Kids Food Allergies Blog

Just as I recognized Trace Adkins for his food allergy advocacy efforts in the reality TV/music realm, I would likewise like to applaud politicians who are championing food allergy awareness at the state and federal levels.

First, I would like to acknowledge Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd and his wife, Jackie Clegg Dodd. Their food allergy advocacy is more than political. It is also personal. Their six year old daughter, Grace, is severely allergic to peanuts, tree nuts, eggs, citrus, sesame, fish and shellfish. Grace and her family have been through anaphylaxis 4 times. As a result, Dodd has authored and is championing the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Management Act in the Senate (S. 1232) to establish uniform and consistent food allergy policies in our nation’s schools.

According to Dodd, important work is being done in several states, but a more comprehensive national plan is needed. “Connecticut, I am proud to say, was the first state in the country to enact school-based guidelines concerning food allergies and the prevention of life-threatening incidents in schools…Several other states have passed laws developing school-based guidelines concerning food allergies including (Tennessee), Massachusetts, Vermont, New Jersey, Arizona, Michigan and New York. But, without Federal guidance, a child’s health and safety may be protected in one school but not in another. Policies may vary even among schools within the same school district.”

Dodd’s senate companion to H.R. 2063 differs from its House counterpart in one critical respect: it provides for federal resources to implement legislative and policy directives. Dodd speaks directly to the importance of federal funding for this plan, “Many of our school districts lack the funding necessary to implement a food allergy management plan so if we are going to protect the health and safety of our children, we must provide an opportunity to make funds available to them.”

Also of interest one of the bill’s 11 co-sponsors: Sen. Hillary Clinton. While Senator Dodd’s reason for championing the legislation is clear, Senator Clinton’s link to food allergy advocacy is less apparent. Perhaps she has a personal link to our community as well: I was surprised to learn from a 1992 NY Times Article that Bill Clinton has had skin tests that revealed moderate beef and milk allergies. Kinda makes me wonder how he used to eat at McDonalds.

On the state level, I would like to commend Illinois first-lady Patricia Blagojevich who, earlier this month, kicked off a new statewide education campaign, “Ask Before You Eat,” designed to prevent unintentional and potentially-life threatening harm to children with food allergies. This campaign was inspired by the State of New Jersey’s “Ask Before You Eat” initiative. Hopefully, other states will soon follow the good example of New Jersey and Illinois and begin statewide education initiatives of their own.

If there are other federal or state politicians who deserve recognition for food allergy advocacy or education (particularly at the school level), please leave a comment here to tell us about their efforts.

Meantime, here’s Dodd and his family.

Question for those of us with food allergic kids in public schools, or about to enter public schools: Is the passage of H.R. 2063 a reason to celebrate? According to a bill summary, H.R. 2063, The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Management Act of 2008, directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Secretary of Education, to develop a voluntary policy for managing the risk of food allergy and anaphylaxis in schools.

H.R. 2063 requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop and make available to local educational agencies a policy to manage the risk of food allergy and anaphylaxis in schools to be implemented on a voluntary basis only. Directs that such policy address: (1) a parental obligation to provide the school with information regarding a student’s food allergy and risk of anaphylaxis; (2) creation of an individual health care plan tailored to each student with a documented risk for anaphylaxis; (3) communication strategies between schools and emergency medical services; (4) strategies to reduce the risk of exposure in classrooms and common areas; (5) food allergy management training of school personnel; and (6) authorization and training of school personnel to administer epinephrine when the school nurse is not immediately available.

The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (FAAN) considers the passage of this bill , sponsored by Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), to be a “wonderful first step to ensuring that the 2.2 million school-age children with food allergy are safe at school.” They further claim that, “If passed, FAAMA will provide schools across the country with uniform guidance on how to create appropriate management and emergency plans for children with food allergies.”

While I laud these objectives, I’m skeptical that this bill will accomplish these goals.

1. The bill is voluntary. In section 5, “Nothing in this Act or the policy developed by the Secretary under section 4(a) shall be construed to require a local educational agency or school to implement such policy or guidelines.” That’s problematic. If schools don’t want to work with parents to implement food allergy action plans for emergency situations, that’s OK? And, a camp can reject your child because of his/her allergies (or refuse him or her to bring an epi-pen to camp)? I share the sentiment of the Breeding Imperfection blog that HR 2063 “is not nearly as interesting” because, frankly, this legislation will not do anything. But it would be really helpful if some legislation could be implemented that would. As she writes, “Mothers like me already do the informing and educating of the schools. Many of us start from scratch, with wholly - and dangerously - ignorant educators … With parents carrying the bulk of the burden, it would help a lot to see this process normalized a bit.”

2. State law supercedes federal legislation (see section 4.2.c). This is a variation of point 1 — but if state and local laws are more lax than the federal guidelines outlined in this legislation (or by DHHS) — then food allergic children are no better off than they were before the passage of this bill. It is precisely in those jurisdictions with policies that disadvantage food allergic students who most desperately need strong federal legislation to protect their safety and rights.

3. There is no money behind it. When this bill was first introduced (April 26, 2007), there was an appropriations authorization provision ($30,000,000 for fiscal year 2008 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal years). This provision was stricken from the version that passed the house April 8, 2008. Not that this matters that much — the power is in appropriations, not authorizations. Actually, taking the appropriations down to zero makes sense since the bill is completely voluntary. If this bill were to make a difference, it would need to be mandatory and have money behind it.

4. I’m really glad to live where I do. I haven’t yet met with my daughter’s principal, but where I live (in Fairfax County, VA), I am optimistic. There seems to be a fairly comprehensive county-wide food allergy policy, and a highly organized mechanism in place for managing food allergies. They post several allergy/anaphylaxis responsibility checklists, which I found interesting:

• Responsibilities of the Parents or Guardians of a Student with Food Allergies/Anaphylaxis
• Responsibilities of the Student with Food Allergies/Anaphylaxis
• Responsibilities of the School Administration
• Responsibilities of the School Public Health Nurse
• Responsibilities of the Classroom Teacher
• Responsibilities of the Food Services Manager
• Responsibilities of School Transportation

The bill goes to the Senate next. We’ll be watching closely.