Are you kidding me! So Logan is responsible for watching out for this child's allergy! My daughter was allergic to red food dye, check food labels, you'll be surprised how many foods contain dye. All her friends knew she had this allergy and whenever she visited their homes, she had apple juice, because she knew what she could have and her friends did too, but never once did she expect her friends to give up their fruit punch drink, BECAUSE OF HER ALLERGY!! Let us know the final outcome, that teacher needs to be the one that makes sure that child doesn't have peanut butter, NOT LOGAN!! I'm a retired teacher and trust me, I had some children with restricted diets but that never affected the entire class, for Heaven's sake, SJC

If the school was willing to accept the child with his allergy, then it is the school's responsibility to oversee lunchtime and isolate the child from harm... it is not the children who should be responsible for safeguarding the 1 child, as they are only performing "normal" activities.

Schools have policies, just like the workplace, a stadium, a public building etc..if the schools policy is that children can't bring peanut products into the building, that's there right. Like anything else in life if we don't like their policy, go someplace else. I'm quite sure the inconvienience of not bringing peanut products to school is greatly overshadowed by the inconvienience of a 3 year old dying if he ingests said produts. Great lesson for the 3 and 4 year olds, it's called tolerance, and excepting others that may have a disibility, or in some way may be different from us. I'm assuming a peanut allergy would be considered a disability correct? So because of his disability we should deprive him of the education his parents want for him? Where does that end? What about the kids with any number of other disabilities? ADD, ADHD, NVLD, Math disabilties, reading disabilaties, speech disabilties, etc....Lets send all the kids with disabilties away from all the "normal" kids so they feel ostracized and lack in self esteem, great idea! Let's take all the handicapped ramps out too, beacuse, after all the majority of us don't use them right? Let's take all the kids with learning disabilities out of the mainstream classroom too, beacuse most of the kids don't need extra help. I guess it's surprising to see someone that's so religious not practicing tolerance, exceptance, and compromise.

Typing too fast....acceptance not exceptance

First of all, I'm not 'RELIGIOUS'. You need to get an understanding of what that word really means. And using that as a weapon is typical. Have a solid defense of your position would be more appropriate than name-calling, So who is it that looks intolerant here?

Secondly, you're really missing the point. It's about rights, not tolerance. Logan was once uneasy in large crowds. We took him to the Marshfield Fair and he was close to freaking out. Should the people running the fair have asked people to leave because Logan was uncomfortable? After all, they should be tolerant and accepting of the needs of others. Is that ridiculous? Of course it is. And so is this situation.

I could go on and on, but I won't. Read the above comments. I've had several emails from readers who agree that this type of policy is ridiculous. I'm surprised because I thought there would be more like yours. (continued in next frame - too long)

(continued)
As I stated, my heart goes out to this kid, but that doesn't mean that his problem should become the problem of every other kid. That's the school's responsibility - and his parents also. Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your own problems? Is a nanny state’ the answer?

We cannot accommodate every single issue that exists in our world. That's nuts. I have an idea - let's tell Jimmy Carter and his family to stop growing peanuts because kids are allergic. That should go well.

Where does it end?

Learning to 'tolerate', 'accept' and ‘compromise’ isn’t the answer for every situation. If it was we’d be bowing to the Queen of England, or speaking German of Japanese. It’s just that this time, it’s our rights that are under attack by the PC police. Who choses what we should tolerate? Thank God there are people in the world who are willing to stand up for themselves and for what's right.

This is just another case of the slow, methodic, purposeful erosion of our individual rights.

As I wrote this, I received 3 more emails from readers with stories about their own children or the children of friendswho had various food allergies. Their schools dealt with it by setting up eating areas for these students and NOT imposing upon the entire student body. Now that makes sense. A nice, simple, effective solution.

Whew...you were SO right! You have truly stirred the pot with this one. I have a grandson who is SEVERELY allergic to many substances, foods and materials. He is now 10..has lived with his allergies since about aged 4. Carries his little bag with Epi-pen with him everywhere. His school has a set-aside table in the cafeteria for all food-allergy students, and the school nurse is aware. Otherwise, there are no restrictions on the rest of the student body. All books are not written in Braille because there are blind people in the world...nor is every building entrance ramped, nor all vehicles equipped with hand pedals for leg/foot handicapped folks. Common sense, people!

