Twinkle Toe Shoes cause epileptic seizures?

[Hannathy]

Okay, so, let's all assume that there is this poor child in the DD's class who is going to go into an epileptic seizure and die because of these shoes.... Then, why are a big percentage of the other kids in the school wearing the shoes???? This child is very obviously going to be around the school property, lunch, recess, gym, library, music, etc... etc... etc... and be subjected to these shoes.

Why was the OP called to interrupt her entire day to go switch out her DD's shoes, when the child that needs to be accomodated should have been removed to a risk-free area, and/or had HER parents called.

Like I said many times, this is not about compassion for a real and bonafide issue.

It is about how the school has handled it.
ALL WRONG...
Totally and completely WRONG.....
No question.
No amount of flaming about being 'uncompassionate' or any other completely false accusation could change my views on this.

AND THIS IS COMING FROM SOMEBODY WHO WOULD NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS BUY THOSE SHOES FOR MY KID, EXPECT TO SEND THEM TO SCHOOL, OR EXPECT THEM TO BE ALLOWED AT SCHOOL.

I agree, except I would have bought the shoes(if I could afford them) and did buy similar shoes when my DD was younger. And she would be wearing them until I saw it in writing and it was school wide.

As far as the distraction lets put the blame where it is, it isn't the shoes it is the child. If the child is acting up and kicking deal with the child and staying still and behaving don't take the easy way out and blame an inanimate object.

 

[Scurvy]

You are right. There has been no compelling argument yet that has made me change my mind. So that is my opinion. The one thing that I will disagree with you on is that the administrators are not the one calling about this problem. The school nurse is. She is not an administrator and is in no position to make rules and demands like this.

Well okay then. I have no medical training, so if a nurse tells me something will aggravate someone's medical condition I do tend to believe them. Especially when I hear people who have actually had experience with whatever it is saying that yes, the nurse is probably telling the truth. I wouldn't wait for the principal to call me or for a rule to officially appear in the book before I took steps to keep another child from suffering. But maybe that's just me.

Sure, the school could have handled this better. Sure, they should have enforced a school-wide ban on the shoes rather than just starting with one class. (Although maybe they did ask everyone to stop wearing them, and the parents of many of those kids are like the posters who would send their kids in those shoes anyway.) But frankly I'm disgusted that so many parents would gamble that the nurse is lying about the migraines and seizures, and would actually send their kids to school with those shoes when there is a possiblilty that she is telling the truth. I hope none of the posters who would continue to send their kids in those shoes are ever on the other end of this, watching as their child is the one being exposed to things that could harm them like this.

ETA - I do understand the OP's frustration. I do understand being mad about the change in policy and the wasted money. I understand being annoyed that other children in other classes are still wearing the shoes. I would be upset too, if I was her. But I will never understand how some posters would intentionally send in something they have been told can be hazardous to another student. I can't understand how anyone could do that to another child, regardless of how badly the school might have handled the issue.

 

[mamacatnv]

But frankly I'm disgusted that so many parents would gamble that the nurse is lying about the migraines and seizures, and would actually send their kids to school with those shoes when there is a possiblilty that she is telling the truth. I hope none of the posters who would continue to send their kids in those shoes are ever on the other end of this, watching as their child is the one being exposed to things that could harm them like this.

I think lying is a strong statement. Misguided and misinformed IMO would better state the overall opinion of us who find the whole thing silly and who think the "nurse" was over the line.

I always love how those on the opposite side of an argument almost always end their statements with some sort of I hope you get yours type statements along with some sort of chastisement such as I am disgusted. What is the purpose of those comments?

My kids as well as most of yours are exposed to things that can harm them every single day in just about everything they do - its called life.

 

[Tinkh]

Little Bobby has an accomodation to allow his seizure dog to go to school with him. Little Jimmy in his class and other children in the school are allergic to dogs. Who wins? Would someone please tell me where we draw the line? Who decides whose needs are more important? Again, if there is someone having seizures because of OP's daughter's shoes, THEN THE WHOLE SCHOOL NEEDS TO BAN THE SHOES, not just for one person. Why can't someone at least concede that point? And again, who says it's a student? I might very well be an annoyed teacher who is distracted by them who just doesn't want them in her/his class. This seems more likely since the school is only asking one person not to wear them.

