Fall Book Club with Laurel Francoeur, The Allergy Lawyer

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2024 (00:00):
A lot of times, people will say,

(00:01):
well, if you're that allergic,don't go out, you know, don't go
to the restaurant, don't go tothe amusement park, but that's
not realistic either.
I mean, we shouldn't have tolive.
In a bubble and not participatelike every other human being
does

Speaker (00:15):
Welcome to the Don't Feed the Fear podcast, where we
dive into the complex world offood allergy anxiety.
I'm your host, Dr.
Amanda Whitehouse, food allergyanxiety psychologist and food
allergy mom.
Whether you're dealing withallergies yourself or supporting
someone who is, join us for anempathetic and informative
journey toward food allergy calmand confidence.

(00:37):
I'm so fortunate to have thechance to talk today with Laurel
Frank cor the allergy lawyer.
Laurel isn't attorney leveragingher personal experiences and
legal expertise to fight for therights of people with food
allergies and raise awarenessabout the challenges they face.
Laurel's legal background hasstrengthened her advocacy
efforts, enabling her to offerinsights into the legal aspects

(00:59):
of food, allergy rights andprotections.
In addition to being apracticing attorney, Laurel is a
national speaker on the topic offood allergies.
She has drafted legislation inMassachusetts to allow easy
access to epinephrin forstudents in classrooms.
She has testified at the stateand federal level about food
allergy issues.
She's also worked with theMassachusetts department of

(01:20):
public health on food allergyguidelines for restaurants.
And Laurel is the author ofseveral books, which we will
talk about in today's book club,episode.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:30):
Thank you so much for joining me
because I, I think you have sucha different perspective than a
lot of, the other people who arein the food allergy space and
community.
So I'm just really excited tohave you on and pick your brain
about all, all things.
in your world and in this legalworld

laurel-francoeur--she-her (01:46):
well, thank you for having me.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (01:48):
Do you want to just tell us a
little bit about yourself you'veshared that you have a kiddo
with food allergies.
And so then your practice becamefocused on that.
Is that right?

laurel-francoeur--she-her- (01:56):
Yes, so I was an attorney, for a few
years and just doing generalpractice, litigation, different
things.
And then my son was born in 2000and he had multiple food
allergies, peanuts, tree nuts,eggs, soy, sesame, and
shellfish.
And at that time, not a lot ofkids had food allergies, so it
was kind of a novelty.

(02:17):
so I kept working, and then Isent him to kindergarten.
I had a discussion with theteacher, the nurse thought
everything was under control.
then he had a reaction atkindergarten.
teacher gave him, gingerbreadfrosting that had egg in it.
And he licked his hands.

(02:37):
and went into an anaphylacticreaction.
The teacher didn't recognize itthough.
Luckily it was the end of theday and when I came to pick him
up he was in the corner coveredin hives.
So I had to give him the epi andtake him up to the hospital.
and then I realized the schooldoesn't get it.
I thought they understood it butthey don't.
So I need to really focus onthis and keeping him safe.

(03:01):
So I stopped full time practice.
I decided I would just work outof my house doing small things
like wills.
And then I devoted myself tolearning as much as I could
about food allergies and hisrights and that kind of thing.
we had some issues with theteacher not wanting to have the
children wash their hands shethought it was too hard to have

(03:23):
the 26 kindergartners washingtheir hands.
And so, I had to kind of fightthat and she almost got fired
for not wanting to do that.
And, it was a whole big issue.
So it just sort of made merealize, I want to know what,
what are my rights?
What are the responsibilities?
What should I look out for?
And just sort of did a deepdive.

Yeah.
Well, I was thinking that's onething that hopefully has changed
with the, with the pandemic.
COVID world now, washing handsis not considered, right,
something that we don't doregularly.
So that was around 2005 then itsounds like.
So give us kind of the overviewfrom then until now, almost 20
years later, how are thingschanging?

(04:02):
Is that shifting a little bit?
Right.

when I first was dealing with food
allergies, there was sort ofonly one online resource and
that was POFAC, Parents of FoodAllergic Children or Food
Allergic Kids, and it was sortof a list serve and it was sort
of rudimentary, but it was itwas good.
You could connect with people,but there wasn't the information
on the Internet that we havenow.
So you couldn't just Google foodallergies and get it.

(04:29):
of resources.
doctors didn't even haveresources at the time.
So I remember my pediatricianwas just totally stunned when
his allergens came back and hesaid, know, I think you're just
going to have to cook and bakeeverything and can your own food
and say, what am I going backto, you know, the little house

(04:49):
on the prairie times.
So there was really not thatunderstanding.
and that has increased.
Unfortunately, more and morepeople have been getting
allergies, but the upside tothat is there's more education
and resources.

squadcaster-1gff_3_ (05:04):
Definitely.
If things hadn't come along ofwhere you, where you would be
with just giving up that careerand staying home and canning
your goods.
Not that there's anything wrongwith canning foods, but

laurel-francoeur--she-her-_ (05:14):
No, no, no.

yeah,

that wasn't what I wanted to do.
And,

yeah.

um, when I started looking into the
laws, so in Massachusetts, whereI'm from, the EpiPen had to be
kept in the nurse's office andit had to be actually locked in
the nurse's office and couldn'tbe anywhere else.
one of the issues that I had washis kindergarten was on one side
of the building and the nurse'soffice was on the other side of
the building.
I said, this isn't right.

(05:39):
He should be able to have hisEpiPen in the classroom.
I researched the law and figuredout that this one law needed to
be amended because it allowedinhalers to be carried, but it
didn't allow EpiPens.
So I wrote this bill saying thatEpiPens should be allowed
everywhere in the school.
And I got my localrepresentative to agree with me.

(06:02):
we filed this as a bill.
It took us seven years, but itfinally got passed.
so now any student inMassachusetts has the right to
have their EpiPen in theirclassroom or wherever they need
it in the building.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2 (06:15):
Good for you.
What was the status of that inother states at the time with
specifically to EpiPen?

laurel-francoeur--she-her-_1 (06:21):
I, I don't know, but it was, there
was not a lot of, uh, there'svery, there was very little law
about EpiPens at the timebecause it, it wasn't really,
again, well known.
I mean, we're talking, you know,2005, you know, so, you know,
There was really a lot, not, nota lot to guide us at

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22 (06:40):
Right.
Well, and, and as you know,there are still families
struggling with their schools.
now to let the kids self carryto have their epinephrine with
them on the bus.
And as we all know, five minutesaway in the school is too far.
You know, if someone needs theirepinephrine, they need it
immediately.
Five minute delay is notacceptable.
So what It sounds like it's astate issue, state to state.

(07:03):
Is that pretty widespread now atthis point?
Do people, do parents have alegal basis to say that?
And if so, how do they find thatout?

