Add a Comment
Email This
This is probably true, but in the here and now, the Americans with Disabilities laws are set up in the favor of those with disabilities.
Yeah, I've always thought the ADA goes way too far on some issues. The 504 plan, though isn't about the ADA - it's to do with the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. Though I think a relevant point is that none of the relevant law - ADA, Section 504, or IDEA guarantees that the child will be kept in the regular public school.
One strategy that the laws would allow but that the parents of the allergic kids would probably reject, would be to remove those seven kids from the regular classrooms and put them in a separate classroom - then only the one classroom need be kept allergen free.
I feel the right decision was made in this case based on the laws currently in place and the possible consequences of doing nothing.
Well, I've only seen the one article, and I don't think it gave enough information to judge. If the kids are really so allergic that merely "opening a jar of peanut butter" somewhere in the school could trigger severe anaphylaxis, then those kids don't belong in the public school. On the other hand, we could be talking about a very mild allergy and preposterously hypersensitive parents, too. The article was just inadequate - focusing on the controversy rather than the relevant facts.
RSS
RE: Um, that's not evolution
The school's costs (to provide required lunches and such) in keeping with the peanut ban are necessarily going to go up. In response, the risk to the kids is going to go down - but it won't go away entirely. Do the costs outweigh the benefits? Frankly, I doubt it.
This is probably true, but in the here and now, the Americans with Disabilities laws are set up in the favor of those with disabilities. The parents can file a 504 plan which can include things like a peanut free lunch environment. How that is achieved is worked out between each school and parent. I've remarked several times that I think there is still a lot of risk despite all intentions, and if I were a parent of one of these kids I would hesitate depending on the extent of the allergy before sending them into school.
The real question here is "Did the school officials make the right decision in enacting a ban?" Secondly, "Should the population of the school form an attitude of compliance in order to at least attempt to keep these kids safe?"
I feel the right decision was made in this case based on the laws currently in place and the possible consequences of doing nothing. The arguments made on the overall philosophy of what should be done on a wide scale could not be considered in the immediate situation. The people who opposed the ban in every way shape and form seemed to be doing so because of inconvenience, and wanted immediate gratification instead of "Let's make the kids safe as we can, and then figure out what to do."
(The police had to be called to the meeting because one guy was so rabid.)
View Full Discussion