General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsParents Required to Sign Permission Slips for Kids to Eat an Oreo
http://www.thedailymeal.com/school-requires-permission-slips-oreo-cookies/32815
Parents of school-age children frequently have to sign permission slips for their children to be allowed to venture off campus or do potentially dangerous things, but this week a mother was instructed that she would have to sign a permission slip for her child to be allowed to eat an Oreo cookie at school.
According to Mommyish, a Pennsylvania school sent a permission slip home with a class of middle school students so parents could consent to their children eating a single Oreo cookie during a project in science class. The permission slip was photographed by one mother, who posted it on Twitter under the handle
The permission slip clarified that the Oreo cookies would be used to simulate geographical movement during science class, and that students with permission would be allowed to eat their Oreos when the experiment was finished. It specifies in no uncertain terms that students will not be forced to eat the Oreos if they do not want to, and the permission slip even included the complete ingredients for a Double-Stuff Oreo cookie, just in case the parents wanted to peruse it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)
- Everybody's afraid of being sued. Damn lawyers.....
MADem
(135,425 posts)It's amazing that people who are old, today, survived given the insistence by parents nowadays that children be supervised to death. There's no spontaneity any more.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)I didn't when my 13-year-old was younger, but I do for my kindergartener. I guess it's a new thing. Every time there's food associated with a lesson, I get a permission slip.
xfundy
(5,105 posts)Sad that it's come to that but there it is.
Overreactionary society with no end in sight.
Initech
(100,056 posts)
You gave my kid an unauthorized Oreo cookie, so I will sue your underfunded, and over burdened school system 100 gajillion dollars.
But, that same school is OK to slop whatever they think passes for food on a tray and feed it to my kid on a daily basis.
Now......I didn't authorize that Oreo so where is my chec ............ I mean this is the only way to "protect the children, .... think of the children".
Whole lot of sue-happy parents out there have poisoned the well for everyone else...
haele
(12,645 posts)or are diabetic or vegan or who's parents never feed them anything other than locally-produced totally organic, or, or, or...
Because all parents know that a child that is old enough to learn about plate tectonics also has absolutely no control over whatever they're going to put in their mouths - especially if the children are really allergic to gluten, or diabetic, et all, instead of the parents freaking out just because they can't control everything that their precious snowflake may encounter in life.
After all, kids never share treats like Oreos with their friends on break or at lunch, and there's nary a fourth-grader that isn't exposed regularly to the concept of Oreos (in cereal, in ice cream, in commercials), and likewise doesn't understand HFCS or any of the other concerns that their parents may have about the Oreo cookie they have been refusing to bring home to their little darlings ever since the child was old enough to watch TV or play with their less enlightened friends. Oreos are everywhere.
Are they as bad as peanuts, where the occasional child will go into anaphylactic shock just coming into contact with them?
Maybe it's because it's an Oreo, an evil corporate empire of food product - what if the teacher used Newmans-O's instead? They're healthier (not by much), have less chemicals, and are tastier and are a bit less corporate.
Y'know, my husband and I prefer Giros (a Mexican brand), which taste like the old Hydrox used to, but since he became diabetic and went mostly vegetarian for health issues, he's allowed to have one Newmans-O's a week - if he's been really good on his diet.
I can see letting the parents know there are going to be Oreos used as a lesson prop so they don't pack sugar treats in the kids lunch or warn the child s/he is expected to give the cookie back or throw it away after the lesson is over.
But I have real problems requiring a permission slip to attend the class, or to in effect, order the teacher to confiscate Oreos from children who do not have the permission slip after the lesson is over, because Mummy or Daddy will sue just because there's the seductive presence of forbidden Oreos in the classroom.
Talk about escalation if that kid doesn't hand over the Oreo, or even worse, a classmate decides to snag theirs to share with him or her after the class is over because it's "unfair" that someone's parent couldn't sign the permission slip.
Haele
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Because in my experience, very few of those people have even the slightest clue as to anything remotely legal or even necessary.
TheBlackAdder
(28,180 posts)There are always at least a half-dozen families who always try to start stuff in elementary and middle school.
Everyone knows who these people are, and a few of them always volunteer or join the PTA to get power.
They intimidate their children's teachers with implied or previously demonstrated complaints to the CSA or school board.
They are the biggest disruptors to the school's harmony, but they don't see themselves as that, even when called out by other parents. They will obliviously carry on, coming up with stupid suggestions to 'improve' the school, while constantly being a thorn in the side of the CSA. Teachers will make every effort to placate these parents, and these jerkwads know it, since their complaints might find their way into their teaching records.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)with food allergies, it is good to see a check by the school. I am sure my jerkwad daughter and son in law would love to pay another hospital bill for any of the kids who have been handed something that could harm them. We have already had one hospitalization for that reason because the adults didn't stop to think and the little one was just participating. Fortunately, the school tightened its rules because jerkwad parents love their children and prefer that they are safe and alive.
TheBlackAdder
(28,180 posts)This isn't a post about peanuts or some other questionable food item, but it is rather interesting that you take a personal affront to the fact that your daughter might be a complainer to the school, using the guise of prior medical issues as an excuse.
Every school has just a few jerkwad parents in them that disrupt the harmony of the school, because they can.
Oh, most elementary schools have a handout as to what treats will be served in school, and an 'opt out' or 'special needs' section that the parents fill out, so this is handled just once during the school year--not having a special note sent home and a 1-week clearance delay before handing out any treats to the kids. That type of special note, on each request, is just a silly measure to exact power against others and institutions.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)Caffeine can cause complications to folks who have certain conditions. Not an allergy, however the drug can cause side effects.