You'd have to go to your state laws,
so

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (07:14):
Uh huh.

is different.
So for instance, um, stockepinephrine.
schools now are allowed to havestock epinephrine, which is
epinephrine that's notdesignated for a particular
person.
So 49 states have that law,Massachusetts doesn't.
So we are the only state thatdoes not have a law allowing
epinephrine to be stocked atschools or in any other place.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (07:38):
And I would imagine that's,

mess.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (07:40):
oh sorry, go ahead.

but luckily, Massachusetts schools
will have their district doctorwrite a standing order for
epinephrine to cover that wedidn't make a law.
We had different things offeredfor laws and they never went
anywhere.
So, but.
you go to any other state andyou're going to see stark
epinephrine in Massachusetts.

(08:02):
It's not there.
So,

Right.
And I was going to say, that'sprobably a different law
specific to have stockepinephrine in schools versus,
you know, the issues that wefind where, can, uh, police
officers and emergencyresponders and do all ambulances
carry epinephrine or not, butthose are all separate issues,
right?
Separate legal issues.

laurel-francoeur--she-he (08:20):
right.
Right.
And so my next, when I havespare time, my next, um, issue
is going to be in Massachusetts.
It says the nurses, may trainstaff and how to administer
epinephrine.
But it doesn't say shall.
So I have had at least two caseswhere schools have said none of

(08:42):
the teachers want to be trainedand we can't force them to be
trained.
So because it says we may tradethem doesn't say we have to
train them.
So that's, so that's my nextgoal is to have that changed.

Right.
And then you represent peopleindividually, right?
You're not just doing advocacyin terms of the laws.
You, you represent individualfamilies, right?

Yes, yes, I do.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (09:06):
How does that play out when
obviously a student under theAmericans with Disabilities Act,
a student has the right to bekept safe and to have their
medical situation accommodatedin the school.
Doesn't that?
Involve having an adult whoknows how to administer
epinephrine to them safely.
What do you see as the casesplay out?

Well, so luckily in one of the cases
we went to a hearing with theMassachusetts Department of
Education and they said somebodyhas to.
They mandated the school to havesomebody, because you just
couldn't have only the nurse bethe only one.
So I don't know how the schoolended up figuring out, which

(09:45):
person to be, the designatedtrainee.
so, so luckily we had the DOE tomake that decision, but., it
just shows you that the,there's, like you said, there's
a patchwork of laws and they'renot always even consistent with
one another.
So for instance, the stockepinephrine law, so
Massachusetts specifically saysyou can't lock epinephrine.

(10:05):
So one of the bills that theyproposed would have had the
stock epinephrine locked.
So

What good does it do if we can't get
to it quickly?

Yeah,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (10:17):
For those who aren't familiar, a lot
of people are, but it is veryconfusing, especially to those
of us who aren't legal minded.
Can you give us kind of thebasic rundown of the laws that
cover our rights as people withfood allergies?

so the ADA, which is the Americans
with Disabilities Act coversfood allergies.
Now the there's a caveat It'salso it's done on a case by case
basis So you can't blanketly sayalways going to be covered as a
disability It's still up to youas the person bringing the the
action to prove that it's adisability But so for instance,

(10:53):
there was a case I don't knowmaybe 20 years ago, said food
allergies are not a disabilitybecause If you eat something,
you have an EpiPen, and thenyou're back to the same level as
everyone else, so you're notreally disabled.
So,

Which we know is not always the case,
right?
Sometimes it is.

if you

Right.

then you're able to breathe, so
you're no longer disabled.
So in 2008, the ADA was amended,so it changed that, so you can't
rely on assistive devices andsay, just because I have
something that will make me feelbetter, doesn't mean I don't
have an underlying disability.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2024 (11:30):
I see.

then you saw the case law start to
shift, but it shifted slowly.
so at the beginning, some caseswere still going back to that
old land case and saying, well,it's not really a disability.
Um, but luckily now more andmore courts are recognizing it.
So as a disability, then you'reentitled to certain
accommodations so that you canexperience the school

(11:53):
environment equal to your peers,your non disabled peers.
Parents object to the fact thatyou're labeling your child as
disabled who has food allergies,but it's sort of a legal term.
It carries a lot of weight, butin order to get the
accommodations, you have toprove that they're disabled.
and disabled means you have acondition that affects a major

(12:15):
bodily function.
for instance, with foodallergies, your ability to eat
is affected your ability tobreathe when you're having a
reaction.
So also the 2008 ADA said youhave to consider the condition
when it's active.
So you can say, well, you know,if you're not having an allergic
reaction, then you're breathingisn't affected.

(12:36):
You know, you're not eatingisn't affected, you, so you have
to analyze it.
If you were having a reaction,what parts of your body are
affected?
And then that's how you get intothe disability space.
So, um, That means you'reentitled to certain
accommodations, andaccommodations basically mean an
adjustment from the way thingsare typically done.
So you have a right to haveprograms modified to make it

(13:00):
easier for you to participate.
But what those individualaccommodations are is, is up for
debate.
And so it depends.
It has to be an individualizeddecision what that child needs.
at that time, what the schoolcan provide.
So a lot of times parents think,well, whatever I want, I'm going

(13:20):
to get.
No, it's, it's a negotiationwith the school.
You have to work on it andfigure out what's the best way.
get negotiated.
So that's, that's the ADA.
there's a similar law calledSection 504, which also applies
mostly just to, public schools,but any, facility that gets
federal funding.

(13:40):
So if it's a private school thatparticipates in the federal
lunch program, or if it'ssomehow tied to federal funding,
then that institution has tomake accommodations for the
person with food allergies.
And again, it's, you know, whatare those accommodations and
then there's, there's somelimitations.
So for instance, you can't dosomething that's going to

(14:00):
bankrupt the school.
So, you know, the school canpush back and say, well, it has
to be reasonable.
So you can't say, I want a medflight, you know, helicopter to
come in if my kid's having areaction.
so, if something that's going tobe an undue burden on the
school, or if it fundamentallyis going to affect the school.
The way that they do things,they can push back.

(14:21):
So it's, it's, it's, you have alot of rights, but you have to
advocate for them.

Right.
A lot of us, I think, you know,in this audience and then the
circles that are talking aboutthis, our parents, and we're
talking about kids in schools,but it's important to note that
this is, this is for anyone, notjust kids in schools, that these
apply.

Oh yeah, I've had employees ask for
accommodations who have foodallergies.
Yeah, so it's, it's many moreplaces than just the schools.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (14:50):
Can you talk about some of your
cases?
I'm, as a therapist, I alwaysfeel like I can't talk about
anything, but are you able toshare with us some of the
interesting situations thatyou've worked with, or, that
people have encountered andworked through

can't, most of my cases, unfortunately,
are subject to confidentialityagreements, so I can't talk
about them, but I can talk, ingeneral about the kinds of,
issues that I faced.
one issue was a person who wentinto a pharmacy and asked for
the ingredients in theprescription medication and

(15:23):
wasn't given the ingredients alot of pharmaceutical items have
the prescription medication.
inert ingredients that aren'tdisclosed.
So I had a federal judge saythat that could be a reasonable
accommodation to make, torequire a pharmacy to disclose
all of the ingredients in amedication.
Probably the, my most famouscase is the Panera case with the

(15:47):
peanut butter.
That was a five year old.
The parents ordered a grilledcheese sandwich and it came with
peanut butter inside, hiddeninside.
Then another Panera down thestreet did a similar thing to
another child.
so you know, dealt with thatcase that got a lot of immediate
attention.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (16:08):
How about in terms of momentum, even
if they, you know, have been inother areas, what do you think
have been some big wins for thefood allergy community in terms
of people demonstrating thatthis should be accommodated or
people should, you know, be ableto expect this reasonably?
What do you think is big changesor big wins?

