by Enoch » Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:47 pm
I'll address the use of "rights" here in a moment.
First, what doesn't compute? There is nothing contradictory in stating that parenthood isn't a prerequisite for being knowledgeable (I never once used the term "expert") about children, and that parents should take an active role in safeguarding their children. Where is the issue there?
Now, back to the use of "rights." I am not claiming that the children have the rights here. I'm stating that the parents do. Parents have the right to send their child to school with a packed lunch consisting of the food they wish their child to eat. If this includes peanut butter, so be it. For many of the working poor, peanut butter is the best option for a protein in their child's lunch. When Sally's mom gets the school to ban students from bringing in peanut butter sandwiches, she is asking the school to infringe upon the rights of Billy's mom to send him to school with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. So, yes, it is about the right to feed your children in the way that is best for them. So long as the foods you are sending with them aren't so unhealthy as to constitute neglect (such as sending them with lard sandwiches and boxes of Twinkies), I fail to see where the school should have the authority to take Billy's lunch away from him.
Yes, schools have the obligation to protect their students. Air-born allergens with potentially lethal reactions are one thing. Peanut butter is another. Unless schools can show documentation for peanut-allergy kids having reactions from being in the same room with peanut butter, it strikes me as little more than an overly hysterical reaction on the part of the school.