It's up to the school, simple as that, if you don't like their policies, go to another one that does things the way you want it done. They choose to adopt the policy of no peanut products, it's THEIR school. I'm assuming it's not a public school correct, you have to pay to go there? They have the right to enact any policy they want, just as you have the right to go to whatever school you want. If you worked at a company that didn't allow facial hair and you wanted a beard, you either shave, or find a new place to work, simple as that. When someone owns a business, they have the right to set whatever policy they want to set, again, if people don't like their policies, that's fine, go somewhere else. Logan does have rights, the right to go to another school if his parents don't like the policies set forth by this private business.

That makes perfect sense, Pat. The school should be set up to handle this for the students who need it. That's fair.

John - that's right. They're a private schoool and they can inconvenience the majority of their students if they wish. The parents of those students have the option to leave - that is also correct. Logan will be attending another school in September.

The larger issue still remains. This isn't really about food allergies. Re-read the column.

@John Havey... In colonial times you would have been strapped into the ducking stool and soaked as a public scold.

If people who think like you do have their way--and they seem to be getting their way ever more frequently--there will be no other place to send our kids because we'll have cookie-cutter rules for all schools. There will be no difference from one school to the next.

And while you're taking a second look at your typing, bone up on the difference between "there" and "their". Maybe toss in "they're" while you're at it.

I have a nephew who has allegries. He is now 8 and he has been tought to ask if the food is ok for him to eat. As his mother says, it is his allergy, not hers and he must be the one responsibile for choosing his food as she cannot be with him all the time.

Patrick, you just don't get it do you. If you don't like the policies set forth by a private institution. GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. The people that own and run the business have the right to set any policy they want, again, THEY own it! It's not a public school Patrick, got it? And Bob, I did Re-read it, and your argument is correct, it doesn't however pertain to Logans situation, this isn't inane goverment intervention, or your god given rights as parents, or the power of the state. I agree there's plenty of that going on, but equating Logan's situation to it is incorrect. It's a private school which sets it's own policy, and should be allowed to. And patrick, I know the difference between the 3, thanks.I type quickly and don't always check my grammar or spelling. Anytime you'd like to compete in a writing competition let me know, I'm guessing I've written more poems and short stories in my life than you've ever read.

Taunton schools have a special table set up in the lunch room for those with peanut and/or other food allergies. . . BUT Cassie also had a boy in her classroom with severe peanut allergies and she couldn't bring a snack that contained peanuts, etc. . . this wasn't too bad. . .

Bob____The point you are making is very clear to me and one built upon common sense. Thanks.

John - that's not what you said in your first post. FYI the Public Schools are worse BECAUSE of gov't intervention, which is the REAL point here. Again, re-read the column. This is NOT about Logan or schools, It's about the gov't or a faction of our society who want to control everything we do, say, think, etc. Read the paper. Watch the news. Our freedom of speech, choice, etc is being eroded. I've commented on several stories on various patch sites that were about the schools banning certain foods, not allowing kids to bring certain foods from home, and on and on. THAT is what this is about. This is NOT the America I grew up in. I"m the one who's defending people's rights here. I fear for what is ahead for our grndchildren unless WE do somedthing about this insanity

John Havey, your point is not the point of the column. Nice try though. You put a nice twist on it. It makes you look like your right about it, if someone's willing to let you change the subject of the piece written. I will go out on a limb and say the people that know you think your one argumentive person, just to be right to boot. Nice try though. You ever run for office ? Or work a public (goverment-state-town job) job of some sort, just a guess.

I agree with your points about gov't intervention. You don't have to enlighten me on the Public Schools, I have 2 teenagers, and one with a severe learning disability remember? In my opinion Logan's situation doesn't back up your argument about inane gov't intervention, etc....."!5 children being put upon because one child needs a special accomodation, since when does the world work that way" Well, it works that way when a private school says it does. Out in the real world, no, it shouldn't be that way, thats why I'm saying Logan's situation and the point you are making don't mesh.

Gov't itnervention and socialist-like attitudes that are oozing into our society are two separate but related points. One is an offshoot of the other. It's systemic. It's a way of thinking that is becoming pevasive in this country.