I, in Massachusetts, have gotten
the only food allergy verdictfrom a jury, and we got a
verdict of over 200, 000 withinterest and penalties.
I can talk about that casebecause that was a public case.
So, what was interesting aboutthat case, so it was similar to
the Panera case in that it was achild who ordered a burrito and
the parents said peanut allergyon the form, and it came with

(16:51):
peanut sauce inside the burrito,so the child ate it and had a
reaction, and it was a traumaticthing, and the parents got up on
the stands and cried, explaininghow they had to hold her down
while she was crying to give herthe EpiPen, and the defense
tried every way to, uh, come upwith a defense, and so one of

(17:14):
the things they said first was,well, the child should have
recognized, the five year oldshould have recognized that it
was peanut sauce inside theburrito, which of course was,
was ridiculous.
Then he

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (17:24):
Oh my gosh.

father should have opened the burrito
first and looked at it and sawthat it was peanut.
So, so again, why would you evenbe looking for peanut

Right.

in a burrito when you

Sauce looks like sauce.
You can't tell if it's, yeah.

but the most ridiculous argument
because we brought it on aproducts liability basis.
So basically saying that theseller sold us a defective
product.
sold us something that wasunsafe for the public, meaning
this child who had the foodallergy.
so his argument was the childmisused the burrito.

(17:59):
And so saying, how can youmisuse a burrito?, I mean, she
ate it.
I mean, she didn't like use itas a weapon.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (18:08):
How do you misuse a burrito?

laurel-francoeur--she-her-_1_ (18:10):
I don't know.
He never really explained how hethought she misused the burrito.
Um,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (18:16):
Oh, my gosh.

um, yeah.
so, uh, that was probably thecraziest argument I've ever
heard.
Um, and I

Wow.

brief about it, and, and I think in
the brief I said something like,you know, she, she put it in the
correct orifice, you know, like,I mean, she didn't, like, she,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (18:33):
How do I put this into legal
terminology?

mean, it was just so ridiculous.
Uh, so luckily he, he didn'twin, and the jury didn't buy
that.
And then I, the judge kind offound it was a crazy argument.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (18:47):
Oh, my gosh.
I guess so.
Well, I think you made a goodpoint it's not just the
expenses, the medical expensesthat are incurred or getting
accessibility, having our needsmet, there's a really big
emotional toll and time andtrauma and loss associated with
people having, incidents thatshould not have happened.
can you talk about that and howthat, how you approach that?

Oh yeah, so I always make sure that
when I have a case that Iinclude emotional distress
damages.
For instance, this five yearold, she said to her mother, am
I going to die, you know, andthat's, I mean, that's
heartbreaking.
It's, and it's real trauma.
I think a lot of insurancecompanies that we deal with
don't understand that becausethey have formulas like, oh, if

(19:30):
you break a leg, it's worth, youknow.
Um, and then so they look at themedical records and they say,
well, the, the child was in thehospital for four hours, so they
say, that's nothing.
So it's not worth much becauseit's only four hours of
treatment and then they werecompletely recovered.
And you had to explain, whatthat entailed, so in this case
with the burrito, the parentshad to pull the car over.

(19:54):
The father had to pull, holddown his daughter who's
screaming and give her an EpiPenin the car while she's saying,
Daddy, am I going to die?
And so if you don't account forthat, you're missing the whole
point of, you know, I mean,that's, that's real.
And then you have, you haveafter effects.

(20:15):
with my son, when he had thatreaction in kindergarten, I
hadn't told him that it was, hisallergy was life threatening,
because I thought he was tooyoung to understand.
So we get to the emergency room,he has the, frosting on his
hands.
And the emergency room doctorsays, Oh my gosh, we've got to
wipe that off his hands, youknow, he could have died.

(20:36):
And my five year old said, What?
I could have died?
And he didn't know.

Great.

was robbed the opportunity to
explain it to him we were goingto explain it to him when he was
ready on our terms.
and then that caused himemotional trauma.
And so he didn't want to go backinto the cafeteria after that.
And, so he had to get sometherapy over that.
there's so much emotion involvedin and it's not just four hours
in a hospital.

It's so complex.
And I think you and I are herepreaching to the choir because
everyone listening, I know I canfeel it in my body when you're
talking about your son or thesecases, because all of my times
that it's happened to us in ourhouse are still in there, right?
Still affecting us emotionally.
but how, how,

and we're expected to be doctors
too.
So I've had so many parents sayI didn't give the epi.
I feel, you know, I'm upset, youknow, I'm, I'm I feel bad and
it's like, well, don't feel, youknow, we're not doctors, you

Right,

laurel-francoeur--she-h (21:31):
trained to be doctors.
We don't, you know, we do thebest we can

right.
Nor are you a therapist, right?
So for you to then know how todeal with how, okay, my son
found this out in this way thatwas obviously not ideal.
How do I, and luckily you wereable to seek out some help.
But yeah, there's so much on usthat we're not really equipped
to do or prepared to do, but itjust seems so hard.

beat

Yeah,

because we're, we're all doing the best
we can and it's, it's a bigburden.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (22:02):
it is.
It's a lot.
And that's why it's good that wehave each other to talk through
it, which I'm curious what youthink, um, you know, obviously
on your end, you're working onit through these cases and
establishing case law andprecedent.
But what do you think to get theworld to understand this aspect
of things?
What do we need to do to havepeople get it?

(22:23):
The, the emotional toll, thissocial emotional trauma baggage
that we carry and the value orthe cost of that.
Do you have any insights on, onwhat will change the world's
perception of that?

Well, people have to realize that it
is life threatening.
So when you say allergy, theythink, oh, you're just going to
get it.
You know, some hives, you'regonna sneeze.
Um, and so one of the thingsthat bothers me is, uh, jokes in
the media about allergy.
Um, and I'm thinking youwouldn't joke about somebody in
a wheelchair, but why is it okayto joke about somebody's food

(22:58):
allergies?
Um, and and so that to me showsthat people don't understand it
and they think it's justsomething to be taken lightly.
You know, we're not doing thisto call attention to ourselves
to get special treatment.
You know, we're doing it becausewe're trying to keep our kids
safe and alive.

