Almost kicked off FLIGHT! Please help

[Nicoleclaw]

When it comes to peanut allergies, your two experiences have been very lucky people, but I will tell you (based on every bit of information given to me from the medical community), BOTH of these people are taking risks. A peanut allergic person will never, ever, ever know for sure if they are only at risk for consumption, contact, and/or airborne. They are guessing and they are solely guessing on maybe past experience and statistics. At anytime, just like any allergy, this could change.

As with your friend above, you weigh the risks. Some people don't live in areas where access to many airlines (peanut free) is available. I'm sure there are many PA people who actually are so bad off that they make that choice not to fly at all. We don't hear about them because their issue is resolved with that decision. Other people feel that, based on an airline's policy and seemingly willingness to accommodate the allergy that the risk of flying is minimal. It's when they actually get on the plane and the airline doesn't do what it promises to do that there are problems.

Yep, and I think limiting peanuts is reasonable. Southwest is definitely accommodating and we fly with them.

As for business in the future, I often wonder why all airlines just don't go peanut free to avoid these. For them to even make some type of published accommodations tells me that there has been enough need to do so. If you've got people wanting to go to peanut free airlines then you would lose business. While I enjoy peanuts myself, they don't make me want to fly with someone who serves them. You would think in this day of airlines losing so much money that they would just stop the whole mess of peanuts being on the plane. Cutting them will not cost them to lose any passengers, it would probably help them gain that small population of allergic people, and it would probably prevent many headaches with flight attendants.

I agree they are lucky but taking risks. People ask me about the severity of Aiden's allergy all the time....he actually was not exposed before we found out he was allergic through testing for something else. So I think he is ok with having it in the room, since it has been, but I am so nervous that one day it is going to change, especially because we don't know what would happen if he ate it! He also is allergic to almonds and hazelnuts, but we would avoid TN anyway even if he wasn't.

If we had to fly tomorrow and the airline seemed reasonable accommodating, like Delta DID, I would fly with my son.

I also feel limiting peanuts is reasonable. It is not like you lure people to fly your airline by serving them. It is not caviar! lol I would think there would be cheaper alternatives.

 

[kaytieeldr]

If we are talking about having reasonable accommodations, not having whole peanuts on the floor I think constitutes a reasonable accommodation. Especially in light of what is stated on their website for the accommodations they will provide.

Respectfully, again - none of the Delta employees with whom the OP spoke could have reasonably been expected to know that the previous passenger in the OP's assigned seats left or would leave peanuts on the floor. Not the person on the phone, not anyone at the front counter, not even the Gate Agent.

Please refer to the several posts in this thread about turnaround time and how it doesn't allow time for fully cleaning the plane between each flight. Since the cleaners don't usually enter the plane from the passenger waiting area, and because they likely don't have information about such things as who sitting where has what needs, it's not unreasonable that there is no 'special cleaning' of a given seat/row of seats/section.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

Respectfully, again - none of the Delta employees with whom the OP spoke could have reasonably been expected to know that the previous passenger in the OP's assigned seats left or would leave peanuts on the floor. Not the person on the phone, not anyone at the front counter, not even the Gate Agent.

Please refer to the several posts in this thread about turnaround time and how it doesn't allow time for fully cleaning the plane between each flight. Since the cleaners don't usually enter the plane from the passenger waiting area, and because they likely don't have information about such things as who sitting where has what needs, it's not unreasonable that there is no 'special cleaning' of a given seat/row of seats/section.

I did read all of the posts, and I do understand the plane does not go through a thorough cleaning before reboarding. I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it is not about it not so much about it being clean when you get on the plane, it is about the hard time they gave her after she notified them. According to what is on the website, you would think they would clean up a mess like that when they know a PA is on the plane.

Here is from the website.
"When you notify us that you have a peanut allergy, we'll create a buffer zone of three rows in front of and three rows behind your seat. We'll also advise cabin service to board additional non-peanut snacks, which will allow our flight attendants to serve these snack items to everyone within this area.

Gate agents will be notified in case you'd like to pre-board and cleanse the immediate seating area. We'll do everything we can, but unfortunately we still can't guarantee that the flight will be completely peanut-free."

