jacqui the parents have to treat every day occurences like sleepovers and parties with utmost care. It is hassle for the parents but that is nothing compared to the inconvenience to the child.

The parents where the child will be are aware of the visiting childs allergy and nine times out of ten go out of their way to make sure they don't come into contact with the source of their allergy. If they don't feel they can take on that commitment they aren't forced into the situation. They either do or don't feel comfortable having to take on the responsibility.

One of the biggest worries is the child with the allergy vomiting in their sleep and choking on it. It happens.

I suspose they could as you suggest hide the child away from everyday life, but thankfully nowadays enough people are educated enough to see the negatives in that as a solution.

villan I am afraid it is your arguments that are out of proportion. Comparing a school ban on nuts to stopping the traffic is not worth discussing. I notice you haven't said if you would be willing to accept the responsibility of a child's death following your stirling campaign to reinstate nuts into a school.

Your child doesn't face traffic in the playground so why should someones else's child with a different danger be forced to face it in school? Or is it only your child that merits protection?