I can and do concede they probably will end up banning them just for the distraction alone. However, this is where I end up on the other side of things. My son's peanut allergy is something we try and handle within the smallest range possible. Concessions do need to be made for his safety. I am truly grateful for all the years that the other parents and students have accommodated our family with this problem. When you end up with school wide bans etc. people go off saying that the world is too this or too that and not everyone can be protected etc. Well, this is the perfect example of how things escalate. Let's assume that there is a real medical issue here. The parent, teacher or student does their best to get reasonable accommodations within the smallest range possible to try and keep the issue to a minimum. Then, lets say Susie Q's parents decide to throw a fit and say if their kid is affected then all should be. Who is snowballing the scenario? The parent trying to make the least amount of fuss as possible? Or the parent who is demanding their child have equal treatment rather than using this as a teaching lesson that we sometimes make sacrifices to better the world for those around us. The OP has stated how loved her children are at this school and how she has relationships there. Maybe the school felt that this would be an issue that could be easily accomplished without EVERYONE who has the shoes having to suffer. That is exactly why things get out of control. You can't have it all ways.

 

[lemondog]

I am curious as to what kind of work this women did that just a kid walking by could set her off. Was she working on a computer? Did she have a phone line?

Advertising agency. She was a media planner. My office was
right across from hers so I was usually the one who saw/heard
the seizures when they would happen and go in there to get her
away from the furniture. She had
the worst case of epilepsy I have ever seen/heard of. Started when she was 13, they believe it was from a bad polio vaccine she had as a child...but I digress. They were always adjusting and changing her meds to try and
control the seizures but never
had much luck. She either wasnt drugged enough or was so overstuffed she was like a walking zombie.
Yes she used a computer and phone. Flourescent lights were out though. She bought a
condo across the street
from our office building so she could walk to work since she
could not drive. She could not watch TV with the lights off, and certain stores had lighting that she had to avoid...I know the lights in
Stein Mart flickered a lot so she
would not shop there.

Basically, in the 9 years i worked with her I saw her brain function
slowly reduce. She became more
forgetful and eventually someone always had to behind her when
reviewing budgets and
whatnot because she would miss so much.

She always made the best of it
but it really was a difficult way
of life.

 

[Scurvy]

I think lying is a strong statement. Misguided and misinformed IMO would better state the overall opinion of us who find the whole thing silly and who think the "nurse" was over the line.
I always love how those on the opposite side of an argument almost always end their statements with some sort of I hope you get yours type statements along with some sort of chastisement such as I am disgusted. What is the purpose of those comments?

My kids as well as most of yours are exposed to things that can harm them every single day in just about everything they do - its called life.

Obviously there are people who believe the nurse could be correct and those who believe she is not and it appears the two groups will not ever see eye to eye. But on the off chance I'm wrong, I'll try one last time. The nurse apparently said "seizures or migraines". There are people on this thread - including me - who have stated that flashing lights cause their migraines. Those shoes have bright LEDs and those are the sorts of lights that often trigger mine. I can completely believe that a child could also have migraines because of those shoes. You don't have to believe that, you are welcome to think that I am lying, or that I am misguided and misinformed, but I know that I am not. I have no idea if those shoes can cause seizures but I do know that there is a wide variety of things that can cause seizures in different people and I certainly wouldn't assume that I am an expert about it just because I read a few things about seizures on the internet. It almost seems some posters are doing just that.

I never ask anyone to make any sort of accomodation for me because of my migraines. I remove myself from a situation if I have to, or I take meds and deal with it the best I can, but I don't ask anyone else to change anything they are doing. A child doesn't have to ability to remove herself from school if something is making her sick. Maybe the nurse is misguided and maybe she isn't. The worst that will happen if she's misguided and people don't wear flashing shoes is that the kids won't get to enjoy their shoes. The worst that will happen if the nurse is right and people do send the shoes is that the kid will have a seizure or a migraine. I know which of the two scenerios I find preferable, but you are free to feel however you want to about it.