Bob, I agree with you about Government intervention getting very out of hand. However, I don't think that Logan's situation is a good example for it. It's a private school and they have the right to implement any rule they wish, wether we think it's ridiculous or not. Could they have a seperate table for this child? Sure....however, how bad is this allergy? Can this child not even smell the peanuts? I once knew someone who had an allergry to peanuts that was so severe she wouldn't be able to smell them or she would be on her way to the E.R. In a school that only has 15 students, I think that the school has a wonderful teaching tool as far as this situation goes. Teaching tolerance, acceptance and understanding. How wonderful for these pre-schoolers to have this lesson put in front of them.

Read thid again: This has the stench of the meddling hands of the legal profession; forever perpetrating an atmosphere of angst for their own avaricious purposes. You can bet your life that the recent trend of public schools banning everything from cupcakes and peanut butter to sugared drinks and snacks has little to do with protecting the physical and mental well being of their young charges and everything to do with some legal-eagle whispering surreptitiously into the ear of a paranoid administrator at the local school committee meeting, “You’d better do this. You’d better do that. If I were you, I’d do such-and-such. You could get sued. You could lose your job. Blah, blah, blah.”

I’ll confess, I may be a little jaded or overemotional on this subject, but I’m really fed up with all the frivolous accommodations that are being made for the minority at the expense of the majority. Let me give you a recent example from my own life.

(continued)

It's about, "frivolous accommodations that are being made for the minority at the expense of the majority."

The government does it, our private institutions do it - and it's becoming more prevalent every day. The POINT is that iy has to be stopped. It's not about whether or not a private school has to comply or not (which, by the way is not always the case) - the point is that this ATTITUDE and mindset is running rampant and will unless it's checked.

The 'public' and 'private' and what's a good example or not a good example has nothing to do with the major point. Whether in public or private schools or wherever, this is about the fact that this is creeping into our lives. This is a precursor to a much more serious problem The patient is dying and some want to argue about what his symptoms are..

Wow!, John. You're just blinded to the truth. And you're SO missing the point!

Sorry my column was multi-faceted. I'll try to keep it simpler for you next time. If you don't understand by now after my many explanations, I can't help you. I appreciate your comments.

Another great column Mr H. This is 2 or 3 in a row that you haven't given me a laugh. I want to laugh and no matter what everyone else wants I demand that you go back to your comedic genre. After all - it is all about me - what I need - what I want. Hmmm - fits right in with the theme here. BTW - I got what you were saying loud and clear. Some peoples brains are clouded over by bias and the fact that they just want the last word.

John - To answer your question above - Jesus would want EVERY child to be taken care of, not just one.

Wow!!! I'm new to this comment business but am going out on a limb guessing you and John are related. Great column!! It's about time that someone had the guts to speak out about the culture that everyone has some sort of "disability" and therefore deserves special treatment. Traces of peanut butter on door knobs or desks!! Please be serious!!! If his condition is that serious how does he survive when he goes to the store or amusement park? I'm assuming there's a risk of exposure there as well. Should they make special arrangements also? In other words when does convenience for the few interfere with the rights of the majority. Apparently now!!

John ~ that is why my granddaughter could not have anything related to peanuts in her classroom.. .even the smell would have set off an allergy attack. . . I can understand where Bob is coming from. . . but also agree with some of what you have said also. . .

There is a movement in this country to trash our individual rights and freedoms. If you don't believe that you must have your head in the sand. Do you have any idea how things have changed in this country since the mid sixties? It's all part of the Humanist agenda. It's worldwide. Google it.

I finally signed up here Bob!!! I told you, you were going to get bombared with comments about this article. Hello Bob followers! I am the son In-Law to this man. I know some of you wonder how I put up with him? Two words: Ear Muffs!! Oh I'm with John Havey on this too, I don't do spell check or grammer check soo DEAL WITH IT!!!

John. I think your point about a business having the right to set its own policies has merit. ("They have the right to enact any policy they want, - - -".) What would be your position be on a policy of not allowing disabled children in the school?

I have been reading this debate with much interest. You see, I have a whole wheat allergy...same exact symptoms as the peanut allergy including being unable to touch anything that might have touched it. I carry an epi-pen with me at all times. White bread is fine, it's whatever makes it "whole wheat". But, my thought while reading this was if I was that 3 year old, would the school then ban all whole wheat from children's sandwiches and what sort of reaction one would expect from that. Healthy bread vs unhealthy bread and all of that...interesting thought.

