Peer Masking as a Reasonable Accommodation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I simply don't get it. School-aged kids can mask. Teaching them community responsibility is a good thing. Teaching them to care about other students, their families and staff is a good thing. If a child has SN and cannot wear one, it's one thing but given how many viruses are going around right now, it makes sense. It's funny how the same parents screaming about learning loss when kids get sick are the same refusing masks and wanting accommodations for their kids when they are out sick. I don't get why people enjoy being sick. We've been so much healthier by masking, only eating outdoors, etc.

My kids got much sicker during the 2021-22 school year while masking than this year so far. I think in part because they’re not constantly touching their faces to adjust their masks or pull them down. Their mental health is better. My oldest in particular had a lot of negative feelings about school after a year of virtual in K and a year of masking in 1st grade, he particularly hated masking during PE. He’s finally having his first normal year of elementary school and now loves to go. My younger kid has some sensory issues (and an IEP) and can’t wear a mask unless it’s one of those ridiculously thin athletic masks (which is what we did to check a box when masking was required so that he wouldn’t continue to lose out on needed services). So for my kids, not masking is absolutely a healthier choice. I know I’m not alone in not wanting my kids to mask. Stop trying to push the narrative that all kids can mask without issue, it’s just not true.

Maybe your kids got sicker as they were doing things outside of school not masked. That makes no sense they were sicker while masking. It sounds like you are part of the problem and what example you set and teach in your home. Perhaps you should have gotten your kids better-fitting masks. If they are having mental health issues, did you get them a therapist and make changes in your home to fix the problems at home? Sounds like there is much more to this and empathy toward others and teaching kids how to live in a community isn't a priority.

Ever think of kids like mine who have had to continue in virtual school because of kids like yours and families like yours? Perhaps your kids would have been healthier if as a community those who could, stayed home sick and everyone masked. I wish I could live in a self-centered world like you but I don't have your privilege.

Please get your kid's mental health treatment given their challenges. Unmasking isn't going to fix those things. And, get the younger child a full neuropsych as sensory issues are not a diagnosis.

you are such a b. get help. and talk to your child’s pediatrician to see if they really have to be isolated from society.

NP. or isolated from this parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read all the comments, so maybe this has been discussed. I think it would be reasonable BUT it would open a whole can of worms for parents to ask for accommodations that require actions by other peers in school, which is something we just can’t do. School administrators are constantly having to deny reasonable requests by reasonable parents because they’d be opening themselves up to unreasonable requests from unreasonable parents. Over my years in special education I’ve had parents want accommodations requiring other students to sit with their children at lunch, to not sing Happy Birthday, to not speak a foreign language, to not bring foods the child is not allowed to school ( not allergy related), and so, so much more. And these are not parents you can explain things to. And this is not even mentioning the unreasonable parents who would be upset that their child had to mask.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NP. This always comes up and isn’t a thing. They sell pb&j at schools. Peanut butter is not airborne. It was never banned from lunches.

What decade are you living in? A lot of schools are peanut free, and even more classrooms are.

I have one in middle school and one in high school. We have not experienced a peanut free school since preschool.

Then you should limit your comments to your own experiences. You stated that it is never banned and that this isn't a thing. That's just not accurate.

The same applies to you, saying nuts are banned in schools. You are limited to your own experiences.

So you're really doubling down on this PB thing, huh. You think your own experience of having PB in your childrens' schools applies EVERYWHERE else? It's always interesting to see how parents put on tunnel vision to suit their own internal narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I simply don't get it. School-aged kids can mask. Teaching them community responsibility is a good thing. Teaching them to care about other students, their families and staff is a good thing. If a child has SN and cannot wear one, it's one thing but given how many viruses are going around right now, it makes sense. It's funny how the same parents screaming about learning loss when kids get sick are the same refusing masks and wanting accommodations for their kids when they are out sick. I don't get why people enjoy being sick. We've been so much healthier by masking, only eating outdoors, etc.

