Sorry, I would follow-up with the school. If they want to say it's a distraction, that's fine, but I don't believe it's because of seizures. I have to admit, I'm so sick and tired of the PC world and everyone being special and having special circumstances. So if there is a child who has issues, do they never watch TV in the dark, go to movies, drive in a car because a blinking traffic light could trigger a seizure? I'm also assuming they never play video games or go to Disney because we all know how many different strobes/lights, etc. there are there. I'm just incredulous at how people think the world is going to remove all the obstacles from their lives. What are we teaching our children? Even if you can remove all these obstacles on a school level, do you think an office is going to change all their lightbulbs for you? Or you'll never ride in a car at night because of the flashing headlights as you drive by? I know I'm obviously a heartless, mean, nasty person, but enough already.
And we wonder why everyone is a snowflake with thier own special set of circumstances.
blinking lights trigger my migranes and no, i do not watch tv in the dark, do not attend movies anymore (have'nt been to one in 3 years), do not drive at night (stuttering streetlights are more my issue-we don't have much if any blinking traffic lights in our area), don't play video games and avoid areas at disney and other entertainment venues with flashing lights/stobes (i have'nt been to a carnival or fair in close to 8 years b/c those lights realy push me over the edge). i don't put twinkle lights on my christmas tree, and generaly try to avoid going to stores around the holidays when they are prone to having them up.
ds is not quite as sensitive when it comes to some types of blinking lights, but he has his issues with it-he avoids the same venues i do, and while he will attend a movie it's never a 3-d (for some reason it definatly triggers a migraine).
these are all things within our personal scope of control. as for what goes on at school, the school as with a potential employer, is obligated under the ada to make 'reasonable' accommodations. in our case, if something is causing ds an issue triggering his migraines we first try to work it out for ourselves-when it was a sound issue (ds has very sensitive hearing and could hear the florescent bulbs starting to go out a week or two before they would start to dim or flicker) we got permission from the school to provide (at our own expense) ear protectors, when it was the scent a particular plant gave off, we just told ds to avoid being in proximity to it, when it was the scent a particular brand of marking pens the teacher required the kids to use-we just asked if ds could (again at our own expense) use a different brand, and when the class was using theirs, could he move near a window which would remain opened.
if it's something we cannot personaly control-as would be the case if ds was triggered by some lights on a pair of a classmates shoes, we would have to present this information to the school which would be legaly obligated to evaluate the situation, and attempt to make a reasonable accommodation.
i have to say, that given the restrictions some schools have placed based on the documented medical issues of their students, the concept of telling a parent that their child cannot wear a particular shoe seems to me, rather mild. i look to the school rules that ban particular foods on busses and campus, particular laundering products to be used on clothing worn on busses and campus, and other similar restrictions which seem a great deal more restrictive.
i don't perceive a child with a proven, documented medical condition whose parents are following school protocol by notifying if something is/could cause a medical episode as being a 'snowflake'. i think that term may be better suited to a child whose parents fight for them in a manner that they are taught that their personal wants and desires to wear whatever is the 'in/cool/must have' fashion item is paramount over another person's health.