If they are creating a buffer zone, they know where the PA is seated and it would be nice in a dream world if they visually inspect that area. That is probably never going to happen...lol....but if they claim there will be a 3 row buffer zone, they should atleast be apologetic and willing to clean it up after being notified.
JHMO

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it is about them giving the OP a hard time overall.

 

[Vallie]

I think the letter sounds good.

I just cant believe they spoke to you like that. Horrible. I would not have been able to stay quiet thats for sure. You did the right thing and I hope the resolve this.

 

[kaytieeldr]

According to what is on the website, you would think they would clean up a mess like that when they know a PA is on the plane.

Here is from the website.
"When you notify us that you have a peanut allergy, we'll create a buffer zone of three rows in front of and three rows behind your seat

Right - but the buffer zone applies to the actual flight on which the PA passenger is scheduled. It means the airline won't serve peanuts in that zone. It doesn't mean they can reasonably be expected to prevent passengers on the previous flight from having peanut products.

but if they claim there will be a 3 row buffer zone, they should atleast be apologetic and willing to clean it up after being notified.

But they were willing to clean that area. They did clean that area. Yes, I realize it was done because the OP brought the peanuts to the attention of the Flight Attendant - but there was no way even that flight crew could have reasonably been expected to know that there were peanuts in that row. It was an entirely different crew from the one that had been on the plane's previous flight.

The OP had the option to preboard and clean their seating area. This can reasonably be interpreted as notification that the area may NOT be cleaned/peanut-free to the degree the passenger needs.

Several responses refer to "they". There's no "they". The OP's poor treatment - real or perceived - was on behalf of ONE airline employee. No, really. A Flight Attendant asking the passenger what that passenger would like the FA to do about a given situation has been explained by several posters in this thread as the FA's attempt to discover what the OP needed done. Someone to pick up the peanuts? A complete vacuuming? Moving them to seats a safe distance from their currently-assigned seats?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Good post and I just want to add a few things within it for educational purposes. Not trying to argue or prove any points, just get some general information out:

....
When it comes to peanut allergies, your two experiences have been very lucky people, but I will tell you (based on every bit of information given to me from the medical community), BOTH of these people are taking risks. A peanut allergic person will never, ever, ever know for sure if they are only at risk for consumption, contact, and/or airborne. They are guessing and they are solely guessing on maybe past experience and statistics. At anytime, just like any allergy, this could change.
****
The person you know that uses almond butter is being risky and it may come back to bite her. As for your adult friend who has the consumption-only allergy, really, that could change but I do hope she realizes that you can NEVER really know that for sure. My experience with my son is that he is consumption and contact but there's always a part of me that knows that one day that could change so I do avoid most of the risks associated with airborne allergies but not all--obviously I fly with him.

As with your friend above, you weigh the risks. Some people don't live in areas where access to many airlines (peanut free) is available. I'm sure there are many PA people who actually are so bad off that they make that choice not to fly at all. We don't hear about them because their issue is resolved with that decision. Other people feel that, based on an airline's policy and seemingly willingness to accommodate the allergy that the risk of flying is minimal. It's when they actually get on the plane and the airline doesn't do what it promises to do that there are problems.

I do believe that we must be careful that an expecatation of reasonable accomodations doesn't become an entitlement to perfect accomodations

I agree with that too and, personally, if an airline said "We serve peanuts, we want to serve peanuts, and we won't adjust anything" then I would not ask for accommodations. When an airline states that they will accommodate me then I do ask and I do expect them to do what they say.

And "sometimes"--not in the OP's case--but there are limitations in how someone can be accomodated. Be it an allergy or a physically or mentally limiting disability. This is why ADA mentions 'REASONABLE'.

Airtran and southwest seems like they are more accomodating and thus probably should have her business in the future.

Yep, and I think limiting peanuts is reasonable. Southwest is definitely accommodating and we fly with them.

As for business in the future, I often wonder why all airlines just don't go peanut free to avoid these. For them to even make some type of published accommodations tells me that there has been enough need to do so. If you've got people wanting to go to peanut free airlines then you would lose business. While I enjoy peanuts myself, they don't make me want to fly with someone who serves them. You would think in this day of airlines losing so much money that they would just stop the whole mess of peanuts being on the plane. Cutting them will not cost them to lose any passengers, it would probably help them gain that small population of allergic people, and it would probably prevent many headaches with flight attendants.