My kids got much sicker during the 2021-22 school year while masking than this year so far. I think in part because they’re not constantly touching their faces to adjust their masks or pull them down. Their mental health is better. My oldest in particular had a lot of negative feelings about school after a year of virtual in K and a year of masking in 1st grade, he particularly hated masking during PE. He’s finally having his first normal year of elementary school and now loves to go. My younger kid has some sensory issues (and an IEP) and can’t wear a mask unless it’s one of those ridiculously thin athletic masks (which is what we did to check a box when masking was required so that he wouldn’t continue to lose out on needed services). So for my kids, not masking is absolutely a healthier choice. I know I’m not alone in not wanting my kids to mask. Stop trying to push the narrative that all kids can mask without issue, it’s just not true.

Maybe your kids got sicker as they were doing things outside of school not masked. That makes no sense they were sicker while masking. It sounds like you are part of the problem and what example you set and teach in your home. Perhaps you should have gotten your kids better-fitting masks. If they are having mental health issues, did you get them a therapist and make changes in your home to fix the problems at home? Sounds like there is much more to this and empathy toward others and teaching kids how to live in a community isn't a priority.

Ever think of kids like mine who have had to continue in virtual school because of kids like yours and families like yours? Perhaps your kids would have been healthier if as a community those who could, stayed home sick and everyone masked. I wish I could live in a self-centered world like you but I don't have your privilege.

Please get your kid's mental health treatment given their challenges. Unmasking isn't going to fix those things. And, get the younger child a full neuropsych as sensory issues are not a diagnosis.

Masks can hold germs close to the face for kids to breathe in.
Fauci sent an e-mail in Feb 2020 that masks do not help, and later was telling everyone to mask.

OMG, this again? Sure let's all go back to the understanding we held of Covid in Feb 2020. That's a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if a student in your child’s class has cancer, you’re not willing to have your kid mask?

Nope. There are home based teaching options if you are that medically fragile.

+1
This is not at all reasonable to impose on the rest of the kids.

Ableism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Except that religious beliefs aren’t covered by the ADA. 🙄

And no one knows if force masking every child in class is either. First, you have to ask. Then, it's going to be challenged in court.

We know the science is incredibly weak and so I think the religious belief analogy is excellent. Chap Petersen compared it to forced speech too, since many people wear a mask to demonstrate their politics are to the left of AOC.

Agreed. Forced peer masking seems more like a belief at this point than an actually effective intervention. The reasonable approach is 1-way masking of the vulnerable child, plus other accommodations like a separate lunch space.

So masks are on the one hand so ineffective that no one else should wear them but so effective that 1-way masking is going to fully protect a child with cancer? Got it.

NP here, nothing is going to “fully protect” a child with cancer in a congregate school setting. Because kids are not going to be hermits outside of school and invariably will come to school contagious with viruses, which are often highly contagious before symptoms start. One way masking with a well fitted mask protects the wearer. More so than relying on the hygiene and 100% mask adherence of 6 year olds. But still, 1 way masking will not be 100% effective.

My kids brought home RSV and COVID last year while in 100% mandated masked classrooms.

So you're saying that 6 year old can't achieve 100% mask adherence but the 6 year old with cancer has to somehow do this?

I think the point is that if the sick 6 year old is relying on masking either way not to die, then it’s probably too big a risk for that child to be in that environment.

It's too big of a risk with one way masking. You can get the risk into a reasonable range with 2 way masking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read all the comments, so maybe this has been discussed. I think it would be reasonable BUT it would open a whole can of worms for parents to ask for accommodations that require actions by other peers in school, which is something we just can’t do. School administrators are constantly having to deny reasonable requests by reasonable parents because they’d be opening themselves up to unreasonable requests from unreasonable parents. Over my years in special education I’ve had parents want accommodations requiring other students to sit with their children at lunch, to not sing Happy Birthday, to not speak a foreign language, to not bring foods the child is not allowed to school ( not allergy related), and so, so much more. And these are not parents you can explain things to. And this is not even mentioning the unreasonable parents who would be upset that their child had to mask.

Schools have to field requests for accommodations all the time, some are off the wall and some are very needed. There's a process for it. But you are legally wrong that schools can't require actions by other peers in school.

