Peer Masking as a Reasonable Accommodation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The "no peanut butter" analogy isn't really comparable. There's no meaningful effect on other kids if they can't bring peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to school. They have plenty of other lunch options.

I can't actually think of any comparable situation where "reasonable accommodation" has been interpreted to require other students (rather than schools) to take certain actions. I see requiring masks on other kids to be more equivalent to requiring the teacher to give instruction in sign language, and requiring the other kids to learn sign language to accommodate one deaf kid in the class.

Queue all the parents who ONLY can bring peanut butter for their very special kids.

Banning one type of food, or having a peanut-free table in the cafeteria, seems pretty reasonable. But, if you had a kid with multiple allergies that required bans of many different foods, that would become an unreasonable request at some point.

Schools are also required to make reasonable accommodations for religious beliefs. An exemption from the school dress code for religious headwear would be reasonable. Banning non-halal food would not be reasonable. I think requiring all students to mask would be closer to the halal ban, in that it imposes too much of a burden on the school and the other students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The "no peanut butter" analogy isn't really comparable. There's no meaningful effect on other kids if they can't bring peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to school. They have plenty of other lunch options.

I can't actually think of any comparable situation where "reasonable accommodation" has been interpreted to require other students (rather than schools) to take certain actions. I see requiring masks on other kids to be more equivalent to requiring the teacher to give instruction in sign language, and requiring the other kids to learn sign language to accommodate one deaf kid in the class.

Queue all the parents who ONLY can bring peanut butter for their very special kids.

Banning one type of food, or having a peanut-free table in the cafeteria, seems pretty reasonable. But, if you had a kid with multiple allergies that required bans of many different foods, that would become an unreasonable request at some point.

Schools are also required to make reasonable accommodations for religious beliefs. An exemption from the school dress code for religious headwear would be reasonable. Banning non-halal food would not be reasonable. I think requiring all students to mask would be closer to the halal ban, in that it imposes too much of a burden on the school and the other students.

This is the conclusion reasonable minds will come to, but queue all the “you haaaaate kids with cancer” posters and “my kid just THRIVED in a mask.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The "no peanut butter" analogy isn't really comparable. There's no meaningful effect on other kids if they can't bring peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to school. They have plenty of other lunch options.

I can't actually think of any comparable situation where "reasonable accommodation" has been interpreted to require other students (rather than schools) to take certain actions. I see requiring masks on other kids to be more equivalent to requiring the teacher to give instruction in sign language, and requiring the other kids to learn sign language to accommodate one deaf kid in the class.

Queue all the parents who ONLY can bring peanut butter for their very special kids.

Banning one type of food, or having a peanut-free table in the cafeteria, seems pretty reasonable. But, if you had a kid with multiple allergies that required bans of many different foods, that would become an unreasonable request at some point.

Schools are also required to make reasonable accommodations for religious beliefs. An exemption from the school dress code for religious headwear would be reasonable. Banning non-halal food would not be reasonable. I think requiring all students to mask would be closer to the halal ban, in that it imposes too much of a burden on the school and the other students.

This is the conclusion reasonable minds will come to, but queue all the “you haaaaate kids with cancer” posters and “my kid just THRIVED in a mask.”

I mean, I'm sympathetic to kids who are at high-risk. But, it's unreasonable to require dozens of kids to wear masks to accommodate one student. If a kid really is that high-risk, maybe going to school with hundreds of other kids isn't in the cards.

[Anonymous]

I’m really baffled by the ACLU declaring victory. I don’t understand how this in any way will lead to a mask requirement. Keep pounding sand though. I’m also shocked youngkin settled. This should have been taken up to SCOTUS. I hope the 5th Cir case goes up. Would like some more guarantees that my kid will never have to mask at school again.