As for the comment about being disgusted, I said it because that's how I feel. I don't understand why anyone would gamble with a child's wellbeing this way for the sake of some light-up shoes. I don't believe most kids are as allergic to things as many of the parents on the Disboards claim they are. I don't believe that a kid is going to drop dead at my son's school if I send the wrong food in his lunchbox. It annoys me that I have to pay attention to ingredients to protect kids when I'm pretty sure that their parents are just alarmists. (Note to those with allergic kids - I do know some allergies are life threatening. My dad had some that were. But I also know some parents who believe overstating their kids' allergies is a great way to make sure they stay safe, and I've seen some of the ones from his school expose their kids to the very things they say the school needs to ban for the kids' safety.) But it doesn't matter - I still do it just in case they are telling the truth. To me, this is the same sort of thing. I don't care if you believe the nurse about the shoes, I don't care if you are mad about the situation. I simply can't understand not complying with the request to leave the shoes at home, just on the off chance that she's completely right about the medical issue.

 

[Hannathy]

I can't speak for the others but most of the argument isn't even about the shoes. It is that many people are tired of the schools over stepping their role. Of them making decisions based on hearsay and fake science. of over compensating, of going to unrealistic extremes, inconveniencing hundreds for the sake of 1 and without even hard evidence or necessity. Of their attitude that they can do no wrong and that we should never question them because they know best, just shut up and do what they want. Of their rushing to conclusions before time has been taken to investigate and set up reasonable boundaries or rules, of changing the rules as they go and not applying them equally. Do I need to continue?

The dress code was established and adopted by the school board, parents bought accordingly. If it needs changed I'm sure there is a procedure in place-follow it! Just as they would make a parent do. It is an administrative decision not the nurses job, she should have reported it to the principal and let them take the proper steps. These shoes have been around for years, I'm sure the child or teacher in question has been exposed to them before if they were a problem the parents should have approached the school before this and got it written into the dress code.

As far as the distraction fine then either deal with the problem, kids acting up don't take the easy way and blame the shoes. And if they are distracting to the 5th grade class then they must be distracting to the other classes also and shouldn't be worn or if they aren't why can't the 5th grade teacher control her kids and the others can. These are all questions that need addressed and weren't when the nurse took it upon herself and beyond her role to single out and call the OP.

Another angle that was briefly brought up way back when and hasn't been discussed is if the OP's DD is the only one in class with these shoes how do we know the child who complained isn't just jealous and if they can't have them don't want the other girl to have them. I've dealt with to many kids over the years to ever doubt the level some kids especially girls will stoop to to get there way or "punish" another child. They can be very nasty little creatures and I've known some chronically ill children that learn early on how to "work" their illness.

 

[Hannathy]

I can't speak for the others but most of the argument isn't even about the shoes. It is that many people are tired of the schools over stepping their role. Of them making decisions based on hearsay and fake science. of over compensating, of going to unrealistic extremes, inconveniencing hundreds for the sake of 1 and without even hard evidence or necessity. Of their attitude that they can do no wrong and that we should never question them because they know best, just shut up and do what they want. Of their rushing to conclusions before time has been taken to investigate and set up reasonable boundaries or rules, of changing the rules as they go and not applying them equally. Do I need to continue?

The dress code was established and adopted by the school board, parents bought accordingly. If it needs changed I'm sure there is a procedure in place-follow it! Just as they would make a parent do. It is an administrative decision not the nurses job, she should have reported it to the principal and let them take the proper steps. These shoes have been around for years, I'm sure the child or teacher in question has been exposed to them before if they were a problem the parents should have approached the school before this and got it written into the dress code.

As far as the distraction fine then either deal with the problem, kids acting up don't take the easy way and blame the shoes. And if they are distracting to the 5th grade class then they must be distracting to the other classes also and shouldn't be worn or if they aren't why can't the 5th grade teacher control her kids and the others can. These are all questions that need addressed and weren't when the nurse took it upon herself and beyond her role to single out and call the OP.