I'm sure they and their allergist have a handle on it--the child and my friend do not get any reaction whatsoever from any exposure. I'm not making light of it.

But surely there are variances otherwise the OP would have dressed her child in similar attire as the Airtran child.


We could go on for years on what airlines could do to attract more business. Peanuts is only a start.

But until they are educated in a FAIR and non-accusatory manner, there is little that can be done. This is outside of the OP's very inappropriate treatment by the employees.

It would be unfair for any airline to claim a truly peanut free flight as they cannot control the food consumption nor sanitation habits of its passengers. This isn't a classroom with hard surfaces that can be wiped down with a clorox wipe. This is a plane full of folks who could very well have had peanut butter toast while waiting for their flight.

I personally don't see what Delta did wrong OTHER than have a possible attitude with the OP beginning with the FA. The way I read her letter--it seemed as though the FA was blowing off the incident--but she may have not and was just being very business like and quick to the point.

If they are creating a buffer zone, they know where the PA is seated and it would be nice in a dream world if they visually inspect that area. That is probably never going to happen...lol....but if they claim there will be a 3 row buffer zone, they should atleast be apologetic and willing to clean it up after being notified.
JHMO

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it is about them giving the OP a hard time overall.

Very true-but in this case, it is probably why Delta has the extra statement that they will permit pre-boarding just in case. They've already stated that they cannot guarantee peanut free and clearly they had seats on the prior flight where peanuts were served.

We have unloaded last on multiple occasions (car seats to unload) and the flight attendants due a very quick scan for items left behind--straggling passengers and a very quick glance for obvious trash.

We don't know where the peanut wrapper and peanut was found--but it is understandable that they missed it in their procedures.

They LIKELY already planned for the 3 row buffer.

AND they likely were just downright witchy and having a bad day hence their possible attitude.

Some FA's are friendly and others are just all business (but seem rude when they are just actually handling matters methodically) and others are just mean people that you hope are not in charge of your emergency exit.

That said--she was permitted to clean herself--which she could have done had she traveled with her own wipes/hand wash and a simple ooops--you missed this. She likely could have just placed her children to the side while she did this.

But there is NO WAY that short of picking and doing a detailed check for physical peanuts that they cleaned the area. Otherwise, she would have told us that they told her that.

It was an entirely different crew from the one that had been on the plane's previous flight.

This is important--but likely OP would have seen this crew waiting. Sometimes the same crew is utilized especially if the plane is on a RT route and the crew just flies back and forth the entire duration of their shift.

They would then have to trust that the prior crew did their close out job and likely would have gotten the notes on the PA to know not to serve in the buffer.

Several responses refer to "they". There's no "they". The OP poor treatment - real or perceived - was on behalf of ONE airline employee. No, really. A Flight Attendant asking the passenger what that passenger would like the FA to do about a given situation has been explained by several posters in this thread as the FA's attempt to discover what the OP needed done. Someone to pick up the peanuts? A complete vacuuming? Moving them to seats a safe distance from their currently-assigned seats?

Words are but a small fraction of communcation. We were not there to witness body language or TOV of the Flight Attendant to know if she was asking in a business-like matter what they needed to do for her or if she was being snitty.

So there could certainly be a "they".


In the end--it isn't a Peanut problem with the airline so much as it is a "how do you properly deal with special needs passengers" problem.

I was pregant with my son and on a trip to Hawaii. I had a loss in the pregnancy immediately before that one and prior to the trip had begun spotting. I was cleared to go on the trip on the Doctor's observation of me as well as ultrasound confirmation that things were okay. But I couldn't lift anything heavy.

On the way back, we were within our carryon limits for our family of four--with hubby being the pack mule.

The Gate agent actually expected me to comply with their limit policy by carrying my own bags or threatening to check them.

I was soooo ready to go off but hubby was telling me to cool it. I asked if she forced disabled passengers to carry their own things and she didn't have a response.

She rolled her eyes at me and let us pass on through.

This was a delta flight.

I'm sure she was just doing her job and we were the red eye flight--but seriously! Her common sense was lacking as her witchy troll-gatekeeper took over with her mean attitude to enforce the carry on policy.


Note that nowhere on their ticket media, ticket envelopes or website does it say that a passenger cannot have the assistance of another to carry their carry ons when they are unable to.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I think it's unfortunate that there was a lack of compassion for the mother and her children during the ordeal boarding the plane (and here as well). It's a sad commentary.