John, I couldn’t agree with you more about prohibiting disabled students from attending the school being wrong. I certainly wasn’t condoning such a policy. You brought up a good point, though. Not only is it illegal but it’s wrong. Would you not agree that that there are certain things in life that are also legal but wrong? Are the rights of 14 other children not being denied to accommodate one child, regardless of the circumstances? There is no credible justification for taking something from one person to benefit another. You failed to mention that the parents of the disabled child also had the right to “go somewhere else”. My take on Bob’s article is that he is totally frustrated, as a lot of us are, with the unrelenting attack on personal liberties from every conceivable direction which are often driven by the fear of adverse legal consequences rather than reason. I don’t believe his intent is to attack the rights of private business owners any more than I believe your intent is to protect the rights of private business owners. His point is well taken with me. I’m sorry you missed it.

I do understand his point Gary, I just don't think his example is a good one. I agree with everything he said except the peanut issue. I believe the school made the decision that's easiest for them. Ban peanut products and take away any risk of the child becoming severely ill, or even dying. I don't believe a child not being able to have a peanut product for a few hours of his day is a hardship for that child, especially when you compare it to what could happen to the child with the allergy. I don't believe this is a case of our freedoms or personal liberties being attacked etc....just a case of the school doing what's in their best interest, and they have the right to do that. Bob also mentioned that it was a money issue. Wouldn't the school stand to lose more money by upsetting 14 sets of parents rather than one? Also, who says the other 14 sets of parents are even bothered by the schools decision, we don't know if they are or aren't. Sometimes in life we have to deal with minor inconveniences, and not being able to bring a peanut product to school is about as minor as it can get. A little tolerance and understanding is all that is needed here, it isn't a plot to take away our rights. Again, his point is well taken, I just believe there is no correlation between his point and the example he used.

After reading through the article and all the comments i have come to a few conclusions of my own. The first would be that i totally understand Bob's commentary and where he is coming from. The second thought would have to do more with a Constitutional viewpoint. That would be private property rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. If it is a private school then i would think that the private property rights guarantee would apply. The school is within its legal limits to do what it wants, but i would feel much better if the school had made accommodations for the student instead of applying a total no peanut policy. Just my opinion.

So Gary, where do the rights begin and end. Suppose I'd like to bring a gun into the school, a knife, or any number of other things, pick one. Well. it's my right isn't it? You can't always say, It's my right. It's the schools right to tell you you can't bring a gun, knife etc...into THEIR school, is it not? Why can't I bring my own food into Fenway Park? Because the owners of the park say I can't. why can't I bring my dog into a restaurant? because the restaurant owner says I can't. Why can't I drink alcohol at work? because my company says I can't. Why can't my kids bring peanuts to a school? Because the school says you can't, and it's THEIR RIGHT to do that if they so choose. You are paying a private school to educate your child, with that comes rules and regulations from that school, if you choose not to abide by them, no problem, find another school. This is not the erosion of our public liberties, nor is it a destructive new rule designed to encroach or stifle ones rights. It's a school that made a rule that people will abide by if they want to attend that school, that's it! Yes, we all have rights, but schools, companies, etc have rules and regulations that we have to abide by like it or not.

To anyone who feels their rights are being violated, I encourage you to call Sen. Scott Brown at 617-564-3170 or Sen. John Kerry at 617-565-8518. Tell them you'd like them to draft a bill to repeal the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. (yes, severe allergies are covered under this act) make sure you tell them that your childs rights have been violated because he/she isn't allowed to bring peanuts to school. Please check in back here and share their response with us.

C'mon, you guys are avoiding the REAL issue which is why so many kids will only eat one or two things and nothing else. Clearly, these kids have been given too much liberty. Picky eaters seemed to be indulged by their parents. What's up with that?

As a society we have produced a plethora of picky eaters AND people highly allergic to so many things. Who do we blame for THAT?

I find it hard to believe that this has been going on since yesterday morning and some, especially John Havey, still think it's about food allergies and peanuts. You took one tiny piece of a very thoughtful story and stuck with that, and completely our of context. That's why you have completely missed the point of the story. Why is it that most everyone else here got it and you didn't?