Another angle that was briefly brought up way back when and hasn't been discussed is if the OP's DD is the only one in class with these shoes how do we know the child who complained isn't just jealous and if they can't have them don't want the other girl to have them. I've dealt with to many kids over the years to ever doubt the level some kids especially girls will stoop to to get there way or "punish" another child. They can be very nasty little creatures and I've known some chronically ill children that learn early on how to "work" their illness.

 

[Scurvy]

I can't speak for the others but most of the argument isn't even about the shoes. It is that many people are tired of the schools over stepping their role. Of them making decisions based on hearsay and fake science. of over compensating, of going to unrealistic extremes, inconveniencing hundreds for the sake of 1 and without even hard evidence or necessity.

So you'd rather they waited until they actually saw the kid have a seizure or get a migraine in class because of the shoes, and then start the process to ban the shoes, and wait till the rule becomes official before they try to get the shoes out of the classroom? That's one way to go about it, I guess. Or they could tell a parent that the shoes can cause a medical issue for one child and to please leave the shoes at home, and hope that the parent will be reasonable about it and help them out, as they appear to have done in this case. Then again, maybe the kid would just be faking it so I suppose they just need to tell the kid with the problem to suck it up and deal with the shoes. Seriously, though, maybe they aren't basing this on heresay and fake science. Maybe they do have evidence that this kid gets migraines from flashing lights, as I do. Or maybe her doctor has verified that she has a history of seizures brought on by flashing lights. You certainly can't be sure that they don't have evidence, and legally they couldn't show you or tell you if they did.

Oddly enough, it seems many people object to the fact that they aren't inconveniencing hundreds for the sake of one. Someone with a child who needs accomodations explained why they chose to inconvenience as few people as possible, and I mentioned possible reasons why the school might ban the shoes from only one class, but it seems many on this thread want everyone to be inconvenienced if their little snowflake has to be.

And now I'm off to bed, since lack of sleep also tends to contribute to my migraines. As does beating my head against a brick wall, which is what posting on this thread is starting to feel like. Goodnight all.

 

[barkley]

Exactly - I am no more convinced now than I was 15 or so pages ago, this has been a long drawn out bleeding heart thread that has no actual factual basis that supports the nurses statements from what I have read and I agree that the "nurse" was way out of line. If it were my kid they would be wearing their blinkie toe shoes along with all the other kids at the school.

and if you chose to send your child to school with these shoes after the nurse notified you of this issue, and a classmate or staff member suffered a medical event that the individual/parent/school (or more likely-their insurer)financialy pursued you regarding, i suspect, any insurer you are associated with would leave you high and dry.


that those of us, including myself, who shared ACTUAL instances where the type and (in my case) the same manufacturer of this style of shoes caused the identical issues cited by the school nurse to the o.p. . are disregarded as "bleeding heart" over opinions, google searches, and 'i know someone who knew someone who'... will in no way, shape or form excuse or comfort family members whose child or adult family member incurred short or (god forbid) perm. damage.



in no way can i fathom, if i were advised by ANY entity that an item of apparal that myself or my child (or anyone within my scope of control) had the option of wearing, was even SUSPECTED of creating a medical risk to ainother human being, taking the attitude that "until it's proven to me it that the risk exists/there has been a life threatening episode, i/my child will not only opt, but will activly continue to wear/expose the alleged endangered to it".

 

[Jennasis]

Does anyone know (OP?) if the nurse made a unilateral choice to call you or was she acting upon orders from the administration (principal etc)?

Just because the call came from the nurse doesn't mean she was the one calling the shots, and frankly I'm surprised that THIS is the bone of contention many people are hanging on to. It would never have occurred to me that the nurse was the one calling the shots...just the unlucky one who got to call the mom.

 

[daughtersrus]

Little Bobby has an accomodation to allow his seizure dog to go to school with him. Little Jimmy in his class and other children in the school are allergic to dogs. Who wins? Would someone please tell me where we draw the line? Who decides whose needs are more important? Again, if there is someone having seizures because of OP's daughter's shoes, THEN THE WHOLE SCHOOL NEEDS TO BAN THE SHOES, not just for one person. Why can't someone at least concede that point? .

Maybe they did and the parents of the children still wearing them have attitudes like these..."If it were my kid they would be wearing their blinkie toe shoes " "And she would be wearing them until I saw it in writing and it was school wide. " "Until a note came home stating that those shoes were banned from the school I would let my dd wear them."...

