Article content continued

“This is ridiculous on too many levels to even engage,” said Nicholas Christakis, a professor of medical sociology at Harvard Medical School and critic of nut policies in schools.

“My feelings are that we cannot childproof the whole world, we have to world-proof our children,” added Lenore Skenazy, the New York-based author of Free Range Parenting. “If it is dangerous for some kids to encounter an acorn, those kids have to be taught not to touch them, because there are trees all over, not just near the school. The best way to keep them safe is to train them to take care of themselves, not to cut down all the trees they may ever walk under anywhere.”

[np-related /]

University of Waterloo researcher Nancy Fenton, who is currently studying how young people with anaphylaxis navigate a social sphere that is not always so understanding and accommodating to their allergies, says it’s a “fraught conversation” when you start taking away potential risks.

Vaughan city councillor Sandra Yeung Racco worries that the removal of the trees would set a dangerous precedent in her community.

“For as many people that may be allergic to acorns, I’m sure there’s a lot of people that are allergic to bees. What are we going to do about that? Are we going to exterminate all the bees?” she said. “We can’t. I am trying to be sensitive, but at the same time we have a responsibility to make common sense a priority. And I don’t believe this is something that should really be under our jurisdiction.”