Well Kara, I think it's odd that you don't see that Bob tried to use Logans situation to make his point. He is totally correct about the gov't etc....He is totally wrong to correlate Logans situation and his point about the gov't, there is no correlation there whatsoever, none. I AGREE with the point about our freedoms being taken away etc..I'm quite sure I've said that multiple times. While some of the article speaks about his stance on the gov't, MOST of the article is about Logan. He clearly says "let me give you an example from my own life." Well, that example doesn't back up his point, sorry you don't see that.

LOL, that's funny, what more would you like me to say, I agree with the article, there is nothing else to say about it. The school set a policy, which is their right, period. Narrow thinking? I AGREE WITH THE ARTICLE EXCEPT THE LOGAN PART, is that clear enough for you? We all have policies and rules we need to follow, the school implemented a policy to protect a child, it's their decision, they are NOT violating Logans rights by doing that. Bob clearly thinks they are..."What about Logan's rights" it's right there in black ink. We have what's called The Americans With Disabilties Act that protects people with disabilties. Again, and this is the last time...I AGREE WITH BOB'S POINT TOTALLY....but Logans situation isn't an example of his point. I adressed both points, one I agree with and one that I don't.

If you agree with everything except that one point, why have you been on here for two days arguing about nothing? You said the same thing so many times it's beyond belief. Wouldn't it be prudent to state your point and move on? I'm finished here. Thanks for the memories!

I'm not arguing at all Kara, I'm defending my position when others want to discred it, isn't that the purpose of the article, to debate and defend our opinions, thats why he wrote the article, thats why all authors write articles, to stir the pot. That's how they keep there jobs isn't it? If they wrote mundane articles that generated no debate how long would they be employed? As long as people want to debate the issue, I'll keep debating it. If someones attacks me or my position, I will keep stating my point.

Again, sorry for the spelling their...discredit...

Correction: Orwell wrote "1984" NOT Huxley. Huxley's dystopian work was BRAVE NEW WORLD

I got home this evening and went to check my e-mail and my inbox was loaded with commentary. I believe you missed your true calling John. You should have been a U.S. senator. You would have carried the floor everytime!! It took you ( and I checked the times to be sure ) 31 hours and 36 minutes to say the same thing without ever once conceding that maybe the other people who all agree on this subject actually made a valid point. Congratulations!!

Wait a minute Stephen. I didn't write that in my posts. Were you directing that at me. If you were I have no clue what you were referring to. I should have read through my posts befire I responded. That's what I get for gettihng al lthese post sent to my email. Big mistake.

Just as a point of interest, since it came up kind of accidentally. If you have not read Brave New World, which I read twice, or 1984 your really should. They'll scare you to death in regard to what can happen with government run amuck. I'm going to bed. It was a long day at the office and the wine has gone right to my head. Nite all.

haha. Kara you crack me up. Drink much or what? LOL!

@ Stephen Williamson - You're correct. My bad. Senior moment. I've read 1984 and have Brave New World sitting on my desk. I just bought it a couple of weeks ago and haven't started it yet, so I guess I had Huxley on my mind. That's my excuse and I'm stickin' to it!

@Kara - Either you had a senior moment (I don't know your age) or you should lay off the wine :-) You can stop getting every post in your mailbox by unchecking the box that says, 'Send me email updates for this article'.

Wow, really??? Poor you... Your finicky grandson can't have a peanut butter sandwich for lunch everyday. I feel so much empathy for you and your family. My son can't EVER have a peanut butter sandwich or he could DIE. Nothing we signed up for when we had children... Nothing you can plan for... But when you are dealt with this kind of situation you learn how to protect your child. People like you make me petrified to send my child to school. I agree with the other poster above (your own brother I think), if it were your child you would think differently. Again, so sorry for your tough situation... Hope it isnt too much trouble introducing new foods to your grandson.

Diane - My heart goes out to your son. You've missed my point and I really don't want to revisit this and argue with you about what I did or did not say or did and did not mean. There was only one other person who didn't understand what I was saying. Maybe I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I know about being dealt a situation and trying to protect a child. You see, on Saturday, January 22nd, 1994 at 4:30 PM, our daughter, Erin, our middle child, lost her 22 month battle with leukemia and there was NOTHING we could do to protect her. Nothing! No laws. No special arrangements at school - nothing! She was 16 years old and mere weeks away from her 17th birthday. She'd be 34 today had she lived. We didn't sign up for that either, We aern't supposed to bury our children. Our chilldren are precious gifts to us. If I were you I'd do everything in my power to protect my child.