Absolutely.
Yeah.
I had a scenario, um, thissummer where my kids did a
wonderful camp, awesome staff, atheater camp.
And we were sitting there in theaudience.
And my, older son who has thefood allergies, was nervous
about starting the camp thefollowing week because he had
just had two reactions like itwas summer of chaos and not
things going well and he'ssitting there in the audience

(23:35):
next to me watching his littlebrothers and there was a joke in
a in an elementary school playabout the big bad wolf having
someone waving peanuts in hisface and i need my epi pen and
he's pretending on the stagethat he can't breathe and i'm
sitting there next to my sonwho's about to start the same
camp the following week and it,you know, to watch it unfold.
Then he didn't want to go thenext week.

(23:57):
And he got upset when I tried toteach them how to use his
epinephrine injector, and hedidn't want to wear his medical
or bracelet.
And people just think it's ajoke and don't see how that
unfolds in an actual individualpersons.
life, right?
And that it affects them.

yeah, yeah.
And then they're teaching theelementary school kids that this
is okay to joke about.
Boy,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08- (24:17):
Exactly.

you reprimanded the camp afterwards.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (24:20):
I, I am awaiting an opportunity to
have what I hope will be aproductive conversation because
he, he refused to let me sayanything before he went.
I talked to him about it and Itried to be respectful of that
now that he's getting older.
Um, but I do want to talk tothem about it because my point
is these are great people.
They were amazing staff.
They love these kids like theirown.

(24:40):
It's so obvious.
And yet, yes, here's my sonwalking in there thinking, Oh,
this is a place where.
People think food allergies area joke and they don't take it
seriously and they laugh at itand that I don't think is what
they want to create and yet theyare.

Yeah, and that's where the education
comes in.
You have to let them know

Absolutely.

and

Yes.
Or I

Yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (25:03):
I'm kidding.
Um, so one of the things youknow you're talking about how
the media portrays things.
There's been this kind ofcampaign lately to have Snickers
remove, this commercial, thiscampaign they have right about
that.
It's not flying without thepeanuts.
And I know you have talked andwork on flying with allergies.

(25:25):
So what's your take on on thatspecifically or just in general
with with flying and foodallergies?

Yeah, like that campaign at all.
And so I, peanuts are alwaysassociated with planes.
So it started way back, I thinkit was back in the thirties or
something when, um, a cheapairline, um, said our fares are
as low as peanuts, like ourpeanuts.
And then they, they startedpassing out peanuts as part of

(25:55):
that campaign.
And so that's how peanuts andflying got associated.
So a lot of people think, Oh,I'm flying.
I have to have peanuts.
Um, and it's all because of thisbeautiful ad campaign, you know,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (26:10):
It was effective.

yeah,

Well, and it's true.

I mean, effective.
Yeah, yeah,

Yeah.
Before I had kids with foodallergies, I never ate peanuts,
but I sure did when I would fly.
You know, it's just like

it's just,

part of the culture, right?
Right.

yeah, yeah.
So, again, it's education.
You have to, say that, that,this is dangerous.
And, somebody with a peanutallergy shouldn't be sitting
next to somebody who's eatingpeanuts.
there was one study that showed,I think, I might be getting the
figures wrong, but something, if20 people open their peanuts
simultaneously on a plane, therewould be enough peanut residue

(26:44):
to cause a reaction.
So,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (26:49):
But people don't believe that that's
a possibility, right?
Mm-Hmm.

yeah, but, it's not something that's
happening all the time though.
To put it in perspective.
So I do a lecture about flyingwith fruit allergies and I have
a slide that shows a snapshotuh, the United States and how
many planes are in the air.
At one time and it's thousands

Mm-Hmm.
Mm-Hmm.

the data that's showing that there's
been reactions on planes.
It's minuscule.
I want people to understand thateven though it's a real risk and
it's, you know, it can bedangerous, you know, don't,
don't let it stop you fromflying.
Because there's so many peopleflying with allergies and as
long as you come prepared, youbring your EpiPens, you wipe

(27:31):
everything down, you don't eatthe food that's served.
by the plane, bring your ownfood.

Yeah.
And I think some, there is thatconcern about airborne or
contact reactions, but a lot ofpeople also, that's the concern.
How do I eat safely on the planeif I'm on a longer flight?
And people aren't always allowedto bring food on or, or don't
know how to navigate that.
So what are, what are people'srights regarding that?
I imagine that's reallycomplicated legally.

Well, you do have a right to preboard
to wipe down the seat.
So we do have a decision fromthe Department of Transportation
that says that people with foodallergies are considered a
disability and do have a rightto preboard like anyone else who
has a disability.
So that's been very, veryhelpful.

(28:18):
what I've been seeing lately isthat people who self identify as
having a peanut allergy or someother allergy, if the pilot gets
word of it, will say, well, Ithink you're too dangerous to
fly.
So you can't fly on this flightjust because you have a peanut
allergy.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (28:36):
And they can do that.

people have been turned away.
So this is, this is, this is mynext battle.

Okay.

So I do,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (28:44):
us know.

I do have a.
I do have a case where somebodywas, denied boarding.
So the pilot can't, has to havea basis for his decision.
If so, the pilot has theultimate decision.
If he really thinks the flightis unsafe, then he can do
whatever he wants or she can dowhatever, whatever they want
sure the flight is safe, butthey can't do it arbitrarily and
they can't do it based onstereotypes.

(29:06):
So they can't say just becauseyou have a peanut allergy, you
can't fly.
But it's happening,unfortunately.
So.
So

coming soon.
You're working on it.

That's my next battle.
I've got a

Okay.

that.

Well, thank you for that work.
And thank you for clarifying.
I do think it's important to putit in perspective what you're
saying about, yes, we have theserights and take the steps to
keep yourself safe, but alsodon't blow out of proportion,
right?
The likelihood of some, some ofthese things happening that
we're afraid of with, airbornereactions and those things being
very, very unlikely.

(29:41):
Statistically.

yeah, it is.
It is a balance, I always saythat.
So there are some upsides.
So, for instance, my son is now24 he's lived with this his
whole life, and I think it'smade him empathetic.
So he understands other peoplewho struggle.
So I think it's given him a lotof on people are struggling.
I also think it makes him veryresponsible.

(30:05):
So he's very cautious about whathe eats.
And so I think there are somegood sides to raising a child
with food allergies.
It's not all doom and gloom.
now he's at the stage where he'sdrinking alcohol though.
So that's bothersome.

Yeah, that's a tough one to navigate.
I'm, my son's only 13, but wetalk about that and how it
changes your decision makingand, and, you know, letting your
guard down.
How, do you want to talk moreabout what kind of how you're
trying to guide him through thatphase of life or?

Well, you're telling him that he has
to have his wits about him.
He can't get to the point wherehe's so drunk that he doesn't
know what he's doing and eating.
And, um, also not all alcohol islabeled for the top nine
allergens.
So you have to be careful ofwhat you're, what you're
drinking.