My children do not have any allergies, nor do I. But there but for the grace of G-d go I.

 

[FireDancer]

I am surprised that you have an allergy but are unaware that the peanuts just being out there on the floor could cause a problem.
I also really do not think it is that terrible of a thing for 100 people or so to refrain from eating peanuts for a couple hours in order to keep a child safe. If you can't manage that, that is that I think is too self-centered. But that is honestly, just my opinion.

I look at this as the exact opposite. 100 people are being inconvenienced for the benefit of one, that I find selfish. I will never ever ever limit the freedom of anyone to eat what they want when they want but no one better attempt to limit mine. I bring my own snacks and often the have peanuts (cliff bars) and I will eat it regardless of what the airline asks. I can't eat raw carrots but I would not tell someone else not to have them, I don't care because I won't limit anyone's freedom to eat them.

 

[Jennasis]

I look at this as the exact opposite. 100 people are being inconvenienced for the benefit of one, that I find selfish. I will never ever ever limit the freedom of anyone to eat what they want when they want but no one better attempt to limit mine. I bring my own snacks and often the have peanuts (cliff bars) and I will eat it regardless of what the airline asks. I can't eat raw carrots but I would not tell someone else not to have them, I don't care because I won't limit anyone's freedom to eat them.

Would you still eat that cliff bar if the person next to you informed you of a peanut allergy?

 

[kidzmom3]

Thank you for your response. Even though it is hard to hear varying view sometimes. I appreciate your responce. I am well aware of the need for a plane to leave on time. In order for that to happen. People must and should do thier job. Yes that includes the cleaning crew. I do not feel I was asking for unreasonable expectations to have the plane cleaned properly. Once again I stated the fact that it was whole peanuts all over the floor. That is not doing thier job initially. You are right it is my responsability for my sons health, but like I stated in the letter the airline also has a responsibility.

they don't fully clean the planes after every flight. They "pick up", but they don't vacuum or anything.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

I look at this as the exact opposite. 100 people are being inconvenienced for the benefit of one, that I find selfish. I will never ever ever limit the freedom of anyone to eat what they want when they want but no one better attempt to limit mine. I bring my own snacks and often the have peanuts (cliff bars) and I will eat it regardless of what the airline asks. I can't eat raw carrots but I would not tell someone else not to have them, I don't care because I won't limit anyone's freedom to eat them.

Do you have children?

Well, is someone eating raw carrots next to you going to possibly put you into anaphylactic shock?
I didn't think so.
Most likely, there is a world of difference between your carrot issue and the severity of some people's peanut allergies.
I pray that my son's well being does not depend on someone who feels the way you do. I hope I am never on the same flight as you.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

In anycase, it is hard to read someone's tone on email. I really wasn't trying to be mean spirited when I said I was surprised. I really was just surprised they were not aware of it because they had allergies. I do not think your comments about me being mean-spirited were necessary or called for. I do not think you have stated that you yourself have an allergy, which maybe explains why you do not understand that I was surprised a person WITH allergies was unaware of that fact. That is not necessarily something I would think the general public might be aware of. But someone with more than one allergy would probably know.

I do want to say it is very nice of you to be accommodating with guests with allergies. Not even all of our close relatives are that helpful. We always have a secret stash of food with us though for those unknown situations! lol

I do have allergies which is why I don't question folks who SAY they have them and then communicate what their limitations are. Lord knows that especially with my grass allergy, things would be much better if folks stopped mowing their lawns. I have no idea what could happen, but it stops me breathing in my tracks (but not an an asmatic sense--almost like I'm choosing not to inhale--but the stench is so bad and the reaction is instant that it's like I think I can stop the allergens if I stop breathing--dumb I know...but it is not a fun allergy!)

Having been to the allergist for the several times in the past 18 months as we explore what works and what doesn't--one thing I have learned is that there are variances in allergies of all kinds.

I don't remember my issue when you quoted that poster nor was I defending any of her prior comments. I simply was sharing my experience with PA peeps and my own experience unmentioned experience with my own allergies.

I am not trying to downplay but rather report on those whom I knew. Certainly they trust their allergist with their kids life and aren't walking around playing russian roulette with nut products.