TheBlackAdder
(28,180 posts)Also, chocolate is not even a word anyone could associate with Oreos, since there are certain requirements to meet for a food to contain chocolate, like a certain percentage of cocoa butter, etc.
You'd have a better objection to the sugars and fats in Oreos, as those affect the body.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)The former could cause an allergic child to go into shock and die. The latter might just make them throw up.
Wheat flour is the second ingredient after sugar.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)which is the second ingredient in Oreos, the reaction could be just as serious as a reaction to peanuts. The throat could close up and the child could die.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)This food was made in a facility that processes peanuts.
There is no such label for wheat. Do you have a link for someone dying from wheat?
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)because of my gluten-sensitive Crohn's.
We have Sen. Ted Kennedy to thank for the food labeling laws that required the most common allergens to be labeled -- and even a small amount of any one of them could cause a highly allergic person to go into shock and die. That's why labels often include that disclaimer you mentioned, and wheat is often listed. It might be on a conveyer belt, for example, even if it isn't a food ingredient.
http://allergicliving.com/2013/09/13/can-you-tell-if-a-food-allergy-is-life-threatening/
Unfortunately, neither skin tests nor blood tests for Immunoglobulin E (IgE are the allergic antibodies) can accurately predict how severe a future food allergy reaction might be. For example, even though two people may have the same blood test level to their food allergen, after an accidental exposure, one might have a life-threatening reaction and the other a mild reaction.
Certain people are thought to be at higher risk of a life-threatening reaction; for instance, those with asthma, a previous anaphylactic reaction (the serious form of allergic reaction), or an allergy to peanut, tree nuts or shellfish.
But, food allergy is highly unpredictable, and even people with a mild history can go on to have a life-threatening reaction. At the moment, we have to presume that all food allergies have the potential to be life-threatening and patients should take proper precautions such as reading all food labels and carrying epinephrine auto-injectors.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)That's your implication above.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)because wheat contains gluten. And, unfortunately, Sen.. Kennedy did not succeed in getting a labeling bill including gluten through Congress. So people with gluten issues have to avoid all the grains that might include it.
I just added the info about a deadly reaction to allergens (including wheat, peanuts, etc.) to the previous post.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)that a young relative has been hospitalized over a food issue?
Wouldn't any reasonable parent be "defensive" of his child's health under those circumstances?
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)When I was in school, I could not have been relied upon to turn down the cookie.
Personally, I think that way too many decisions are being taken out of parents' hands and so have no problem seeing an instance where the parent gets to make the call.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)
TDale313
(7,820 posts)I may be in the minority, but I don't see what's wrong with this. Rather have the school ask than have my child get sick or worse from eating something they're allergic to.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)either. Better safe than sorry.
3catwoman3
(23,965 posts)...of a time some years ago when a mom at the pediatric office needed a letter from us giving her daycare center medical permission to put Vaseline on her baby's butt after diaper changes. It's a damn over-the-counter product, for gawd's sake. Why can't the mother give the permission?
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I signed every permission slip that my kids ever brought home. It's not a big deal. I would rather be safe than sorry. You can't know everything about every kid. The parents will know if the kid has an allergy or is trying to avoid sugar or there is some religious thing going on.
Igel
(35,293 posts)Because there's a lot of accounting that goes with this and it sets precedent.
You have 100 kids, you need to keep track of 100 of these. What about kids who don't have permission slips signed and on file? You can't let them do the activity (which they may want to do)--even if the parent signed the slip. Maybe it's in the wrong pile of papers--on your desk or in the kid's stuff. Or on the kid's kitchen counter at home.
Then you have to have some alternate activity for them to do--one that very likely is going to be fairly passive while you're dealing with the other kids. Those who had permission slips signed and not on file, parents who didn't see the permission slip, parents whose kids don't like to be left out, all can get bent out of shape.
What if they eat the thing anyway? Then suddenly not only are you responsible for not having gotten permission for something trivial, you're responsible for letting the kid do something you "know" they didn't have permission to do. (Although with 100 kids, actively "knowing" the status of all 100 kids for something like this can be a bear.) "Mrs. Smith, Jonny ate the Oreo anyway, even though he didn't have permission. I was 25 feet away, it took 0.1 seconds for him to go from looking at it to chewing it."
This is new work. None of the old work is going away. Consider it a kind of "speedup" where all of a sudden you have a couple of hours of additional work to do one week without additional pay. (Yes, we all have things like that sometimes. But most of us don't say, "Ah, yes, I don't have a problem with this."
And heaven forbid that you did this permission slip thing but another teacher didn't.
Or if you don't do this next year. And if Oreos need a permission slip, what's next?
antigone382
(3,682 posts)No paperwork to wade through, no kids accidentally sickened or killed, and health experts actually recommend it as an evidence-based step schools can take to change our food culture and curb obesity and other diet related disorders.
I work with kids regularly and often have to ask about food sensitvities/allergies. There are really obscure ones out there, and if you don't live with it you don't know what products are safe or unsafe. Safety trumps paperwork hassles, in my opinion.
dumbcat
(2,120 posts)Handling paper can cause paper cuts, which can become infected. No need to allow kids to handle pieces of paper unless there is a permission slip signed by both parents, their lawyers, their doctors and maybe their minister. We cannot make things safe enough for our precious darlings.