Right.
And is that, there are differentlab, food labeling laws for
alcohol than there are for food.
Is that why?
Right.

Yes.
And I think there's a bill tochange that brewing right now,
brewing, uh, right now.
But, um, I,

That would be good.

laurel-francoeur--she- (31:13):
movement to change that.
Yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (31:16):
All right, good.
And I'm glad you mentioned thatbecause I like, I like to ask
everyone who's on the show aboutwhat, what are the pluses, you
know, as a reminder, everyonehas challenges in life.
This is ours.
And challenges in life are howwe grow and become who we are.
So I like that perspective fromyou as a, Parent of of an adult
now and seeing kind of how he'sturned out the beginning of how

(31:36):
he's turned out, right?

Yeah.
Yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (31:40):
And you mentioned to me before a
little bit about having when hewas younger gotten your son
involved in some of the advocacywork That you were doing.
Do you want to share about that?
Mm

Yeah.
So right around the time when hehad his reaction in kindergarten
fan, which was the predecessorto fair.

hmm.

and Anaphylaxis Network did a, March
to Congress.
And so, they arranged for, um,the families and children to
speak to their legislators.
At that time, they were debatinghaving the, uh, CDC guidelines
on food allergies, because atthat point there were no
national guidelines about foodallergies.
this was a bill that wasintroduced to have the CDC come

(32:19):
up with these guidelines.
So my son, I sat down with himand we, he wrote a little speech
and he put a suit on and he tothe Capitol and he met our
Congress people.
Um, he met Nancy Pelosi.
Yeah, yeah,

cool.

Um, yes, and he met like at that
point in time, it was, uh,Representative Kaufman, who's
now a senator, Kaufman.
Um, and, uh, he gave his histalk about why it's important to
understand food allergies.
And I'm not sure how much of ithe remembers.
You could see it was so young.

(32:59):
but I thought it was importantthat he, you know, that he
participate and advocate forhimself.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2024 (33:08):
I think it is too.
Even if he doesn't remember thedetails, the feeling and the
confidence and concept of thisis important and important
people are listening and justthe idea of that I think sticks
with us even when we don't mayberemember all the details.

Yeah,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (33:22):
So I'm curious, I'm gonna, I'm
gonna throw out the big onethat's out there right now, and
if you can't talk about it ordon't want to talk about it,
it's okay, but this businessthat is going on with Disney and
this, this physician who diedthere and her husband suing
Disney and them saying, I'll letyou explain it, but what is your
take?
Everyone's kind of really, um,having big reactions to this.

(33:43):
As it's unfolding,

it's ridiculous.
It's absolutely ridiculous.
Um, and I, I want to follow thisup to see what the case, what
the judge does.
I think the attorneys actually,I think Disney changed its
pleading now and is, is comingback on that because of all the
backlash.
But so what they were trying tosay, and I think it's a, it's,
not a good argument was thatbecause he signed up for Disney,

(34:09):
his family signed up for Disneyplus,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (34:11):
The spouse of the woman who passed
away, right?

and there's all these terms and
conditions when you sign thesethings, you know, nobody ever
reads them.
You just say you click.
I agree and go on.
So one of those terms said thatany dispute you have with Disney
has to go to arbitration andcan't be heard in a court.
And arbitration is a privateResolution process usually paid

(34:37):
by the defendant.
So it's usually one sided.
And so, and then, so I have acolleague who is being forced
into arbitration on anothercase, totally unrelated to food
allergies, he said they'reasking for the plaintiff to have
20, 000 deposit.
to start the arbitration.
So, it's a very, so it'sarbitration is not a good thing

(34:59):
for plaintiffs.
It's expensive, it's biasedusually.
So Disney was trying to say,instead of going to a court
where you're going to get a fairopinion, you are agreed by
signing this and the servicethat you, any dispute with
Disney will be arbitrated.
So that means we get to pick whohears it and it'll all be done

(35:20):
privately.
And

Just because he signed up for Disney
Plus way before this everhappened, right?
Nothing to do with the actual

do

squadcaster-1gff_3_08 (35:29):
incident.

right, and it's nothing to do with the
personal injury either.
I mean, so, know, so with Disneyif you were going to sue them,
it would be maybe your powerwent out or you didn't get a
good signal or something.
You're not, you know, is a

Right,

injury.
It's totally, totally irrelevantto, to that

right.
Right, and unfortunately, Imean, not to lose the
seriousness of this.
It's a, it's a death.
This woman.
passed away from an allergicreaction.
It's the gravity of that versusthat response that people are
feeling is so dismissive, um, isjust shocking to all of us, I
think.

Oh, yeah, yeah.
And as I said, I think they'refeeling the backlash because
they're withdrawing thatargument, which they should.

Yeah, so, and I know you can't predict
where it will go, but you know,the other factor of this that
people are discussing is thatthe restaurant that she ate in
is actually part of DisneySprings, not the park, but yet
Disney Springs is owned byDisney.
So do you have a take on whetherthen that does fall back on
Disney or do you think there'sany legitimacy here to someone

(36:34):
having responsibility for thiswoman passing away?

You'd have to see what the agreement
was between the restaurant andDisney.

Okay.

it was really going to come down to
that.
Whether, you know, if, if Disneyhas some control over that
restaurant, if they neededDisney's permission to operate
there, it's really going to comedown to, I think a contractual
as to how much control Disneyhad over the restaurant.
Cause if it was a trulyindependent restaurant and

(37:04):
nothing to do with Disney or,and just, but just happened to
be located, you know, There, itmight, Disney might not have
liability, but you'd have to seehow the, how it's structured.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (37:15):
I'm actually surprised the lawyers
didn't focus on that argumentrather than going to that crazy
arbitration clause hidden in theDisney plus.
Um, so, so they're going to haveto look and they'd have to look
if they have a franchiseagreement or if they have some
kind of whatever agreement theyhave, um, they'd have to look
and see.
to determine who wasresponsible.

Definitely.
Well, I think that what I'mtrying to take away from this is
hopefully what you said that theway that they're responding is
reflecting upon the company andthe business and that hopefully
that means we have some sway asa community in terms of how
businesses and companies aretreating us and that that should
matter.
You know, I hope they're takingnotice that we have some

(37:58):
influence here and, I want, Iwant that to mean something, but

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (38:02):
Yeah, absolutely.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2024 (38:03):
a case like this.
Well, it'll be interesting towatch it unfold, but you know,
obviously this is the worst casescenario I was talking about
when there are deaths.
Um, and I'm just curious if youcan comment on that a little
bit, not specifically to thisDisney case, but just in
general, when, whenunfortunately they they're rare,
but they do happen, these foodallergy deaths.
The legal perspective on thatand what your take is.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-2 (38:27):
usually in cases where people have a
reaction at a restaurant orsimilar liability is usually
pretty clear.
So they go in, they say, I havean allergy.
The restaurant acknowledges.
Yes, I know you have an allergy.
You say, I need to be servedfood.
That's free of my allergens.
They agree to do that.
And then they don't.