And again, who says it's a student? I might very well be an annoyed teacher who is distracted by them who just doesn't want them in her/his class. This seems more likely since the school is only asking one person not to wear them.

There is no evidence that it was a teacher that was annoyed. The OP said that the nurse called. Are you saying that the nurse made it all up to cover for the teacher?

in no way can i fathom, if i were advised by ANY entity that an item of apparal that myself or my child (or anyone within my scope of control) had the option of wearing, was even SUSPECTED of creating a medical risk to ainother human being, taking the attitude that "until it's proven to me it that the risk exists/there has been a life threatening episode, i/my child will not only opt, but will activly continue to wear/expose the alleged endangered to it".

I like skechers (so I am not knocking that company) but it surprises me the number of posters who are willing to totally believe the stats given out by the company who has a lot to lose versus the epilepsy website and posters who suffer from migraines/siezures.

 

[DawnCt1]

I can't speak for the others but most of the argument isn't even about the shoes. It is that many people are tired of the schools over stepping their role. Of them making decisions based on hearsay and fake science. of over compensating, of going to unrealistic extremes, inconveniencing hundreds for the sake of 1 and without even hard evidence or necessity. Of their attitude that they can do no wrong and that we should never question them because they know best, just shut up and do what they want. Of their rushing to conclusions before time has been taken to investigate and set up reasonable boundaries or rules, of changing the rules as they go and not applying them equally. Do I need to continue?

The dress code was established and adopted by the school board, parents bought accordingly. If it needs changed I'm sure there is a procedure in place-follow it! Just as they would make a parent do. It is an administrative decision not the nurses job, she should have reported it to the principal and let them take the proper steps. These shoes have been around for years, I'm sure the child or teacher in question has been exposed to them before if they were a problem the parents should have approached the school before this and got it written into the dress code.

As far as the distraction fine then either deal with the problem, kids acting up don't take the easy way and blame the shoes. And if they are distracting to the 5th grade class then they must be distracting to the other classes also and shouldn't be worn or if they aren't why can't the 5th grade teacher control her kids and the others can. These are all questions that need addressed and weren't when the nurse took it upon herself and beyond her role to single out and call the OP.

Another angle that was briefly brought up way back when and hasn't been discussed is if the OP's DD is the only one in class with these shoes how do we know the child who complained isn't just jealous and if they can't have them don't want the other girl to have them. I've dealt with to many kids over the years to ever doubt the level some kids especially girls will stoop to to get there way or "punish" another child. They can be very nasty little creatures and I've known some chronically ill children that learn early on how to "work" their illness.

With regard to your first statement. You are correct. A lot of people with chronic illnesses or conditions derive secondary gains from the attention and concern that others show them. With regard to the first statement, stress can be a seizure trigger, and if a child fears that the flashing lights of shoes will trigger a seizure, I would think that it would be stressful. A school nurse is always walking a fine line balancing the perceived needs of a child with a special condition and the "rights" of the other children in the class. I however would not be looking for a "rule" nor would I want to see the entire school penalized because my DD was unfortunate enough to be in the classroom with a child that had a "special need". Sometimes the right to do something should be balanced with, "Is it right to do it". Sort of like the mosque issue at Ground Zero.

 

[Toad_Passenger]

With regard to your first statement. You are correct. A lot of people with chronic illnesses or conditions derive secondary gains from the attention and concern that others show them. With regard to the first statement, stress can be a seizure trigger, and if a child fears that the flashing lights of shoes will trigger a seizure, I would think that it would be stressful. A school nurse is always walking a fine line balancing the perceived needs of a child with a special condition and the "rights" of the other children in the class. I however would not be looking for a "rule" nor would I want to see the entire school penalized because my DD was unfortunate enough to be in the classroom with a child that had a "special need". Sometimes the right to do something should be balanced with, "Is it right to do it". Sort of like the mosque issue at Ground Zero.

Completely unnecessary in this thread, and borderline political. Please remove this statement.

