Abstract

BackgroundThere is ongoing controversy surrounding the appropriate standards and limits of accommodation of children with food allergies in schools. We identify and explain how relevant Canadian common law, legislation, constitutional law and human rights policy can inform future school policy around allergy, disability and food bans.Main bodyThe Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to governmental laws or policies, including the policies of schools, and grants every individual the right to freedom from discrimination based on, among other things, disability. Canadian constitutional and human rights law define disability broadly including perceived disabilities. Provincial human rights tribunals in both Ontario and BC have explicitly found allergy to be a disability requiring accommodation, even in cases not involving anaphylaxis risk. However, the cases most pertinent to the scenarios faced by schools have found that food bans may not be required, due to recent scientific evidence that they do not render allergy sufferers safer.ConclusionAnaphylaxis-level allergy constitutes a disability under both the Charter and human rights legislation, despite the fact that higher courts have not definitively ruled on the matter. Accordingly, schools must make careful decisions about how to deal with life-threatening allergies among their students. Food bans are generally not legally necessary, and, in the absence of new legislation, are only likely to become so if sufficient scientific evidence demonstrates that they increase safety for students. School policies should be substantially informed by evidence-based research in order to ensure ongoing congruence with human rights law.

Highlights

  • There is ongoing controversy surrounding the appropriate standards and limits of accommodation of children with food allergies in schools

  • Anaphylaxis-level allergy constitutes a disability under both the Charter and human rights legislation, despite the fact that higher courts have not definitively ruled on the matter

  • Food bans are generally not legally necessary, and, in the absence of new legislation, are only likely to become so if sufficient scientific evidence demonstrates that they increase safety for students

Read more

Summary

Conclusion

It is clear that in most if not all provinces, allergy is legally a physical disability and, as a result, there are obligations to accommodate in the context of schools. Schools must make careful decisions about how to deal with life-threatening allergies among their students. If bans can be shown to be effective, they may be a convenient, reasonably simple, and inexpensive way for schools to create clear boundaries and a safe environment for children. Fear of litigation, and the social climate can all lead school authorities to ban foods. The law creates the overall structure and guiding principles in which our educational institutions must operate, but it is the medical advice of experts and their evidence-based research that hold the key to the content of the policies that schools should adopt.

Background

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.