I've had cats all my life--and I'm allergic to those also. Some folks have lethal allergies. I've not been told yet by my allergist that I have to get rid of them.

Peanut allergies are tricky--but it makes it hard to compromise on the topic when (in my experience) there are folks who go with the flow and there are others who choose not to or absolutely cannot that it is easy to see why some folks would be confused. (See one of my other PA stories below--more confusion!)

A friendly explanation is all that is needed.

I'm puzzled why mom couldn't pick up the peanut trash herself, but it is the skeptical side of me who is believing that is all the FAs did once she was off the plane. It is what the people I know would do and not meant to imply that I think she was rude not to.



********

I will say I would be in a most definitive pickle myself. My son has a speech issue that makes it difficult to communicate. So if he doesn't understand something--we have WWIII. He is a super picky eater. He won't eat fruit to save his life or much anything else. It is a challenge sometimes to get him to eat and one of the things he loves is Peanut Butter. Sometimes it is all he will eat.

We are at a gym where I cannot bring any nut products in, so we make do as the gym is a couple of hours max. No biggie.

But sometimes flying is more than a couple of hours of an inconvenience.

It is tough for me b/c my son is so picky and the alternative very well may be for him to go hungry. It may cause folks to go deaf if he can't understand why he can't have food when he wants his Ba-Ba (peanut butter). Given that he is only 2, surely the flight will understand should that occur if we were to go 100% peanut free on flights.

I don't try to make fusses--but it certainly is a challenge for me when my son has his own issues. While not lethal--he doesn't have a clue of what that means.

So an airtran cross country flight--I'd surely be taking my chances if the flight were 100% peanut free. I'd be screwed.

It is something I am working on--but it does make me wonder...whose rights are more importan, you know? It really isn't a big deal--but some things aren't as cut and dried as a grown woman being able to survive a flight without consuming a peanut.

The only other place peanut products of any kind are not permitted is when we go to the allergist for me and DD for her allergies and we can make do for the 30 minute visit.

************

Funny Delta alert:

I remember traveling with my husband in 1999 on Delta and I was looking forward to my usual honey roasted peanuts. They (at the time) no longer had them according to the FA due to PA's and this snack was so that everyone could have it--even PA. Except that the snack mix had peanuts in it. Makes you wonder who made that call. I did survive the flight without my snack though since chex mix and copycats is icky. But hopefully so did the PA folks on the flight who still couldn't eat the dang snack.

Odd that in 10 years they still can't figure it out.

************
One other note that perturbs me are the unspoken nut allergies.

We had been taking piano for 6 months AT LEAST and my DD always played before this little girl. My children on numerous occasions had peanut butter products, no big deal. Even a few times we have brought lunch to the instructors house (she allowed it) and ate while one was playing.

One day--my kids had had almond butter at home--and unfortunately I hadn't noticed that they missed a bit in clean up. The mother FREAKED OUT. Not in a bad way, but like she was shocked at the possibility that other kids would be consuming nut products. She homeschools, but I have no idea if that is the reason. But if it is, all the more reason to be vigilant with the activities you do participate, no?

I felt kind of bad--probably more so than I should have b/c the errant nut butter was an accident and most importantly--she told noone.

So suddenly (after 6 months mind you!) of carefree and not following up--suddenly the piano had to be clorox wiped after my daughter's played. This was not a new allergy--it was pre-existing. She just didn't think to notify the piano instructor who then could have notified us.

It kind of almost made me feel dirty. I know why she did it--but it was just an odd sudden change of behavior when it should have been that way all along.

They played for the next year and she ended up quitting anyway. But we see them gymnastics and one thing is for certain. The place is not peanut free and they are not scrubbing down her equipment before she gets on it. Ton's of kids are on this equipment all day long and of course there is no way to be 100% sure that everyone is cleansed and peanut free prior to use it.
(They have a snack bar and the gym even sells the little crustless PB&J sandwiches--so PB is in the facility!)

It's ambivilance like that that gives me pause to wonder--it's either a serious allergy or it isn't. Make up your mind! (this mom--not directed at the mom's here!)



Sorry for the length!

 

[Nicoleclaw]

A friendly explanation is all that is needed.