I'm not even sure we should allow teachers to handle paper. Think of the liability issues.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)jesus christ.............thank you for reminding me why kids are the way they are these days, and why even a fucking oreo is so threatening to the health and well being of children.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)I know situations where kids with allergies were given dangerous foods in a classroom setting without parental knowledge or consent. I know how common weird food allergies are. I guess we could view those children as coddled weaklings, and their parents as overprotective nitpickers. I guess if you want to have that much contempt for kids in a vulnerable situation you could just decide they are worth sacrificing in the interest of survival of the fittest.
Or, you could maybe try to think about what it's like to be a parent in that situation, knowing that sending your specific kid into the world poses a huge and unique risk that you really can't control. It just takes one ignorant, self-righteous person with a cavalier attitude to your child's real, diagnosed health struggles.
It is an unprecedented and difficult situation and yeah it would be great if we could all just bring in walnut fudge brownies like the old days. But the fact is that kids can go into anaphylactic shock and die. It isn't analogous to a paper cut, or drinking water from a hose, or scraping your knees. It's a child's life or death. A consent form isn't a big deal.
But quite honestly I don't have a lot of patience for "these kids today/get off my lawn" attitudes, and I find that the people who express those kinds of attitudes tend to be ignorant, bitter, and tiresome.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)"survival of the fittest" ....."contempt for kids"..........."Unprecedented and difficult situation" .............. drama major right ?
let me change my response...... jesus FUCKING christ,...... if a child is thrown into a life threatening situation because a fucking Oreo puts his very survival at risk, maybe you could be the compassionate one and advocate an environment for him to be safe from all of life's risk to life / safety. What kind of trauma are you advocating, for this helpless child, to be at such risk that a fucking Oreo threatens his very survival, how dare these parents throw their own child, KNOWING that a cookie could KILL HIM.... to the societal wolves. If the child can't know enough to avoid an Oreo if it could KILL HIM, how the hell does he know to stay out of 7-11 ? The ice cream man could be brought up on involuntary manslaughter, if he didn't pass out permission slips the day before.
"I know situations", I am absolutely positive you do.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)with this:
If the kid doesn't have any money on him, he isn't likely to be buying anything at the 7/11.
And the ice cream man doesn't give out free samples
But even aside from that, what is the big deal about allowing parents to decide what their kids are going to eat?
And like someone else said, it's just a permission slip. Takes all of 30 seconds to read and sign. It's not like parents have to list income and assets and social security numbers, blood type, bathroom habits, sexual orientation, religious beliefs or anything else of a private nature.
Give permission or not. Big deal.
You expose ANOTHER demonic plot against today's vulnerable children, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the children of today to acquire the means to satisfy a sugary suicide.
Children running wild can only be kept safe by the fortitude of the "permission slip".
Or maybe the school doesn't want to be sued for a BILLION fucking dollars because some over sensitive parent finds out their kid had a cookie. What about permission slips for school lunches ? God lord man, .....the horrors that await children in lunch room cafeterias ?
have you no mercy ?
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)so the defense here is going to consist of sarcasm?
What ever.
But this...
Unless you're the kid, what the hell do you care about some "over sensitive parent" and what he does, or doesn't, want his kid to eat?
Really. Tell me why that's such a problem for you.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)Really, why have you no desire to keep the kids safe from the perils that are served in the cafeteria ?
I want daily permission slips for every meal offered at school, that could potentially KILL a food sensitive child. Show them to me, or find a sense of humor.
P.S. I threw in that "find a sense of humor", so you had an out, ........and could continue to focus on my "problem" instead of answering the very real question of why do YOU think there are no daily permission slips for the potentially last meal a child will ever eat, served by unknown adults that prepare tainted food behind closed doors.......
Don't tell me that a food sensitive child knows not to eat cafeteria food, otherwise how could he POSSIBLY know to avoid the death cookie ?
It's ridiculous, that's why.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)poison or tainted food anymore.
I'm talking about basic respect for a parent's rights to decide what his kid will or will not eat.
School lunches don't need permission slips because a parent already knows that schools SERVE lunches. So the kid will either eat a school lunch or he'll bring one made at home.
If kids are trading items at lunch, then that's a whole different scenario than an adult handing out cookies in class.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)talk to me about the basic respect of a school not asking permission to serve whatever food they serve on a daily basis ? What is in that school food ? parents need to be given the ingredients of everything served. Or, should parents just "trust" that the FDA is watching out for the sensitive needs of growing children ?
School lunches frequently have cookies, where the fuck is the permission slip for those cookies "handed out by adults at school".
Again, because this "issue" of the cookie is ridiculous, and even though you won't admit it, you have a hard time believing in your own end of this ridiculous threat to children.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)the third time.
It's not about a "threat" to children.
It's about the rights of a parent to decide.
If a parent finds out cookies are being served as part of a school lunch, and he doesn't want his kid to have them, then he can pack lunches for his kid.
If a parent doesn't know something is being handed out in school that he doesn't want his kid to have, or to participate in, and finds out later somehow, he could cause problems for the school, or for the teacher who was involved.
I'm still not seeing the problem with allowing parents to decide what their kids do, see, hear, or eat.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)like I said, we grew up different, and I'm thankful for it.
My childhood would put you in a child protective, overload coma.
take care. and I mean that, ............. some dangerous shit out there, be careful.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)I'm glad you've chosen to die on the hill of Oreo Liberation for everyone though...reality be damned.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)
Priceless!NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)it to a kid Monday night at Isotopes game.
Didn't even ask his dad if I could give his kid a potiential murder weapon.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)Food allergies didn't really crop up until the '90's. Now at least 5% of kids have some kind of food allergy. Kids that have them should not have to live in bubbles. And yes, Oreos contain soy, which is one of the more common allergens.