(38:48):
In some cases, likeMassachusetts, it's called
strict liability, which meansthe restaurant is liable per se
for what they serve.
And if they serve somethingunsafe, they're liable for that.
So usually these cases aren't anissue of, is the restaurant
liable?
Because almost always therestaurant is.

(39:08):
If they've understood that therewas an allergy and served them
something that had the allergen.
The fault is on them.
So the next step is what arewhat we call the damages.
How much is that worth?
And, um, yeah, and, and the, thedeaths are, are horrible.
And, and I don't even know anyamount of money can ever bring

(39:30):
back a person or a child.
And, and, um, so that that's,it's, it's sad.
Uh,

It's so tough.
And I think in those cases, thepoint is, you know, often to
bring the case to light so thatwe can protect other people so
that we can try to prevent thatfrom happening in the future.
but what, what are our rights interms of going to a restaurant
and feeling like we can eatsafely there?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (39:55):
Well, so the question always comes up.
If I go to a restaurant, do theyhave to make me an allergen free
meal if I go in?
And I, so we talked about placeshave to accommodate.
Um, but the question is forrestaurants.
So if you look at, um, what theDOJ, the Department of Justice

(40:15):
who interprets the ADAregulations has said, is that if
a restaurant doesn't typicallyalter their menu for other
conditions, then they don't haveto serve you an allergen free
meal.
So if it's a restaurant thatnever makes accommodations for
anything, they could say, sorry,we're not going to give you.

(40:36):
and you have no rights therebecause they're under no
obligation to do that.
the question then becomes, youknow, what rights, other rights
do you have?
So for instance, there was aMassachusetts, ice cream store
that had a sign outside thatsaid food allergies.
Don't come in.

Yeah.
We've

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (40:56):
So,

here too,

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (40:58):
yeah, so the, so the question is,
okay, some people say, well,that's great.
Now, I know that it's an unsafeplace and I'll stay away, um,
but in my opinion, that'sdiscriminatory.
So you may not have to, you cango into the ice cream store and
there may not be any ice creamthat's free of nuts and that's
okay, but I don't think they cantell you, you can't go in.

(41:19):
I think that's where thediscrimination comes in to say
we don't even want you in therestaurant.
Now, bringing in outside food isa whole other issue, whether you
can bring in outside food andthis.
Not, we have one case, theWilliamsburg case, um, that the
judge said it could be areasonable accommodation to
allow somebody to bring in, butit was very fact specific, so we
don't know, um, you know, in allcases, whether you'll be allowed

(41:44):
to bring in, an argument isalways the, the food code.
People say, well, we can't haveoutside food because of the food
code.
Which is usually not a goodargument, because the food code
regulates what the restaurantserves, not what you bring into
the restaurant.

Right,

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (41:59):
Um, yeah, so that's kind of
unsettled right now,

Okay.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (42:04):
you can bring it.
But I've heard of, you know,people bringing in food.
So I have heard of a person whowent to a wedding and brought in
their own food and was told toeat it in the basement.
Of the venue and couldn'tparticipate in the wedding.
Um,

Jeez.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (42:19):
and I, I, um, I think that's
discriminatory, you know, Imean, you know, uh, yeah, so,
yeah,

Yeah, we have a long way to go, I
think, is a good

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (42:35):
we do, we do.

What do you see as the next, you
know, what's important next, ifthere are one or two things that
you think really, should betackled legally in terms of
establishing something orchanging something?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2024 (42:48):
I think, yeah, about, about the
restaurants, Making it so thatmaybe they do have to
accommodate more and, you know,that the thing about, um,
bringing in food.
Um, there's another issue.
So they're now having these,what are called, disability, I
think, and I've forgotten theterminology, but disability
cards.
I don't know if you've seenthat.
So Disney now has these andother, uh, I think six, I don't

(43:10):
know, sort of six flags or, butso parks.
Universal.
Yeah.
So what parks are saying is ifyou have a disability, you can
go on to this website becausewhat they were afraid of is
people feigning having adisability to cut lines.
So, what they said is you go onto this website, and you
disclose your disability to athird party.

(43:33):
So it's not even, you know,Disney or Universal.
It's a third party.
So you don't know where thisinformation is going.
Upload your medical records.
Upload permission for you to,for them to talk to your doctor.
And then they determine whetheryou have a disability.
And if you do, you get the card.
And the card has a QR code wherepeople can scan it and then see

(43:54):
about your disability.
So they put food allergies intothat mix.
So Universal would be basicallysaying, you'd have to show us
this card that you really dohave a food allergy before we're
going to make any accommodationsfor you.
And.
To me, that's just wrong on somany ways.
I mean, you shouldn't have todisclose your disability.

(44:17):
You shouldn't have to give yourmedical records to a third
party.
And you don't know where they'regoing.
You don't know who's making thedetermination as to whether
that's good enoughdocumentation, and then they can
talk to your doctor.
so this looks like it's, it'sthe trend now to require anybody
who asked for accommodations toget one of these cards.
And, um, I think that's, I thinkit's wrong.

Yeah, I agree.
It seems like an invasion and,and the burden on us to Disclose
our private health information,which there are so many laws to
protect, and then this is theopposite of that.
Mm

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22 (44:52):
Right, so if you have a service dog,
the ADA specifically says youdon't have to give the reason
why you have a service dog.
You don't have to disclose whatcondition you have that makes
you have the dog.
But in this scenario, you wouldhave to, because you'd have to
upload your medical records.
So even if you wanted to bringin a service dog, you'd have to
go through this process.
Which is totally wrong.

Yeah.
And that brings up a good pointthat I always often think just
in terms of socially what weseem to accept as valid and what
we don't.
And I, obviously service animalsare wonderful and there's all
this debate about serviceanimals versus emotional support
animals, and I'm not commentingon that.
But in general, the public seemsvery supportive, right, of
anyone who needs an animal tosupport them in some way.

(45:36):
And yet, I find at least.
It's not the same reaction ofpeople who have food allergies
and want an accommodation.
And I just don't understandthat.
It just seems like it, it kindof goes, I guess that's the
case, right?
The law flows along withwhatever the society deems
important or valid at that pointin time.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (45:55):
But there's also the issue of, so
I've had an issue of people whohave dog allergies wanting to
fly, and then there's a servicedog on the flight.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (46:06):
Mm hmm.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (46:07):
And so who wins?
So you have two disabilitiesnow.
You have somebody who has a, youknow, a severe allergy to
dander,

Right.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (46:15):
you have somebody who has a
disability who needs the dog.
Who wins?
And usually the dog wins.
Um, but so then that's, sothat's a whole nother issue.
What if you have twodisabilities clashing, you know,
both have equal rights, butthey're opposite from each
other.
Um, so, or also the, yeah, the,in the instance where they'll

(46:35):
say, well, this child, Well, canonly eat peanut butter, you
know, maybe the child needs to,a certain child needs to eat all
the time for their condition,but then that's going to affect
the person with food allergies.
So, um, that hasn't really beenexplored yet.
So,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (46:52):
And it's tricky and I don't mean to,
you know, discount anyone andwhat they need, but I feel like
we don't have this perspectiveof how do we make this work for
everybody?
Like, everybody deserves to besafe, not which one of these
wins, right?
Um, or whose, whose need is moresevere or, or, or more serious
It's

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2 (47:09):
and, and, and there isn't a
constitutional right to peanutbutter.

