Girl Hospitalized After Attack with Cracker
 

Girl Hospitalized After Attack with Cracker
Dec 20, 2005

A seven-year-old girl was hospitalized for two days after a schoolmate allegedly attacked her with a snack.

Arionna Lunceford spent two days in a St. Louis hospital after a schoolmate rubbed a peanut-butter cracker on her face and dribbled crumbs in her hair while on the school bus ride home. The assault was allegedly part of the boy’s hazing of the girl for her peanut allergies. Lunceford suffers from extreme peanut allergies, and the assault left her so weak she collapsed shortly after leaving the bus.

Lunceford has been released from the hospital. Charges against the alleged cracker-brandiser have yet to be filed.

My son sometimes threatens my daughter with this. I told him if he ever does it, he's dead.

Am I a horrible person if I find this really funny? I mean, it takes some thought to do this instead of just throwing spitballs.

If there wouldn't have been a big deal made of her allergy so everyone knew she had it, she would have been fine. I think that's the lesson here.

Serious Question
 

Has anyone ever been on a plane and sat near anyone with a severe peanut allergy? I mean, what do they do when they start giving out bags of peanuts to everyone? Do these people simply not fly on certain airlines? I've heard stories of kids in the lunchroom having to be separated from PB&J sandwich eaters...what do they do on enclosed airplanes?

If I was that little girls parents, I'd have that kid in juvie. If I was the little boys parents, yeah, he would be dead. What a sick sadistic little kid to do something like that. He'll probably end up a serial rapist or something when he grows up.

A few weeks ago, I heard on the radio about a case where a teenage couple was making out. The boy had eaten peanut butter a little while before they made out. He didn't know she had severe peanut allergy and she didn't know he had eaten peanut butter. She has an allergic reaction which I'm guessing is from whatever peanut butter was left in his mouth after eating some. She died. The police were going to charge him with something although I can't remember with what.

I think what they should charge him with is failure to brush his teeth after eating peanut butter and then kissing someone. Ew.

Anyhow, I'm just surprised that some people are so allergic that making out with someone who had just eaten peanut butter could kill them.

YES you are a horrible person.

Just kidding ;), but what happened to this girl isn't funny. Peanut allergies are really serious and potentially deadly. The boys who did this either don't understand how serious this allergy is or they are really vicious.

ShaedyKD: my mother is allergic to peanuts, almonds, coconuts, etc. When they handed out peanuts on a plane, she would excuse herself to the restroom for about 20 minutes until people were finished. She carries benedryl and an epi-pen just in case she is exposed.

When you think about it, though, what a sadistic little bastard this boy is. To actually rub a peanut butter cracker into someone's face?

I mean, Mr. KR and I do that but that's only during playtime.

Hahaha, you're funny KR!

ZTA- I heard the boyfriend had eaten the PB sandwich 2 days earlier before making out with the girl. That's really sad.

PnC- Thanks, I always wondered about that!

I'm guessing that the boy didn't think the allergy was as bad as it is, and like I said, if the parents or child or whoever wouldn't have made a big deal out of it he would have never done it. It's on the same level as asking a kid whose parents are divorced why your daddy didn't love you because he left. And that's been going on for YEARS.

Little kids are mean jerks - that's not exactly a news flash.

But the parents have to make a big deal out of it. Other kids in the class have to know the danger of exposing this girl to peanuts.

And no, it's not on the same level as asking why your daddy didn't love you because he left. That hurts your feelings, but it doesn't risk landing you in the hospital or worse.

Little kids can be jerks, but this goes way beyond that. As the parent of young kids, I feel quite sure this kid had been told how exposure to peanuts can make this girl seriously ill. (My son can tell us which kids in his class have peanut or lactose allergies -- there's one of each. He doesn't make fun of them, he understands that peanuts or milk can make those kids sick and he's glad he's not allergic.) This kid isn't just a jerk, he's seriously mean.

It's up to the kid with the allergy to stay away from dangerous foods, not the rest of the class to "protect" her. If she's old enough to know her school bus number, she's old enough to stay away from peanuts. What's she going to do when she grows up and wants to go to a baseball game? Make people around her get rid of peanuts or call the ballpark to tell them not to sell them?

To reiterate, I'd like to know how much of a deal was made out of this - if the teacher went on and on about how they HAVE to be considerate, if the parents are hovering over her every minute, if the kids are no longer allowed to carry peanut butter just because of this girl, then I'm not surprised she was harassed. Don't set your child up to be the victim.