You're right. It's a fucking Oreo. It's also a fucking piece of paper, and a fucking signature.
You are the one who was complaining about what was wrong with these kids today, like somehow they're all just a bunch of spoiled weaklings. To me that implies contempt. If that isn't the case, maybe you should choose your words more carefully.
However much it sounds like overblown hyperbole to you, it isn't an exaggeration that for some kids, the wrong food can be deadly. It's not that hard to check with the parents, who are more likely to know what is potentially risky for their kid before you offer them food.
I have to do it all the time as a part of my job, and I don't stomp my feet and whine about having to accomodate the coddled brats that happen to have a diagnosed medical condition that requires a minimal amount of care and planning from the adults in their life. It just isn't that difficult of a concept.
So Jesus FUCKING Christ right back atcha.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)And the parents of a kid with allergies might also be more aware of what other substances might accidentally have been near a particular food.
Some foods that don't even contain peanuts, for example, could be made in a factory that uses peanuts in another part of the factory. Cross-contamination can, and probably often does, occur.
For a kid with peanut allergies, it could really be deadly.
Nobody knows what someone else is allergic to.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)Very little was known about them until people facing the problem directly started to organize and aggregate information about the phenomenon. Diagnosed food allergies have gone up a lot by then, as have hospitalizations for severe reactions.
Right now according to FARE, about 1 in every 13 children has some kind of allergy. And even though many allergic reactions are mild, ANY allergy can become severe and deadly at random from one exposure too many.
I work on an educational farm and we have elementary school kids come out for field trips all the time. Usually they're in groups of around 30 to 40 kids. Because some of our activities involve food (one using a tree nut), we always ask about any students with food allergies. I would say 3 out of 4 times, at least one of the kids in the school group has an allergy that requires us to adjust our teaching activities to avoid any danger. It's just the reality of our times, and those kinds of accommodations are routine for good reason.
I'm glad the 70's was a fun free-for-all for everyone, but there is a legitimate epidemic of unknown cause that puts a whole lot of children at risk. Mocking that reality because it seems overblown might be fun, but it doesn't change the facts.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)born in the early 70s and neither one ever showed signs of a food allergy. If they had any, they weren't serious enough to show up...
until my son got to be in his 30s and showed signs of having a shrimp allergy.
Breathing difficulties, closed off throat, redness in the face, etc.
Allergies can come on at any time, and they can also worsen at any time.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)deathly allergic to shrimp. She and my father went to Florida, they ate a bunch of seafood, and suddenly, it just happened.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)and the defense of it, goes farther to mock the ridiculousness than I ever could.
It was you, wasn't it ? that compared this Oreo "issue" to the "survival of the fittest" and a"matter of life or death".
damn, you out clever-ed me..... I should called "No jesus fucking christ give backs"................... but I was to busy stuffing my face with Oreos.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)It doesn't change the fact that they are, that around 1 in 13 children have them, and that the easiest way to deal with that safely is to ask parents before you feed something to their kid. And you can't change the fact that people WAY smarter than you have put reasonable policies in place that have become routine (with the understanding and endorsement of most teachers who are actually dealing with the issue).
I get that clueless sneering outrage is fun. Actually knowing what the fuck you are talking about is more fulfilling, in my humble opinion. But I do realize it's important to feel good about yourself and I'd rather not waste more of my time on someone with no real rhetorical skill or the capacity to substantively add to the conversation. You take the last word, dear. And make it good. I promise I'll go cry in my beer somewhere.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)What happened?
I write this knowing someone whose child has a deadly peanut allergy. Nurse has an Epipen and his teacher has one, as well. (Had to get special permission for a non-RN to administer.) Yeah, some kids have life threatening allergies, but we've taken food sensitivities to the extreme, imo.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)About 1 in 13 kids have a food allergy. That's about two per classroom. Hospitalizations due to severe allergic reactions to food have increased 7 fold in a matter of decades. I don't know why that is happening or what to do to change it, but at this point it's kind of an extreme situation.
Epipens are great but it's better to avoid a bad reaction at all. I don't expect teachers to know what allergens may be present in what trace amounts that may impact the variety of allergic students they teach. In fact I think that would be pretty overwhelming. But parents more likely will, and it isn't that hard to check in with them.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)Everything is on the teacher's shoulders. It's ridiculous.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)to wheat or another ingredient in the Oreo.
That's what you're saying.
zazen
(2,978 posts)But I'd just tell my child the risks and they could choose. They've eaten M&M's after multiple math tasks. Yuk (I'm germ-phobic).
However, in this hyper regulated school environment I can't blame the teacher for doing this. I think we finally stopped having to do permission slips for sunscreen just a few years ago. You'd have to drag me kicking and screaming to be a public school teacher in this inane common-core, zero tolerance, wastefully micromanaged era. God bless them.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)RandiFan1290
(6,229 posts)would be the first to sue if their kid got sick or was allergic to the food.
So many are all for 'tort reform' until it's their tort getting reformed.
Vinca
(50,251 posts)And amazingly, we survived. A lot of what we did as kids would now get our parents arrested and us put in a foster home.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)My childhood was woo-the-fuck-HOO!
And I only needed stitches once.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)today, a permission slip is required for a fucking OREO. I weep for some of the youth of today, when they meet the world, and have to interact with all the normal people.
A poster above said why "risk kids being sickened, or killed",........ by a fucking OREO.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)Oreos contain wheat. To the wheat-allergic person, eating an Oreo can also cause a life-threatening reaction.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)the school should never serve lunch, snacks or in any way shape or form feed nor raise the kids other than teaching. Kinda what a school should be for anyway. No permission slips were required for all the kids that have been killed because of food allergies suffered from the slop in the cafeteria. Where is the compassion for the.... what..... how many children KILLED at school because of food allergens ?