 

[luvmy3]

I can and do concede they probably will end up banning them just for the distraction alone. However, this is where I end up on the other side of things. My son's peanut allergy is something we try and handle within the smallest range possible. Concessions do need to be made for his safety. I am truly grateful for all the years that the other parents and students have accommodated our family with this problem. When you end up with school wide bans etc. people go off saying that the world is too this or too that and not everyone can be protected etc. Well, this is the perfect example of how things escalate. Let's assume that there is a real medical issue here. The parent, teacher or student does their best to get reasonable accommodations within the smallest range possible to try and keep the issue to a minimum. Then, lets say Susie Q's parents decide to throw a fit and say if their kid is affected then all should be. Who is snowballing the scenario? The parent trying to make the least amount of fuss as possible? Or the parent who is demanding their child have equal treatment rather than using this as a teaching lesson that we sometimes make sacrifices to better the world for those around us. The OP has stated how loved her children are at this school and how she has relationships there. Maybe the school felt that this would be an issue that could be easily accomplished without EVERYONE who has the shoes having to suffer. That is exactly why things get out of control. You can't have it all ways.

I hardly call wanting fair treatment of your child, throwing a fit and snowballing. And yes it would be a great lesson to teach a child, however we are talking about a child who would have to go to school everyday and see that there are plenty of other students out there doing exactly what she was told she had to sacrifice for that "greater good". Seems a bit hypocritical don't you think to make only one of their students suffer if it truly is a case of preventing a medical disaster? Like others have said the child effected is most likely not confined to that one classroom for the entire day, 5 days a week and would be exposed to other students who didn't have to sacrifice anything. In this case, yes you can have it all ways. Protect the health of safety of all students, not just one, by banning the shoes from all students, not just one.

 

[maxiesmom]

IF the shoes can cause seizures or migraines, then yes, they do need to add it into the school's handbook as a banned item asap! If I had spent almost $50 on a pair of shoes for my child, and that item was not listed as inappropriate in the handbook, you can bet your bippy I would be pissed. Not at the child who has the medical issue, but that the school had not informed me ahead of time.

I also cannot see letting anyone in the school just decide by themselves what is appropriate, or a danger, to the other students. So if the flashing shoes are banned (and it shouldn't just be skechers, it should be all shoes with lights) then what will be next? Too many sparkles on a child's head band? They catch the light and flash.

Any one person in the school should not be able to decide for themselves willy nilly what is appropriate (or a danger) or not.

 

[daughtersrus]

I hardly call wanting fair treatment of your child, throwing a fit and snowballing. And yes it would be a great lesson to teach a child, however we are talking about a child who would have to go to school everyday and see that there are plenty of other students out there doing exactly what she was told she had to sacrifice for that "greater good". Seems a bit hypocritical don't you think to make only one of their students suffer if it truly is a case of preventing a medical disaster? Like others have said the child effected is most likely not confined to that one classroom for the entire day, 5 days a week and would be exposed to other students who didn't have to sacrifice anything. In this case, yes you can have it all ways. Protect the health of safety of all students, not just one, by banning the shoes from all students, not just one.

How is not being able to wear a particular item while at school causing a child to suffer?

Children with medical problems are most likely exposed to other students throughout the day but that is not the same as being with the same students for 6 1/2 hours.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

Advertising agency. She was a media planner. My office was
right across from hers so I was usually the one who saw/heard
the seizures when they would happen and go in there to get her
away from the furniture. She had
the worst case of epilepsy I have ever seen/heard of. Started when she was 13, they believe it was from a bad polio vaccine she had as a child...but I digress. They were always adjusting and changing her meds to try and
control the seizures but never
had much luck. She either wasnt drugged enough or was so overstuffed she was like a walking zombie.
Yes she used a computer and phone. Flourescent lights were out though. She bought a
condo across the street
from our office building so she could walk to work since she
could not drive. She could not watch TV with the lights off, and certain stores had lighting that she had to avoid...I know the lights in
Stein Mart flickered a lot so she
would not shop there.

Basically, in the 9 years i worked with her I saw her brain function
slowly reduce. She became more
forgetful and eventually someone always had to behind her when
reviewing budgets and
whatnot because she would miss so much.