I'm not doubting food allergies (two of my coworkers have severe ones) but when something doubles by 50% in a year, I'm calling Munchausen by proxy in at least SOME of the cases.

Allergies like this are serious stuff.

My husband was strongly allergic to cats and dogs, to the point where he was unable to breathe after 5 minutes in a house where a cat lived, even if the cat was not present and the room had been cleaned. (I say "was" because he's been going for allergy shots and is much more tolerant of his allergens now.)

Peanut allergies can be similar in their intensity. People can and do end up in the hospital; people can and do end up dead.

This boy deliberately hurt this little girl. She could have died. He deserves some form of punishment.

Although there's an interesting case to be made that these allergies are getting worse with time, and that lack of exposure is one reason . . .

There was a whole story on them in last week's people.

I agree. But there's a difference between protecting her and being appropriately considerate around her. And responsibility to stay away from dangerous foods would seem to be a moot point when someone is smearing peanut butter on your face and dropping crackers with peanut butter on your hair.

Quote:

To reiterate, I'd like to know how much of a deal was made out of this - if the teacher went on and on about how they HAVE to be considerate, if the parents are hovering over her every minute, if the kids are no longer allowed to carry peanut butter just because of this girl, then I'm not surprised she was harassed. Don't set your child up to be the victim.

Given that the kid had peanut butter crackers on him, I'm assuming the girl didn't keep others from eating peanut butter. I agree with don't set your child up to be the victim, but even so that doesn't excuse the boy's completely unacceptable behavior.

Quote:

but when something doubles by 50% in a year, I'm calling Munchausen by proxy in at least SOME of the cases.

I'll agree, and I'll also say I suspect that there are some other things going on with the increase in allergies, including what KSig RC suggests.

I feel sorry for that little boy, I wonder what kind of home life he has for him to be so hateful. :(

The medical examiner just stated that her death was NOT due to exposure to peanuts and was not related to making out with her boyfriend. The actual cause of death has not been released.

According to CNN the Coroner says that lack of oxygen, not the peanut allergy, killed the girl: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americ...ap/index.html.

Exposed by a Teacher
 

My oldest daughter is always very careful not to eat peanut products, strawberries, fish, or eggs. At the beginning of each school year, I fill out the student information card stating all of her allergies (she's also a severe asthmatic), and make it a point to tell her teachers. We also teach her not to eat from classmates because they may not realize that certain candies, etc. have peanuts in them.

Anyway, her teacher was giving out "treats" to those that had done well on a test. She gave my daughter some candy (I believe it was chocolate coated, so she didn't realize it had peanut butter in the middle). She spat it out immediately when she tasted the peanut butter. :mad: :mad: :mad:

Now - thank God - she did not go into anaphylactic shock or anything, but instead got hives on her legs.

On another note - we found out my youngest daughter also has peanut allergies when her eye swole for a WEEK after eating Chick-Fil-A (Yes - they cook in peanut oil :mad: - which needs to be on a large sign in the drive thru).

Another thing we avoid is fried turkey (it's a southern thing), because that's usually cooked in peanut oil.

So Mystic Cat - you're right. Parents have to make a big deal out of peanut allergies, because so many people are not aware of it. The weird thing is - neither my husband nor I have peanut allergies...:confused:

there is a big difference between "protecting" and "attacking" - what this child did to her was a form of assault.

not that i am saying you're supporting this but - this same type of argument is used for justification on why people should just "get over it" or "just avoid it" in terms of sexual harassment

sadistic assholes can't always just "be avoided"

- marissa

I'm not denying that. I'm saying that if the parents and teacher made an overly big deal about the allergy - i.e. set the child up to be victimized - it's really not surprising that this occurred.

Yes the child that did it is a jerk, but don't give jerks fodder to abuse you. Keep your medical conditions and private life private. It would be like if someone was epileptic and the teacher announced it to the whole class - you know there would be an a-hole out there faking seizures and such.

Faking seizures is not at all equivalent to trying to kill you. We're not talking about kids teasing or bullying, this is about constricting your airway to the point that you cannot breathe within minutes - before medical help could arrive.

My sons have the peanut allergy and are both severely asthmatic. We have to tell the school about it. The teachers tell the kids about how serious this allergy is so they know it is nothing to joke about. The school recently asked me if I would support a school-wide ban on peanut butter. In other words, no kid could bring PB&J for lunch. I told them that I thought that was ridiculous. If my kid requires that much special attention he should be home-schooled. That being said, if someone knew my kid was allergic to PB and intentionally gave it to him, I would support charging the kid with assault.