All this Oreo bullshit is to avoid a billion dollar lawsuit from an over sensitive parent, ...... so just fuck the whole thing, make parents feed their own kids if its a life or death situation. They obviously don't care what potential poison is fed to their kinds in the cafeteria, but that god damn teacher fed my kid an Oreo, and the only way to make it right is a billion dollar lawsuit. LITTLE TIMMY COULD HAVE BE KILLED FOR GODS SAKE !
At first I believed this to be a ridiculous waste, and the permission slip was mocking the silliness of an Oreo. But with SO MANY people believing that the Oreo threatens the very lives of children, and with those SAME people unwilling to explain why there are no food allergen permission slips for the slop served in the cafeteria....... just fuck it. The teacher is protecting themselves, and the school from a lawsuit, so fuck it, next will be the emotional trauma of being the only kid NOT allowed to eat an Oreo, and another opportunity to inflame some outrage.
Save the lives of the children, feed them yourselves. problem solved as well as the budget.
Throd
(7,208 posts)
csziggy
(34,135 posts)I grew up in the 1950s and 60s in a house next to a swamp filled with alligators and water moccasins. That didn't keep us out of the swamp, we still went out there and played in it. We didn't swim since the water was so murky, but we waded around the edges, knowing that any minute we could disturb a gator or cotton mouth. It was just part of the fun. The only time I actually came close to a cotton mouth I was running full blast, stepped on it but didn't realize it until several steps later when I was well past the snake.
We didn't have plastic tricycles - ours were metal, mine was old since it was inherited from my older sisters. My first bike was one I scavenged out of a trash pile - it was so rusty I was in danger of a strut breaking and impaling me. When we tried to inflate the tire, the tube came out a hole in the side and exploded. And it had no brakes. In order to stop it, I had to run it into a grassy area and bail off the thing. It made life very exciting. I put a lot of miles on that bike, pedaling out of town into the countryside along the rural highways.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)Alligators, water moccasins, the bugs .....my god the bugs of the South,....... all pale in comparison to the treachery of the Oreo.
only permission slips give parents the security they need to know that kids are safe, especially from teachers handing out an Oreo cookie while keeping kids engaged in science.
the horror,...............the horror
Aerows
(39,961 posts)which I don't really understand why the permission slip is a problem, I was on a bicycle or roller skates pretty much the second school let out and I never work knee pads, helmets and my bike stopped by reversing the wheels.
Dear goodness the fun the neighborhood kids and I had the day another neighbor got a load of dirt. I think everyone of us wiped out at least twice jumping it with our bikes. LOL.
TBF
(32,035 posts)but that was in the early 80s in the midwest ... would never be able to do that now.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)to be evacuated because she underestimated the reaction of bleach and ammonia. It overwhelmed the fume hood, and we had to have the next class in the courtyard.
that could easily have happened when I was younger. I remember making fudge in beakers at Christmas time!
surrealAmerican
(11,359 posts)... complaints from parents when they didn't. As a parent, I wouldn't have a problem with seeing this slip. For a middle school kid, it would even be kind of nice to see what they're doing in class that day.
Silent3
(15,181 posts)Accidental omission (yeah, sure!), or devious plot to poison the next generation?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)I'm only half-joking.
allforone
(51 posts)Charge a parent who lets his children walk to a park to play by them selves
Charge a parent for letting a child ride a bike without a helmet
We are past the point of no return
MisterP
(23,730 posts)
Omaha Steve
(99,566 posts)
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)As a "person engaged in feeding children in the regular course of their duties"?
According to Nabisco, Oreos have cross-contact with milk and are not suitable for vegans. They are also not gluten free.
In normal life, one would ask "May I give your child a _____" if giving that child a _____ is not part of your normally expected responsibilities.
This is called "being polite".
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)As someone said upthread, you can't be too careful as there are sue-happy people out there.
My only issue is that's it's not double-stuffed.
djean111
(14,255 posts)to eat an Oreo - PLUS it would have been bad to set a precedent, that he could eat sweets at school.
So, to me - complaining about the form is the nit-picking thing.
Parents are lambasted enough about food choices for kids.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)a life threatening allergy, the teachers are already aware of this. No?
I bet your brother's teachers all knew about his juvenile diabetes by the first day of school.
Have you any idea what it is like for a teacher to drum up excitement for the kids to do this experiment, only to find that three kids never returned the forms? What do you do with those kids? Punish them because their parents forget to sign a form? It creates havoc in the classroom, I promise.
Teachers already know about any child with serious health and dietary issues, so it's ridiculous to put an entire class project in the hands of a couple of parents who forgot to sign the forms.
djean111
(14,255 posts)after the project was the issue. The teacher could have just collected the cookies.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)nt
djean111
(14,255 posts)be trusted to watch over diabetic kids in the first place?
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)they probably wouldn't use the oreos at all. With an older child who can be trusted with his dietary issues, they might use them, anyway.
Teachers are well made aware of special concerns at the beginning of the year. I have voluminous forms to fill out every damn year - even for my kids who are now in high school. And if my child had juvenile diabetes, you can be sure I would make a personal visit to have a chat with every teacher.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)would have known about this. There was no mechanism for telling them.
Throd
(7,208 posts)How did we ever survive?