[Anonymous]

Peer masking is reasonable because it’s not an undue burden. That is the analysis. If the school provides the class well-fitting masks, it’s no cost to the families, minimal costs to the schools, and at most upsets parents who prefer their kids be maskless but really can’t show actual harm or major burden on them (except maybe in limited circumstances where another child has a disability that prevents them from masking). This is not actually as complicated as people are making it seem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peer masking is reasonable because it’s not an undue burden. That is the analysis. If the school provides the class well-fitting masks, it’s no cost to the families, minimal costs to the schools, and at most upsets parents who prefer their kids be maskless but really can’t show actual harm or major burden on them (except maybe in limited circumstances where another child has a disability that prevents them from masking). This is not actually as complicated as people are making it seem.

The complicated part is finding a kid that this actually applies to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peer masking is reasonable because it’s not an undue burden. That is the analysis. If the school provides the class well-fitting masks, it’s no cost to the families, minimal costs to the schools, and at most upsets parents who prefer their kids be maskless but really can’t show actual harm or major burden on them (except maybe in limited circumstances where another child has a disability that prevents them from masking). This is not actually as complicated as people are making it seem.

The burden isn’t just to prove there’s no harm in kids wearing masks, there must be a proven benefit to the student requesting an accommodation. The studies are all over the place (even the court cited how infection rates were similar across schools that were masked vs. unmasked). So even accepting your argument that it’s not a burden for kids and schools to mask, it’s also not settled science that mask mandates make that much difference. And the school could offer other accommodations that lead to similar COVID rates (such as ventilation improvement).

Also, plenty of parents will attest that their kids dislike masking and find it uncomfortable while trying to learn. It can be a distraction from educating if teachers are now tasked for enforcing and monitoring kids to properly wear masks. You may disagree there is a burden to masking, but the fact is mandating masks for an entire class requires many people now take actions that otherwise would not exist. This is some degree of burden. Not to mention the financial burden of the school now has to supply a well-fitted mask x 25 kids each week. That isn’t zero burden. And you’ve completely discounted the special needs kids who cannot mask and/or need to see faces as if those kids don’t even exist. But I guess you only care about disabilities that align with your personal view that masking causes no harms.

Btw, based on how fast masks came off even in our very liberal elementary school, I think you’re in the minority in claiming masks are NBD. Most parents I know never want their kids to wear them in school again.

[Anonymous]

I would never want tell my kid that them not wearing a mask perfectly every day for a whole school year could result in their classmate becoming seriously ill or worse. Kids don't need that kind of emotional burden. And if the kid did get sick, I wouldn't want someone in the class to think it was their fault because they took their mask down that one time or lost it for 15 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would never want tell my kid that them not wearing a mask perfectly every day for a whole school year could result in their classmate becoming seriously ill or worse. Kids don't need that kind of emotional burden. And if the kid did get sick, I wouldn't want someone in the class to think it was their fault because they took their mask down that one time or lost it for 15 minutes.

You don’t need to do that. Just explain they’re wearing a mask to provide extra protection and a classmate. It doesn’t need to be that dramatic and I promise kids will accept and understand. Have your kids really never had to do anything to accommodate another person in their life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ACLU really being misleading with their spin. Suggest reading this: https://twitter.com/scottyd121/status/1603596252305772544?s=21

ha, ha yeah i'm not taking legal analysis from a guy with a hashtag urgencyofnormal.

If you read the settlement he is correct, though.

No, he's not. The ACLU is correct.

- Special Education Attorney

NP here, please explain. It seems like all the ruling did was give parents the right to request masking as an accommodation and establishing that state law regarding masking does not trump the ADA (but state law generally doesn’t trump federal law, so this is not necessarily ground breaking).

And I mean parents can ask for almost anything as an accommodation, it doesn’t mean it has to be granted. The schools have to negotiate it. But it seems there are a lot of other accommodations that should be considered before involving other students in the accommodation. And then you have kids like mine (ADHD/ASD) who struggle with masking and have an IEP. I would ask that it be included in my child’s IEP that he isn’t to mask and that he needs to see faces to work on social cues (one area of struggle that was exacerbated by losing services and in-person interaction during the pandemic). Home bound or isolation would make his disability much worse. So then how does a school balance that?