Right.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2024 (47:14):
I know a lot of people say, well,
my kid has to eat the peanutbutter and you can't take it
away from me.
You can't take it away.
So there was one Michigan casewhere a judge said, no, they can
at school.
If the school determines thathaving peanut butter in the
classroom is unsafe.
For a child with a disability,then they can absolutely tell
you not to bring it in.
And it's not a property right.

(47:35):
It's not a constitutional right.
It's merely keeping somebodysafe because they have a
disability.
Um, so,

it's so tricky.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (47:45):
but yeah, it's hard because I think,
and that's, I think where someof the backlash comes in because
we're always sort of askingother people to look out for us.
And I think that's kind of maybewhere the resentment comes in.
Um, you know, So we're not onlyjust you're avoiding it, but
you're asking me to avoid it,you know, and I think that's
where the education again has tocome in.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2024 (48:07):
I agree.
And I think if people understoodthe seriousness of it, they
would have a little bit morecompassion, but I still think
there's, like you said, there'sthis perception that it's a
joke.
It's a laughable thing.
We have that picture as if it'scomical, not a life threatening,
genuinely dangerous thing.
I think if more peopleunderstood the severity, I would
like to think that they would bemore compassionate in terms of,

(48:28):
of helping.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (48:29):
And then a lot of times, so you'll
see in comment sections, peoplewill say, well, if you're that
allergic, don't go out, youknow, don't go to the
restaurant, don't go to theamusement park, but that's not
realistic either.
I mean, we shouldn't have tolive.
In a bubble and not participatelike every other human being
does,

Right.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (48:47):
know, um, so yes, we are extra careful
and we do different things, butit doesn't mean we have to just
sit at home and can our, ourvegetables like my pediatrician
wanted me to do, you know, Imean, we have to live in the
world and we have a right tolive in the world,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (49:03):
to.
Exactly.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (49:05):
yeah, and participate and enjoy things
and, you know, so, um, but youdo get a lot of that, well, then
if you're that severe, don't flyor don't, you know, Go to a
restaurant.

Yeah.
I love that you said that.
We have a right to participatein the world and live a full
life and not just have to hideout, in order to protect
ourselves.
That's, that's our right.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2 (49:26):
Yes.
Yeah.
And at school, of course, youhave, you know, you have a right
to a free education,

Right.
Right.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (49:33):
so you can't say, well, just stay
home because they're eatingpeanut butter in the cafeteria
and don't get an education.
I mean, that's not.
You know, that's not acceptableat all.
So there has to be a way to makeit work.
And I think education is thekey.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2024 (49:47):
I agree.
What else haven't we talkedabout that you wanted to touch
on or that you think isimportant to mention?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (49:54):
It'll take time because, you know, the
law really hasn't caught up insome ways to this growing need.
So it'll take time, but we'llget there.

What's the best way for people to
participate or contribute tothat movement in terms of legal
advocacy?
What can we do who aren't inyour shoes?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (50:13):
So there's a lot of nonprofits that
do a lot of advocacy work.
So there's FAIR, there's AFA,the Asthma and Allergy
Foundation of America.
there's FACT, F A A C T, there'salso ANMA, Allergy and Asthma
Network.
And they'll have things wherethey'll send blurbs to people
about current laws that are So,yeah.

(50:33):
Being considered and sayingright to your congressman so for
instance, and my has a day atCapitol Hill.
So I did that this past year.
So we went to Capitol Hill.
so there's ways you canparticipate.
Even though you're not a lawyer,but you can still have, make
your voice heard.
There are ways to do it.
Petitions.
A lot of people, do onlinepetitions.

(50:54):
Those seem to have a lot ofchange.
org type petitions.
Another issue also is, um,Sesame.
I don't know if you've, we weretalking about recent issues, how
Sesame has been added as theninth allergen,

Yes.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08- (51:07):
bakeries are adding it to products.
that never had it before.
So it's making it so thatthere's virtually nothing a
person who has a sesame allergycan eat, even though it may not
contain sesame.
I'm a member of the Council ofFood Protection, which is a
group that advises the FDA.
And so, I brought up this issuewith sesame.
And so they wrote a letter tothe FDA explaining this problem

(51:31):
and saying that they need todeal with it.
So the FDA now is.
is trying to crack down.
But the problem is it's legalfor them to add the sesame.
There's no, it's not against thelaw, but it's against the spirit
of the law by adding sesame.

Right.
And for

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (51:46):
So

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (51:47):
the spirit of the law is to add
sesame to the top nine becauseit's so prevalent, and I, I, we
deal with sesame allergy in myhouse, so yes, I've been among
those infuriated I assume it'smoney saving, right?
To avoid all of the precautionsthat they would need to do to
safely have a product thatdoesn't have the sesame in it.
They just added the sesame onpurpose to sidestep the spirit

(52:07):
of this law,

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (52:08):
yeah, and what I was told is that it
comes down to cleaning the waythat the machines handle Bakery
items that have sesame and thatsesame is so small that they
can't guarantee that they cantotally clean the machine.
So there's going to be residue.
And then if it turns out thatthat's enough residue that it

(52:29):
has to be declared as anallergen and they don't, then
they're in trouble.
Let's say that was, if, ifthat's the solution everybody
took, then there'd be nothinganybody could eat.
I know the FDA is also lookinginto the precautionary labels.
for food allergies, may containbecause there's no regulation
about those at all.

Yes, so, and can you speak about
that?
Because a lot of people I findstill don't understand that may
contain shared facility.
Those are not legally required,right?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (52:57):
No, and there's no legal mission.
There's no legal definition.
So what does made in a facilitymean?
There's no standard definition.
One company could call itsomething or some or some
company call something.
I mean, there's just noregulation.
I think there was a study thatshowed something like up to 20
percent of foods listed as asmay contain did actually contain

(53:21):
the allergen in it.
if you're going to use a maycontain state, it has to mean
something and you can't justslap it on there and to say,
well, I don't want to be sued.
So I'm just going to sayeverything may contain.

right.
And is that another topic thenthat the council that you're a
member of is advising the FDA?
Is there any movement ormomentum building in that area
or is that not quite?
In the works.
Yeah.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2024 (53:44):
I think it's I think it's in the
works.
Yeah.