I am still alittle confused as to what I said that was not friendly (mean-spirited)

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I am surprised that you have an allergy but are unaware that the peanuts just being out there on the floor could cause a problem.
I also really do not think it is that terrible of a thing for 100 people or so to refrain from eating peanuts for a couple hours in order to keep a child safe. If you can't manage that, that is that I think is too self-centered. But that is honestly, just my opinion.

Nicole--it is my personal opoinion only---but your response to firedancer or whatever their name is...seemed more confrontational and accusatory than friendly if your goal is to educate.

It may be your opinion and you are entitled to your opinion, I did find the way you expressed it as unfriendly.

I provided examples of folks I know who just can't eat the peanuts but the person was okay with other people having them and then was told by several people how dangerous and thus wrong they were for doing this.

Nevermind that they haven't consulted with either person's doctor but rather giving a general heavy handed PA lecture on what they were doing.

I wasn't supporting their statement as I do know for some folks it isn't just as easy as not eating a peanut.

I provided that b/c I found what you said a bit confrontational as though all folks with allergies magically know the ins and outs of all nut allergies when we don't.

And it seems what we do know and what we have experienced has been by wreckless PA peeps and is just wrong and incorrect.


It makes it come across that you don't care what others think as long as your kids are safe.

Frankly, I wouldn't care either--but there is just a nicer way to convey that message and that is what confuses/upset folks who aren't dealing with lethal allergies.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

I didn't read all the responses but wanted to say you should never have been treated so rudely. I don't think, however, that it was their responsibility to pick up all the peanuts. If I was allergic to peanuts I would just not eat them. Everyone around me is more than welcome and I wouldn't expect the airline to make everyone else go without peanuts only because I couldn't eat them, that seems ludicrous. I would be annoyed if I had to go without because one person has an allergy. Just don't eat them and let me eat mine. I have an allergy to certain items but I don't walk into places and expect no one to have them, that is way too self centered.

I also wouldn't find it all that hard to resist picking them up off the ground and eating them. If you were concerned your son just couldn't resist the potentially deadly nuts hanging out on the floor around him a quick pick up by you would have sufficed. Since they should be in their seatbelt the whole trip anyway and never out of your row on their own the only place you would have to worry about is the floor immediately in front of you.

None of this excuses their treatment of you but it could have been avoided had you just picked them up from your row.

Nicole--it is my personal opoinion only---but your response to firedancer or whatever their name is...seemed more confrontational and accusatory than friendly if your goal is to educate.

It may be your opinion and you are entitled to your opinion, I did find the way you expressed it as unfriendly.

I provided examples of folks I know who just can't eat the peanuts but the person was okay with other people having them and then was told by several people how dangerous and thus wrong they were for doing this.

Nevermind that they haven't consulted with either person's doctor but rather giving a general heavy handed PA lecture on what they were doing.

I wasn't supporting their statement as I do know for some folks it isn't just as easy as not eating a peanut.

I provided that b/c I found what you said a bit confrontational as though all folks with allergies magically know the ins and outs of all nut allergies when we don't.

And it seems what we do know and what we have experienced has been by wreckless PA peeps and is just wrong and incorrect.


It makes it come across that you don't care what others think as long as your kids are safe.

Frankly, I wouldn't care either--but there is just a nicer way to convey that message and that is what confuses/upset folks who aren't dealing with lethal allergies.

Please understand that I am just confused as to why I am being called mean-spirited when my response to what I have put in bold. I simply stated I was surprised they did not know that being that they had more than one allergy. I then took what they said was self-centered and showed them how I felt the reverse was self-centered.

In any case, I can assure you all my family, friends, the 125+ students I teach every year for the past 10 years, and all of my coworkers would probably pick mean-spirited and confrontational as the very last two adjectives to describe me! It certainly was not my goal to be mean, however in replying to firedancers post, I have to admit it was hard to write what I thought would come across as acceptable.

 

[FireDancer]

Do you have children?

Well, is someone eating raw carrots next to you going to possibly put you into anaphylactic shock?
I didn't think so.
Most likely, there is a world of difference between your carrot issue and the severity of some people's peanut allergies.
I pray that my son's well being does not depend on someone who feels the way you do. I hope I am never on the same flight as you.