She always made the best of it
but it really was a difficult way
of life.

That's a shame. A little OT but I remember many years ago I was visiting someone in a hospital and I met a patient that was going for surgery to implant electrodes in her brain to help stop seizures. I always wonder how it worked for her and if they offer that treatment for a lot of people who have epilepsy.

I can't speak for the others but most of the argument isn't even about the shoes. It is that many people are tired of the schools over stepping their role. Of them making decisions based on hearsay and fake science. of over compensating, of going to unrealistic extremes, inconveniencing hundreds for the sake of 1 and without even hard evidence or necessity. Of their attitude that they can do no wrong and that we should never question them because they know best, just shut up and do what they want. Of their rushing to conclusions before time has been taken to investigate and set up reasonable boundaries or rules, of changing the rules as they go and not applying them equally. Do I need to continue?

The dress code was established and adopted by the school board, parents bought accordingly. If it needs changed I'm sure there is a procedure in place-follow it! Just as they would make a parent do. It is an administrative decision not the nurses job, she should have reported it to the principal and let them take the proper steps. These shoes have been around for years, I'm sure the child or teacher in question has been exposed to them before if they were a problem the parents should have approached the school before this and got it written into the dress code.

As far as the distraction fine then either deal with the problem, kids acting up don't take the easy way and blame the shoes. And if they are distracting to the 5th grade class then they must be distracting to the other classes also and shouldn't be worn or if they aren't why can't the 5th grade teacher control her kids and the others can. These are all questions that need addressed and weren't when the nurse took it upon herself and beyond her role to single out and call the OP.

Another angle that was briefly brought up way back when and hasn't been discussed is if the OP's DD is the only one in class with these shoes how do we know the child who complained isn't just jealous and if they can't have them don't want the other girl to have them. I've dealt with to many kids over the years to ever doubt the level some kids especially girls will stoop to to get there way or "punish" another child. They can be very nasty little creatures and I've known some chronically ill children that learn early on how to "work" their illness.

I agree with a lot of what you said.

With regard to your first statement. You are correct. A lot of people with chronic illnesses or conditions derive secondary gains from the attention and concern that others show them. With regard to the first statement, stress can be a seizure trigger, and if a child fears that the flashing lights of shoes will trigger a seizure, I would think that it would be stressful. A school nurse is always walking a fine line balancing the perceived needs of a child with a special condition and the "rights" of the other children in the class. I however would not be looking for a "rule" nor would I want to see the entire school penalized because my DD was unfortunate enough to be in the classroom with a child that had a "special need". Sometimes the right to do something should be balanced with, "Is it right to do it". Sort of like the mosque issue at Ground Zero.

What does this have to do with anything? Really?

I hardly call wanting fair treatment of your child, throwing a fit and snowballing. And yes it would be a great lesson to teach a child, however we are talking about a child who would have to go to school everyday and see that there are plenty of other students out there doing exactly what she was told she had to sacrifice for that "greater good". Seems a bit hypocritical don't you think to make only one of their students suffer if it truly is a case of preventing a medical disaster? Like others have said the child effected is most likely not confined to that one classroom for the entire day, 5 days a week and would be exposed to other students who didn't have to sacrifice anything. In this case, yes you can have it all ways. Protect the health of safety of all students, not just one, by banning the shoes from all students, not just one.

This is my point. I would send my child to school in whatever I had to if it was going to prevent another child from being sick. BUT- don't make my child the only one that has to comply. See because then I feel you lose credibility and I don't believe the alleged reason. My child shouldn't be the one that is punished so to speak. If there really is a problem then look at the big picture and don't single out one child which is what happened here.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

How is not being able to wear a particular item while at school causing a child to suffer?

Children with medical problems are most likely exposed to other students throughout the day but that is not the same as being with the same students for 6 1/2 hours.

Because they are kids. Kids like to dress like their peers.

 

[Disneyadore]

How would this work when a kid would be very sensitive for dogs and cats or other pets? I have read many times on the DIS that people are so sensitive they can get an attack if the guests before them in the resort room have a pet at home.
Should the parents of the non allergic child just get rid of there pet because one child has problems?