I don’t envy schools who have to deal with this, but I imagine the outcome will be that sitting a kid near an open window and having them wear an N95 would need to be tried before we start masking all the kids and teacher in class.

A lot of people are claiming on here that a peer masking accommodation is flat out unreasonable. This settlement, and the legal ruling in the same case that preceded it, reject this view. Peer masking is a reasonable modification (modification is actually the correct legal term although many informally use the term accommodation). Whether the accommodation is needed/warranted for a particular child is an individualized determination that has to be worked out on a case by case basis.

[Anonymous]

Those of you worried about the hypothetical kid who needs an accommodation to not mask are welcome to bring those children and individual schools forward in a lawsuit just like these families were forced to do.

Or, perhaps realize schools can take those individual cases and *gasp* accommodate them in other classrooms from
the kid who requires masking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would never want tell my kid that them not wearing a mask perfectly every day for a whole school year could result in their classmate becoming seriously ill or worse. Kids don't need that kind of emotional burden. And if the kid did get sick, I wouldn't want someone in the class to think it was their fault because they took their mask down that one time or lost it for 15 minutes.

You don’t need to do that. Just explain they’re wearing a mask to provide extra protection and a classmate. It doesn’t need to be that dramatic and I promise kids will accept and understand. Have your kids really never had to do anything to accommodate another person in their life?

Not to this degree, no. I can’t even think of anything comparable that has ever been asked of a kid in school (not being snarky, honestly can’t think of an example). And you must have the kind that just accepts whatever answer you give them without follow up questions. I don’t. Me saying that the class has to wear a mask to protect a kid (when presumably other classes aren’t) would result in “but why? What will happen?” Etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peer masking is reasonable because it’s not an undue burden. That is the analysis. If the school provides the class well-fitting masks, it’s no cost to the families, minimal costs to the schools, and at most upsets parents who prefer their kids be maskless but really can’t show actual harm or major burden on them (except maybe in limited circumstances where another child has a disability that prevents them from masking). This is not actually as complicated as people are making it seem.

It’s not complicated as long as you get to make up all the facts!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would never want tell my kid that them not wearing a mask perfectly every day for a whole school year could result in their classmate becoming seriously ill or worse. Kids don't need that kind of emotional burden. And if the kid did get sick, I wouldn't want someone in the class to think it was their fault because they took their mask down that one time or lost it for 15 minutes.

You don’t need to do that. Just explain they’re wearing a mask to provide extra protection and a classmate. It doesn’t need to be that dramatic and I promise kids will accept and understand. Have your kids really never had to do anything to accommodate another person in their life?

Not to this degree, no. I can’t even think of anything comparable that has ever been asked of a kid in school (not being snarky, honestly can’t think of an example). And you must have the kind that just accepts whatever answer you give them without follow up questions. I don’t. Me saying that the class has to wear a mask to protect a kid (when presumably other classes aren’t) would result in “but why? What will happen?” Etc.

the comparable example would be requiring girls to wear shirts that cover their arms, because one boy needs a religious accommodation because his religion believes short sleeves on girls are evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would never want tell my kid that them not wearing a mask perfectly every day for a whole school year could result in their classmate becoming seriously ill or worse. Kids don't need that kind of emotional burden. And if the kid did get sick, I wouldn't want someone in the class to think it was their fault because they took their mask down that one time or lost it for 15 minutes.

You don’t need to do that. Just explain they’re wearing a mask to provide extra protection and a classmate. It doesn’t need to be that dramatic and I promise kids will accept and understand. Have your kids really never had to do anything to accommodate another person in their life?

Not to this degree, no. I can’t even think of anything comparable that has ever been asked of a kid in school (not being snarky, honestly can’t think of an example). And you must have the kind that just accepts whatever answer you give them without follow up questions. I don’t. Me saying that the class has to wear a mask to protect a kid (when presumably other classes aren’t) would result in “but why? What will happen?” Etc.

the comparable example would be requiring girls to wear shirts that cover their arms, because one boy needs a religious accommodation because his religion believes short sleeves on girls are evil.

Ok, so no. My kid has never been asked to do that (and I would not allow it).