None of that matters to me. I am concerned with my right to do what I want. I will not constrain the choices of someone else merely because my choices are constrained. There comes a point when you have to fight for your rights and this is one area. I have the right to eat what I want when I want. I find it appalling that choices are made that effect everyone because of a few people's restrictions.

I know there are schools where kids can't bring in a peanut snack for themselves because of other people allergies. This appalls me as badly as restricting the religious rights of one person because another doesn't agree. I will eat my peanuts and my kids will eat their peanuts. With the childhood obesity in this country I don't see why one healthy option should be taken away. You and your kids can chose not to eat peanuts. My choice should have zero bearing on yours while yours has zero bearing on mine. In my scenario no one is denied their free choice, everyone wins. I would rather die than ask someone to give up their freedoms.

I believe the supreme court has made some pretty important, if not controversial, decisions about restraining rights, even at the cost of life.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

In my scenario no one is denied their free choice, everyone wins. I would rather die than ask someone to give up their freedoms.

I am not going to go into everything I would like to say in response to your last post. However, I do want to say that in your scenario, not everyone is going to win. Someone WILL end up having an allergic reaction. You might rather die than ask someone to give up their freedoms, but I can assure you no one is willing to sacrifice their child for your freedom.

 

[disneyfav4ever]

I really don't think that the "I'll eat what I want when I want" is a valid argument. Most stores have a no food rule, do you go into those stores, taking in food, since you can eat "where ever you want?"

I think anyone who is that inconsiderate that they can't survive a few hours without peanuts is just selfish.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Please understand that I am just confused as to why I am being called mean-spirited when my response to what I have put in bold. I simply stated I was surprised they did not know that being that they had more than one allergy. I then took what they said was self-centered and showed them how I felt the reverse was self-centered.

In any case, I can assure you all my family, friends, the 125+ students I teach every year for the past 10 years, and all of my coworkers would probably pick mean-spirited and confrontational as the very last two adjectives to describe me! It certainly was not my goal to be mean, however in replying to firedancers post, I have to admit it was hard to write what I thought would come across as acceptable.

You did not quote the bolded portion in your post to which I was referring.

I responded to your post as it stood. I had already forgotten her original statement.

In any case, it is how I felt your post came across and now how BOTH posts were coming across.

In fact, I think it has flared things up as her latest post shows and another PA-foe is further unaccepting of the dangers.

It is the one disability that impresses upon other people to change and modify their behavior and thus restricting their rights so that your child can enjoy some freedom of their own. I think there is a happy medium--but short of banning the peanut crop federally, it is difficult for you to ensure your child the freedom of safety without placing temporary bans in places you frequent.

But my kids are not allergic and my son right now about lives on peanut butter and it will take time to teach him to eat other things. But he's got issues of his own that I won't detail here. He has no understanding that nuts can kill someone and so in my world--it is a real pickle if we ended up on a long duration peanut-free flight. Not happening anytime soon--but should we need to take a flight, we would have a real problem and him refusing to eat for 5+ hours doesn't sound fair to him and he isn't exactly at a force-feedable age.

As it stands there isn't much that we do that couldn't be modified. But one things for certain.

Someone's oxygen tank or wheelchair usage or feeding tube or what not--doesn't infringe on my rights so that they can live and I think that is the crux of the issue for Firedancer.

But neither of you --- in my opinion --- are open to each others POV.

And sadly--that can put your child's life at risk as you state.

 

[FireDancer]

Someone's oxygen tank or wheelchair usage or feeding tube or what not--doesn't infringe on my rights so that they can live and I think that is the crux of the issue for Firedancer.

Exactly. And you are correct, I will never see the POV of anyone who wants to restrict anyone's freedoms. I want zero restrictions, outside of the law, on my freedoms. I know too many people who have died to give them to me to allow one person's inconvenience to take them away. I am not asking that peanuts be forced on you or your child. I want choice. I want to chose, completely independent of everyone else's circumstances, what is right for me and my children. You are of course free to do the same, provided it doesn't impede my freedom.

I have no problem with there being elevators in my building to assist the handicapped, but in your scenario not only would the elevators but put in, but no one would be allowed to use the stairs if they chose.

I also know the parents of many soldiers who have sacrificed their children's lives for all of our freedoms.

Without choice there is no liberty, and I seem to remember someone once saying "Give me liberty or give me death". There is also a quote I love that "those who will sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither." Amen to both!