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)I AM INVINCIBLE ! ................I MUST BE A GOD or something,
One time, just for the sport of it .............I donned my super hero uniform and demanded various assorted candies from the dwellings of mere mortals,..... as tribute .... one cold October evening,.....with only my fellow junior demigods .....also displaying a cavalier sense of invincibility .... We celebrated our victorious adventure and have come to realize, we were the chosen few,...able to withstand the perils of a life threatening world of "being a kid".
Today, .......alas............ there are Oreo's,.............. or as we call them up here on Olympus........ the chocolate cookie disks of desire, disguising a white sugary death.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Without your parents' permission, you weren't collecting candy from anyone on Halloween.
And that's all the school is doing. Asking for parents' permission.
Really...would people who think this is a big deal actually walk up to a kid and give him a cookie? Especially if the parent is present. No. It's good manners...not to mention smart if you don't want to get sued...to ask the parents' permission first.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)I, like my demigod childhood companions required no parental approval on the witching night of candy tribute gathering, .... other than "watch out for cars"! Mere mortal children, cannot be expected to understand such times, they were the barbaric times, dark and unforgiving when gods themselves were forged.
We even drank various exotic fruit and sugar based elixirs prepared by unknown elders at sporting events, where we ran around forcefully kicking a black and white soccer ball threatening to bloody our very noses, bruise shins, and the ever terminal threat of the grass burn.
Good god man, ........ on one heathen day of celebration, children handed out sugary death to other children in a show of emotional acceptance. the candy,........... forged in the shape of the soul capturing organ of the human heart was not even monitored by the elders of the time................yet...we the chosen few lived on.
Burdened by our immortality.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Without your parents' permission, there's a whole lot of stuff you would NOT be doing.
I just wonder why you seem to have such a huge problem with strangers wanting a parent's permission before giving anything to a kid.
Not discussing that issue seriously instead of using lame sarcasm really points to a huge problem which is not mine to figure out or solve.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)where is your outrage and demand for a permission slip EVERY SINGLE day for the rank food served by unknown adults, behind closed doors in school cafeterias.
Are you this narrow minded, that permission for a cookie, ONCE, is so necessary. yet you encourage the entire school to eat whatever slop is served on a daily basis without daily permission slips ?
Com'on man, discuss this issue of potentially deadly school lunches, and why parents don't give a crap what the school serves them ?. I can hardly wait. save the "government" nutritional value crap if that is your response, parents who need to approve a cookie, NEED to be aware of every poison the school is serving.
You and I grew up very differently, and I am grateful for that.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)wants to let his kid eat the worst cafeteria slop imaginable, and then turn around and get pissed because a teacher gave him a cookie, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense, but that's for the parent to decide, not you.
I am no longer discussing food quality or cafeterias or anything else like that.
It's about asking for a parent's permission for the kid to do something.
What is the problem with a school asking permission to give the kid a cookie?
That question, and only that question, without bring up a lot of irrelevant crap about cafeterias and crappy food and poisoning the kids.
What is the issue with sending home a slip that takes 30 seconds to read and sign?
Also, as far as saying you and I grew up very differently, you have no idea how I grew up, so don't even go there, OK?
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)when you advocate the ridiculousness of a permission slip for the school activity of an Oreo cookie.
what about wiping the nose of a snot bubbled nose ? GOD KNOWS what pathogens the teacher is passing to the helpless children.
See where this goes ?
It's not about a cookie, it's about stupid. and this permission slip is the prime example of stupid.
I can imagine whatever I want, and based on your selective concern regarding an Oreo, and only the Oreo's ability to kill children with food allergies, I think I know.
OK ?
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)I don't care if it's an Oreo, a tuna sandwich, a roadkill casserole, or a candy cane.
It's not about WHAT the object is.
My point, which you refuse to address is this:
Why is it silly/ridiculous/a waste of time/whatever to send home a piece of paper that takes less than 60 seconds to read and send back to school?
This paper gives parents the right to make the decision as to what, where, and when, their child will eat something.
Parental choice. That's my main argument here.
And since you insist on trying to imagine what my upbringing was like, and trying to use it against me, two can play that game. Based on your total failure to explain what's so bad about parental choice, I can imagine what your upbringing was like as well.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)my childhood was everything a child should have, I still thank my dad for giving us what every kid should be given to become successful adults.
the Oreo permission slip
Its ridiculous,..... its to avoid a hyper sensitive parent from suing an already underfunded public school,... and the idea that children's lives are at stake is so over-inflated I can't imagine how many children have already been killed, the media has done well hiding all those cases.
And............... since you think calling me "dear", is having any effect other than proving you can't support you position without resorting to the routine of a professional blogger, I'll say better tomorrows, ...... and for gods sake be careful, who knows what life threatening obstacles are lurking to seize the life of the unsuspecting.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)What position is that?
I'm talking about the rights of parents to decide what their kids will eat.
I'm not talking about shitty school lunches, evil lunch ladies, Halloween, or any of that.
I'm only asking for a one-word answer to my question...
Do you think parents should have the first and final say in what their kids eat?
Yes or no.
the issue is this cookie right ? and the potential of killing a kid, sugar fee diets ruined, or against religious beliefs, or whatever the reason, this unknown cookie being distributed by a strange adult, NOT serving food in the cafeteria is the issue ? right ?
parents NEED to know such things as what schools are feeding their kids right / again not the cafeteria, who gives a shit what they feed em in that room........ its this threat of the unknown food being distributed by unknown adults.
