:39 PM on 09/22/2011

Thanks for your very nice reply. I wish your son well.
Some say the best way to deal with alleries and children is to send the kids out in the yard to play in the dirt.

[Georgi Anne]

12:37 PM on 09/22/2011

When I dine out, I first place my epi-pen on the table so that it is not only visible but also handy. I will then ask when I order if it is possible to easily get the dish I want without any cross contamination with fish which is deadly to me. If the server is a kid who most evidently does not know and does not offer to check, I will order a salad and be quite happy with it. I do not order anything fried as many places will use the same fryer and oil for fish and all other fried foods. I do not expect anyone to go to extremes to accommadate me, but by the same token I do expect to be offered the option of paying extra for the service in an upscale restaurant. I have, BTW, had servers in the past who have lied to me about ingrediants, because they considered me to be one of 'your whiners' who just did not like anchovies. I nearly died and did not sue but did allow them to pay all of my medical expenses. Also the waitress apologized to me after I got out of the hospital.

[ProudLiberalDemocrat]

02:01 PM on 09/22/2011

The answer: To the best of their ability.

When a restaurant is operating at capacity, why should someone with a severe food allergy believe it OK to ask the kitchen to stop the production line to care for this one single patron.

If you have a severe allergy and want to eat someplace special, just call ahead. This way, the kitchen can be prepared. But if you are so allergic that even an airborne cross-contamination is life threatening, then why place that burden on the restaurant. It just doesn't seem right to me.

[Arwen Undomiel]

02:24 PM on 09/22/2011

I love how liberal Democrats proclaim themselves to be so compassionate. I hope you're proud of your hypocrisy.

[allerleirauh]

12:05 PM on 09/22/2011

I have trouble believing that a third of people in the quoted Oakland restaurant have life-threatening allergies and so few in Memphis do that I've neither met nor overheard such a person in any restaurant ever. Maybe the people of Oakland should ask what's in their environment that's making them so allergic to everything. Note that the restauranteur says he doesn't have the same problem on the East Coast, or abroad. It seems entitlement is a powerful allergen.

Those with serious allergies should be the first in line to denounce those who fake them. The fakers reduce sympathy and are likely to put the lives of real allergy sufferers at risk.

[Arwen Undomiel]

02:25 PM on 09/22/2011

Faking an allergy is putting someone else's life at risk. Period. The examples in this article are extreme and not the typical way allergic families do things. People with real food allergies bend over backwards to not inconvenience people--it's so hard to be different, why make yourself stand out more than you have to?

[Edward Taylor]

12:03 PM on 09/22/2011

i once worked at a seafood restaurant, a women came in with friends and explained she was so allergic to seafood that a pot, pan, utensil, or plate that had seafood on it even after washing could still cause a reaction. she was deeply offended when i refused her service since i could not guarantee this to her. this is the stupidity of some people

[Stephen Thorpe]

12:56 PM on 09/22/2011

Exactly!! It's her problem - sorry!

[Arwen Undomiel]

02:26 PM on 09/22/2011

One stupid person does not mean the rest of people with food allergies are like this.

[SlowBurn]

12:00 PM on 09/22/2011

I've found lately that the majority people I have encountered who claim to have "allergies" have not actually been tested, they just believe they are intolerant to those foods or have read too many articles about the dangers of gluten. I completely understand the difficulties of those with actual medically diagnosed conditions, but wish everyone else would stop being so paranoid and picky. Additionally, those with extreme diets - if you have to, stay at home! Or, choose your restaurants carefully - someone following the paleo diet would probably not do well at a pasta shop. I agree with the sentiment that chefs are artists, and anything we do to change a menu item interferes with the chefs intent - so it should be done only when absolutely necessary, and one should try and pick the dish that would need the least modifications. My dad is highly allergic to mango, so if he has a choice, he will just not order an item with mango, thus preventing the staff from having to cook a separate meal for him.

[allerleirauh]

11:35 AM on 09/22/2011

Geez... it amazes me what people expect. I take medication which makes me extremely sensitive to caffeine. If I ask for decaf and get served regular coffee, I end up with heart palpitations. So when I order coffee, I make a point to ask the server to please double-check and make sure my coffee is decaf, explaining why. And sometimes I do get the wrong coffee anyway. I've gotten to where I can tell after a few sips (there is a taste difference) but in the past I've had some bad times.

And that's not a life-threatening condition, just an uncomfortable one. If I were truly in danger of my life, I wouldn't drink coffee unless I made it myself! What sort of lunatic would put their life in the hands of overworked, underpaid kitchen staff - people who don't know you and love you, people who make mistakes, people who might not take your condition seriously? Why would you do that to yourself, or your child? What kind of ego does it take to imagine that others consider your wants and needs that carefully?

[Arwen Undomiel]

02:29 PM on 09/22/2011

Perhaps because people have a right to live a normal life?

Put it this way, what kind of lunatic would put their mobility into the hands of engineers, bus drivers, and business owners who might or might not make their places of business wheelchair accessible? Overworked, underpaid people who don't love you, make mistakes, don't take your condition seriously--these people mean that people in wheelchairs should just never go out, right? What kind of ego does it take to imagine that you might have the right to go out and live a normal life even if your legs don't work the same as everyone else's?

Attitudes like yours are what led to hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities being "culled" from society in Europe in the forties. But lacking an empathy gene doesn't qualify you for disability so I guess you'll just have to rely on the compassion of others if you ever, God forbid, broke a leg or were unable to walk for some other reason.

[allerleirauh]

12:18 AM on 09/23/2011

It's a bad comparison. Using a wheelchair ramp is not putting your life in someone else's hands. Using a bus is not any more dangerous than what all people do all the time.
I have a brother who's a quadriplegic, by the way.

That's different from asking some of the lowest paid workers in America to please kindly jump through a dozen unfamiliar-to-them hoops in order to keep you from dying. It's pretty simple - if you have a food allergy that will kill you, and you insist on having others, unskilled in caring for those with your condition, prepare food for you, you are putting your life at risk. Insisting on your theoretical rights will not prevent you from becoming dead.

[jokinok1]

11:08 AM on 09/22/2011

If I owned a restaurant, I'd put up a sign in the window that read "Everything we serve contains pork fat...even the beverages."

[Angela Taraskiewicz]

10:56 AM on 09/22/2011

It seems fairly obvious that patrons with food allergies need to handle their requests with respect and some sense of compass. However, as a mother of children with LIFE-THREATENING food allergies I find the intolerance of allergy accommodations quite offensive. Honestly, most restaurant owners are very gracious and conscientious about helping out; those who are not are easy enough to avoid. Frankly, this article generates needless controversy.

[Arwen Undomiel]

02:30 PM on 09/22/2011

Precisely. Instead of focusing on how people with special needs are a normal, important part of society, this article only serves to take a few examples of unreasonable people and generalize it to all. Disgusting, no wonder the Huff Post is doing so poorly...

[misgsoft]

09:23 AM on 09/22/2011

Contrary to what is suggested, we ALL pay for restaurant allergy accommodations. It is up to the individual with the allergy to ask if ingredients are not published on the menu. I wonder how a restaurant would treat a patron ordering a peanut butter sandwich when an individual in the next table or booth has a peanut allergy? I have a reaction to out of control toddlers and screaming infants, how would they accommodate for that????

[Stephen Thorpe]

01:02 PM on 09/22/2011

The baby / toddler thing is a huge negative. We are paying for a nice meal and a nice experience. Not out for the night babysitting. Sorry,....baby parents stay home or hire a baby sitter. ;-)