You really think the child was trying to murder the other kid via cracker? Honestly?

Does it matter what his intent was?

Furthermore, I was responding to 33's position that the parents gave the kid motive by making a big deal about the allergy. So, following that logic, the kid did not have good intentions and WAS trying to engage an allergic reaction. I don't buy into the "he didn't mean to do it" line of discipline.

1. The kid knew the other kid was allergic to PB.
2. The kid forced the PB on the kid anyway.
3. The kid is guilty.

Does a kid necessarily understand the severity of the consequences of his actions? Probably not. He did know that it was wrong and did it anyway.

Let's just build more prisons and put all the disobedient, PB-wielding kids in there. That will solve all the world's problems.

OK, kidding. But if your kid has this allergy, it is a great concern. If your kid is mean enough to exploit someone else's weakness, that is a greater concern.

You're allowing your "mom" feelings to interfere with rational discourse here - which is both commendable and obvious, but is really causing you to miss the trees for the forest here (if you'll allow).

First - no one is disputing that the kid's allergies are severe, and that the other kid was in the wrong.

Second - you have just indicated reasons why the kid's behavior is totally dissimilar from 'trying to kill him' but objectively similar to other such 'he knew it was wrong but did it anyway' things, such as faking a seizure (which would be done to embarrass/hurt the kid with epilepsy - also 'wrong', also intentional).

Finally, 33's point is NOT that the parents are giving anyone 'motive' - again, you're not viewing this objectively.

Instead, I think her point is that the parents are giving the child OPPORTUNITY - that is, without the knowledge of the allergy, it probably would not have occurred to the child to smash the cracker onto the kid's face. There are, most likely, ways in which the child can be protected from food allergies but not singled out - and 33girl is simply pointing out that some extreme parental actions may create unintended consequences outside the protective cocoon. Does this make sense? I feel like I'm being overly obtuse here, but I'm not sure on what level I agree with her - I just know you're not seeing her point at all.

Re: Girl Hospitalized After Attack with Cracker
 

Yo, yo, yo. It wasn't me.

Re: Re: Girl Hospitalized After Attack with Cracker
 

cracker please.

By telling people that your kid has the PB allergy, you are primarily protecting your kid from the unintentional exposure to the allergen. ( I think someone else already used the example of a chocolate-coated candy). If the teacher or the moms who buy treats know there are kids allergic, they are likely to refrain from offering it to your child. When your kid is 7, that is important. That is why parents tell the school about the allergy. I hardly think that is irrational. I also believe I understand 33's point just fine. I still believe that faking a seizure hurts someone's feelings, which is a lot different from harming someone physically. If that is irrational, so be it.

Allergies are serious business and folx in a contained public setting need to be aware of those among them who have them.

And guess what? As you grow older you can still develop them. So I hope that the folx blaming the victim's parents for publicizing her allergies never develop them.

That boy knew exactly what he was doing. If any parents should be checked, it is his.

here's is the point where i'd like to say - i'd rather be the parent who raised a child with a peanut allergy than the parent who raised a sadistic little asswipe who would assualt another child in this manner...

I don't think anything at all should happen to that little boy. He's been through enough, with half of greekchat condeming him and alll.

I would hope the parents thrashed the little boy when he got home.

I don't agree with charges though.

We had a medical emergency whrn I was Convention Chairman. The student had eaten something that had peanut oil in it even though everyone was told she was allergic to peanuts. She went the hospital and was treated and released. This was before epi-pen! Very scary stuff.

Denise

I'll bet he's crushed.

Who knows what this kid was thinking - or his friends that instigated the hazing. They probably thought 'allergy' meant sneezing, itchy, hives, common hayfever symptoms, rather than a potential for anaphylaxis (as with a lot of food allergies).

Just as a note, anaphylactic reactions are bloody terrifying. I've had two - one when I was 9 and another when I was 21 (from two different allergens). It happens fast and if it's not sorted straight away by an epi-pen or going to hospital or both, then the person is pretty much screwed.

So as funny as the title sounds, it's really not something to be flippant about. I hope the boy got suspended, or given loads of detentions, and his parents given a good jolt into reality about the kind of child they're raising (misguided or miscreant, however you want to look at it :rolleyes: ).