I can't answer yes or no, because you can't conceive of juggling two concepts of the same argument at the same time. Lunch and a cookie............. both served at school, both by school staff.... but in different rooms. Little Timmy could be killed by that Oreo, but parents don't have a say if Timmy eats every cookie in the cafeteria. I'll chalk this on up to as difficult as politics and religion to discuss.
you are the exact reason this teacher HAS to protect herself / himself (don't want to accused of being sexist by assuming it's a female teacher) from lawsuits.
I've got the answer. I don't care anymore. this permission slip is an example of stupid, and by stupid I mean STUPID, it s a frickin cookie........but fuck it. Burden the teacher with as much crap as you want, they have way to much free time anyway, they make WAY more than they should , and shit like this "cookiegate" only serve to engage kinds in science...... Quash that shit as much as possible.
without milk Oreos suck anyway, and god only knows what would happen if milk were to be served.a singularity probably.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)If the menu changes in any way, they are informed as soon as possible so that they can take action as necessary. In general, school lunches avoid the most common allergens as a matter of course. Every effort is also made to be aware of students' specific allergies or other important dietary considerations (like having diabetes 1, lactose intolerance, certain religious food restrictions, etc).
So your premise is faulty to start with.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)How many tens of millions of children are threatened by food allergens, because the school is too selfish to not inform every parent of every ingredient of every meal ever server an any school. Don't children matter to you ? Isn't proper notification worth the lives of children ? or is it just the audacity of this teacher daring to feed Oroes to helpless children ?
how can you be so callous, why do you want to threaten the very lives of children with the caviler attitude of "informing parents of menu changes as soon as possible". Why do you advocate the lives of children gambled on "menu change notifications as soon as possible" It almost sounds like you only think Oreos threaten the very lives of children.
"Notified of menu changes as soon as possible" !!!??? how many children are going to be buried because of the schools inability to inform every parent with the same due diligence of the lone teacher saving children with an Oreo permission slip ? Some might say it could be accessory to premeditated murder.
better option, fuck school food all together, parents feed them yourselves. Parents gamble the lives of thier children every school day with the millions suffering from cafeteria food allergen without ANY care or concern.
No, it is your premise and insensitivity that is flawed, ..... to all the kids killed by the schools inability to properly inform parents of school prepared food, or should we call it "russian roulette pizza day".
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)do not make good substitutes for the mature answer to the question:
Why should parents not have the right to decide what their kids will eat?
Even if a parent lets his kid eat the shittiest food imaginable at home, does that mean he has no right to decide what the kid will eat away from home?
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)the lunch ladies are unknown serves of potential death, with no advanced warning for the parent to analyze.
"I did it all for the cookie, .....what? ....the cookie what? .......the cookie"
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Never wearing seat belts back then was a blast. And no kid ever died from a lack of one...
(six of one, half a dozen of the other... and both as melodramatically irrelevant as the other)
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)from not wearing a seatbelt?
Maybe none you knew.
But I'll bet plenty of kids died from not wearing a seatbelt.
In fact, I know they did. I've heard plenty of times from Mr Pipi, a retired cop, about how many kids he had to scrape up from the pavement before seat belts became mandatory in my state.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Which isn't just a flippant question -- most states still don't force kids on school busses to wear seatbelts, and some die every year.
Compare that to the number of students who have died because of things their teacher fed them. Just in the last few years, not back in the day when cars were death traps.
Maybe I missed the grade level, but at what point, or age, does a school bear responsibility for preventing kids from eating stuff they're not supposed to? What level was the teacher working with?
More importantly, why didn't she or he just ask parents about allergies when their children enrolled in the class? Not an onerous burden for an elementary teacher, and would have saved everyone a lot of paperwork.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Could be that a kid could show no signs of an allergy at the beginning of the year, but suddenly develop one a few months later. In all the chaos of medical testing, etc., that's one piece of information that could be forgotten and not passed on to the school.
Also, such paperwork/information has a disturbing way of being "lost" or "misplaced".
I think it's much safer to ask as close to the event as possible, and for the teacher who's actually involved in the activity, to have the pertinent information at his fingertips.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)there are parents who don't want their kids eating this shit:
Nabisco Oreo Double Stuf Chocolate
Size: 20 OZ UPC: 4400003325
Ingredients
SUGAR, UNBLEACHED ENRICHED FLOUR (WHEAT FLOUR, NIACIN, REDUCED IRON, THIAMINE MONONITRATE {VITAMIN B1}, RIBOFLAVIN {VITAMIN B2}, FOLIC ACID), HIGH OLEIC CANOLA AND/OR PALM AND/OR CANOLA OIL, COCOA (PROCESSED WITH ALKALI), HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, CORNSTARCH, LEAVENING (BAKING SODA AND/OR CALCIUM PHOSPHATE), SALT, SOY LECITHIN, VANILLIN--AN ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, CHOCOLATE.
http://www.snackworks.com/products/product-detail.aspx?product=4400003325
First ingredient on any list like this is what there's the most of. Oreos are a whole lot of sugar.
Oh look! High fructose corn syrup (for the people who think it's poison)
Salt. Although it's pretty far down on the list
And it doesn't even list Vanilla. No..."Vanillin". An artificial flavor.
I don't see the problem with letting parents decide what their kids are going to eat.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)
DrDan
(20,411 posts)don't blame that teacher or the school one little bit.
treestar
(82,383 posts)they know it is possible one parent will be outraged as they have their child on a no sugar diet!
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)No, son, G_D created the earth in seven days, so you can not eat California.
NM_Birder
(1,591 posts)BEHOLD ! The demon of science and witchcraft, .......Satanically disguised as a cookie, ..Satan himself sends the horrors of truth, and factual learning, ..... disguised as a cookies to ensnare the youth of today. ...... course it was just an apple when the earths propensity for eternal inbreeding started with one dude and one girl.