By your logic we should get rid of all disability laws cuz they open up a can of worms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read all the comments, so maybe this has been discussed. I think it would be reasonable BUT it would open a whole can of worms for parents to ask for accommodations that require actions by other peers in school, which is something we just can’t do. School administrators are constantly having to deny reasonable requests by reasonable parents because they’d be opening themselves up to unreasonable requests from unreasonable parents. Over my years in special education I’ve had parents want accommodations requiring other students to sit with their children at lunch, to not sing Happy Birthday, to not speak a foreign language, to not bring foods the child is not allowed to school ( not allergy related), and so, so much more. And these are not parents you can explain things to. And this is not even mentioning the unreasonable parents who would be upset that their child had to mask.

Schools have to field requests for accommodations all the time, some are off the wall and some are very needed. There's a process for it. But you are legally wrong that schools can't require actions by other peers in school.

By your logic we should get rid of all disability laws cuz they open up a can of worms.

I can’t think of any other accomodation that requires every kid to wear something/do something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

NP. This always comes up and isn’t a thing. They sell pb&j at schools. Peanut butter is not airborne. It was never banned from lunches.

What decade are you living in? A lot of schools are peanut free, and even more classrooms are.

I have one in middle school and one in high school. We have not experienced a peanut free school since preschool.

Then you should limit your comments to your own experiences. You stated that it is never banned and that this isn't a thing. That's just not accurate.

The same applies to you, saying nuts are banned in schools. You are limited to your own experiences.

So you're really doubling down on this PB thing, huh. You think your own experience of having PB in your childrens' schools applies EVERYWHERE else? It's always interesting to see how parents put on tunnel vision to suit their own internal narrative.

Seems like you’re the one doubling down and thinking your experience is right.
-DP

[Anonymous]

Can we stop with the nut analogy? Masking is FAR more invasive and burdensome than a nut ban. They have nothing in common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if a student in your child’s class has cancer, you’re not willing to have your kid mask?

Nope. There are home based teaching options if you are that medically fragile.

+1
This is not at all reasonable to impose on the rest of the kids.

Ableism.

Just add an “ism” allegation when you don’t agree with something someone says and then you don’t actually have to think about any nuances!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we stop with the nut analogy? Masking is FAR more invasive and burdensome than a nut ban. They have nothing in common.

+1. Ridiculous argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I simply don't get it. School-aged kids can mask. Teaching them community responsibility is a good thing. Teaching them to care about other students, their families and staff is a good thing. If a child has SN and cannot wear one, it's one thing but given how many viruses are going around right now, it makes sense. It's funny how the same parents screaming about learning loss when kids get sick are the same refusing masks and wanting accommodations for their kids when they are out sick. I don't get why people enjoy being sick. We've been so much healthier by masking, only eating outdoors, etc.

School-age kids can do lots of things. That doesn't mean that they should, nor should they be asked to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read all the comments, so maybe this has been discussed. I think it would be reasonable BUT it would open a whole can of worms for parents to ask for accommodations that require actions by other peers in school, which is something we just can’t do. School administrators are constantly having to deny reasonable requests by reasonable parents because they’d be opening themselves up to unreasonable requests from unreasonable parents. Over my years in special education I’ve had parents want accommodations requiring other students to sit with their children at lunch, to not sing Happy Birthday, to not speak a foreign language, to not bring foods the child is not allowed to school ( not allergy related), and so, so much more. And these are not parents you can explain things to. And this is not even mentioning the unreasonable parents who would be upset that their child had to mask.

Schools have to field requests for accommodations all the time, some are off the wall and some are very needed. There's a process for it. But you are legally wrong that schools can't require actions by other peers in school.

By your logic we should get rid of all disability laws cuz they open up a can of worms.

I can’t think of any other accomodation that requires every kid to wear something/do something.

As parents we should set a good example and teach our kids it’s the right thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I simply don't get it. School-aged kids can mask. Teaching them community responsibility is a good thing. Teaching them to care about other students, their families and staff is a good thing. If a child has SN and cannot wear one, it's one thing but given how many viruses are going around right now, it makes sense. It's funny how the same parents screaming about learning loss when kids get sick are the same refusing masks and wanting accommodations for their kids when they are out sick. I don't get why people enjoy being sick. We've been so much healthier by masking, only eating outdoors, etc.

School-age kids can do lots of things. That doesn't mean that they should, nor should they be asked to.

Yes they should. You show them by example.