Which reminds me....why DO Adam and Eve have belly buttons ?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)If I was hungry that day, I was grateful. If I wasn't....blech. Overall, I would have preferred an Oreo and cold milk.
Takket
(21,550 posts)I think she should demonstrate plate techniques with a surf 'n turf of filet mignon and lobster tails. And I would very much like to attend the class to assist her.
But she's going with Oreos? Pffft. Cheap.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)
MindPilot
(12,693 posts)Some of the poor kids didn't have a cow, so they used mud they scraped off their barbed wire shoes.
Wait...when I was in school the Earth was flat and held up by elephants. Never mind.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)Pangea!!! 
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Someday... when I have nothing more important to do..... I will introduce your ASS to your ELBOW.
They'll be able to tell the difference.... even if YOU can't.
And people wonder why no one wants to go into teaching anymore?
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)
Buns_of_Fire
(17,173 posts)And a DOUBLE-STUF Oreo, at that! Do the Oreo Tectonics differ if a regular Oreo is used?
Oh, yeah -- this was about EATING them afterwards. I feel sorry for teachers these days. If my third-grade teacher was held responsible for all the library paste I ate, I'm afraid the poor thing would have been executed LONG ago.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)made me laugh:
My mom was a horrible cook except for a couple of things that she didn't make all that often.
I was a thin child anyway, but I'm sure I would have wasted away from starvation if not for my supplemental diet of library paste in school.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)of life threatening allergies. It is easy to laugh at this but, yes, for a wheat- allergic child, even an Oreo could cause a life threatening reaction, closing up his throat and stopping him from breathing. And sometimes the first serious reaction is the one that kills the child.
http://allergicliving.com/2013/09/13/can-you-tell-if-a-food-allergy-is-life-threatening/
Unfortunately, neither skin tests nor blood tests for Immunoglobulin E (IgE are the allergic antibodies) can accurately predict how severe a future food allergy reaction might be. For example, even though two people may have the same blood test level to their food allergen, after an accidental exposure, one might have a life-threatening reaction and the other a mild reaction.
Certain people are thought to be at higher risk of a life-threatening reaction; for instance, those with asthma, a previous anaphylactic reaction (the serious form of allergic reaction), or an allergy to peanut, tree nuts or shellfish.
But, food allergy is highly unpredictable, and even people with a mild history can go on to have a life-threatening reaction. At the moment, we have to presume that all food allergies have the potential to be life-threatening and patients should take proper precautions such as reading all food labels and carrying epinephrine auto-injectors.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Who needs the frickin' hassle?!
Or is this a parody/Onion-type thing?
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I don't understand why this is controversial. If you have a child, wouldn't you want to know MORE about what they are doing in school, rather than less?
I don't see this as a problem. With childhood obesity on the rise, and juvenile diabetes a very real problem, I see this as a positive step to ensure the safety of the children.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)If somebody's given him an Oreo he'd have left school in an ambulance.
And no, this wasn't some special snowflake imaginary sensitivity, he died before reaching adulthood.
Don't feed kids who aren't old enough to understand and articulate their medical history without checking with an adult.
Nine
(1,741 posts)No, this isn't because of sue-happy lawyers. This isn't because of the food police. This isn't because of big government. This isn't because of Mister Rogers and other kiddie-coddlers. All of those, by the way, are favorite right-wing scapegoats.
The reason for this has already been explained upthread. It's because of potentially life-threatening food allergies. Simple as that. The parents have to sign a simple permission slip. That doesn't seem like a particularly onerous burden. I don't understand why so many posters are getting their knickers in a knot about this.
Couldn't have said it better.
antigone382
(3,682 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)In her December 8 New York Times article, "Researchers Put a Microscope on Food Allergies," Karen Ann Cullotta cites a statistic commonly used in articles about food allergies: "Up to 200 deaths each year are attributed to the most severe reaction, food-induced anaphylaxis," she writes. A similar statistic appears in Nicholas A. Christakis' recent British Medical Journal article, "This Allergies Hysteria is Just Nuts," which is referenced in the Times' "Well" blog today. Dr. Christakis writes in the BMJ that "Only 150 people (children and adults) die each year from all food allergies combined." Having seen these statistics used over and over again in the media and the medical literature, I wondered: how many people really die of food allergies? 150 or 200? As it turns out, the real number of food allergy deaths is much smaller: just 11. The 150-200 death estimate comes from the media resource kit of the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, a lobbying and educational group headed by a former marketing executive at Dey Pharmaceuticals, the maker of the EpiPen adrenaline injector (which is prescribed to millions of food-allergic patients). It's time for journalists and doctors to stop using FAAN's exaggerated statistic.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meredith-broussard/food-allergy-deaths-less_b_151462.html?
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)according to researchers at Northwestern University.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/229041.php
Dr. Ruchi Gupta, from the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago said:
"What I hope this paper will do is open this awareness to how common (food allergy) is and how severe it can be, and develop policies for schools and sporting events and any activities that kids participate in to make it clear that everybody is looking out for these kids."
The study's authors surveyed a nationally representative sample of almost 40,000 U.S. adults who lived with a child under 18. Previous studies have estimated that anywhere between 2 and 8 of every 100 kids in the U.S. has a food allergy.
Gupta continues:
"One of our big findings was that 2 in 5 kids who had allergies had a severe reaction or a life-threatening reaction. There are a lot of misconceptions of what allergies are. When you think of allergies, you don't think of life-threatening."
SNIP