Yeah.
I think back to what I wassaying before the, what I try to
look for silver linings.
I think the plus side of this,is how we vote with our dollars
and how much momentum thecompanies who are doing really
good labeling and really clearabout their practices are, are
thriving because we trust them.
And if we trust them, we're allon board or as a community,

(54:08):
right.
In terms of,

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (54:09):
Oh, yeah, we were the most loyal
customers they'll ever get, alot of people like me tip extra
when you go out because yourealize what they're going
through.
So, you know, we, we are goodcustomers.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (54:22):
We are.
Absolutely.
Sometimes I feel helpless about,you know, the way that things
are and not being able to changeit.
I always come back to that, um,idea of I can vote with my
dollar, right?
If I can't, if I can't influencethe law directly or make it
happen quickly enough, then Ican, I can vote with my dollar.
We have to have faith that thelegal process works slowly, but

(54:43):
there is change, the change hasbeen slowly moving in the right
direction for years.
And it's so good to know thereare people like you that are
working to make that happen andkeep it, keep it happening.
Thank

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (54:54):
so going back to your daughter, so
for a restaurant, if they don'tserve, they decide we're not
going to serve you because youhave a food allergy.
Well, now they haven't justmissed out on your business.
They've missed out on yourfamily's business.
And then you tell a friend andthey tell a friend.
So the restaurant may think,well, we're just, we're avoiding
one issue because we're justsaying, okay, you can't eat

(55:15):
here, but now you've just lostinstead of one customer, you
could have lost 30, 40customers.
So it really pays to payattention to us.

Yeah.
Yeah.
And I wish, I mean, maybe theyknow, you know, we have, we have
our little networks where wesay, where can I go to eat with
this?
And if there's someone who'sdoing it well, they are going to
be known about.
And if someone does it poorly,they are also going to be, uh,
we're just going to spreadquickly among us because we're a
tight knit crew.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (55:41):
There used to be a website, I don't
know if it's still, OperationalAllergy Eats.

Yes.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (55:46):
so it was done by Paul Antico,
who's a friend of mine here inMassachusetts.
I don't know if he's stillmaintaining it, but it was sort
of like a Yelp for, uh,restaurants in regards to food
allergies.
So,

believe it is.
And I think there are a coupleof spinoffs and I know we have a
local, a little, uh, some localresources in our area, which is
great because yeah, we want togive our money to the people who
are to help us.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (56:11):
sure, sure.
Speaking of wanting to give ourmoney to the people who are out
there working hard to try tohelp us.
You have several books that wecan use as resources to help us
when we're flying or tounderstand our rights.
I'd love for you to tell us moreabout those.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (56:28):
One thing I tell people a, a trick I
have about, um, about airlinesis people will say, which
airline is better for foodallergies?
Is there one that's better thananother?
So when people complain aboutbeing mistreated for food
allergies or allergies on aflight, they file reports with
the Department ofTransportation.

(56:49):
And most of the time, thosereports just get filed and don't
get answered.
They just, because they're justoverwhelmed.
But, the, the website for theDepartment of Transportation
keeps track of the complaints.
The number of complaints.
So, they'll have a column.
So you, for every, everyairline.
So you can look and say, oh,American Airlines this month got

(57:11):
10 allergy complaints.
Delta this month got 3 allergycomplaints.
United this month got.
You know, a hundred allergycomplaints, and then just using
that, you could say, okay, maybeI want to pick the airline that
has the fewest allergycomplaints.
Um, I mean, it's not, it's not,you know, it's not scientific.

(57:33):
It's not guaranteed because alot of people have problems and
don't write about it.
But, um, but that I think is agood way to look at, cause you
can kind of get a, Oh, if oneairline is making, Getting more
complaints than another.
You probably don't want to flythat airline.

absolutely.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (57:48):
Yeah.
So, the food allergy flyingbook, I wrote because I was just
doing research for myself aboutflying.
And I thought this is whatpeople should know.
so for instance, they shouldknow that a lot of things are
tied to the, the airlineAppropriations Act.
So for instance, airlines areprohibited from making,

(58:09):
regulations about peanuts.
Because Way back a few, severalyears ago, a congressman from
Georgia tied, airline funding topeanuts and said, if an airline
tries to make buffer zones orban peanuts or to make other

(58:30):
regulations about peanuts, thenthey'll lose their funding.
That was was enacted.
And then in 2010, I believe itwas the F.
The I mean, the D.
O.
T.
Was finding that there was risein complaints about peanut
allergy, so they proposed, uh,proposed rulings and they put it
out to the public and had thepublic comment and said, what do

(58:51):
you, what would you think abouta ban on peanuts?
What would you think about abuffer zone on peanuts?
What would you think about this?
And immediately the sameCongress people came back and
said, wait a minute.
Uh, remember we have this,you'll, you'll lose your
funding, uh, DOT if you require,uh, if you require them to make

(59:12):
these.
So.
Immediately, the O.
T.
pulled down the questionnaire.
So, that's something that peopledon't understand is that, you
know,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (59:22):
was the spirit of that in the first
place of connecting the fundingto not

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22 (59:27):
peanut farmers

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (59:29):
Oh, they have a big

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (59:30):
and protecting

them.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-2 (59:34):
peanuts on the planes.

squadcaster-1gff_3 (59:36):
Interesting.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (59:38):
The ADA doesn't apply on flights.
There's a separate,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (59:41):
Oh.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08- (59:42):
separate law called the Air Carrier
Access Act, which does requireairlines to accommodate for
disabilities and food allergies,but you can't sue.
So,

They have certain protections from
the law in the spirit ofproviding a service that the
public needs.
Is that the kind of

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (59:59):
so when Congress wrote the law,
they didn't provide for aprivate remedy.
So a lot of courts have said,because Congress didn't
specifically say private peoplehave a right to sue, then we're
going to say you don't have aright to sue, because Congress
didn't say that.
So there was an airline bill, Idon't know, maybe three, four,

(01:00:19):
five years ago, where they weregoing to, that was one of the
things they were going tochange.
To have Congress actually add inthere that you can sue under the
Air Carrier Access Act, but itdidn't, it didn't go anywhere.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:00:30):
Okay.
Interesting.
So what else then in your book,we're talking about, your Flying
with Food Allergies book.
What else, will people learnabout in there that's helpful if
they want to check that bookout?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (01:00:43):
So I have tips about, flying with
food allergies.
I have, uh, studies.
So for instance, there was astudy, very small study, but it
showed that something like 60,and again, I, because I don't
have the data in front of me, Imay be misquoting the numbers,
but something like 60 percent ofall airline trays have MRSA on
them.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2 (01:01:04):
Wow.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:01:05):
Yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2024 (01:01:06):
I didn't want to know, Laurel.
Thank you.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:01:08):
Yeah, so it shows you the importance
of wiping down.
So even if you don't have foodallergies, I mean, you may want
to wipe everything down beforeyou sit down

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (01:01:21):
Oh

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-2 (01:01:21):
because you don't know what's there.
Yeah,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-2 (01:01:24):
Wow.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:01:25):
yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (01:01:26):
So, and you don't only have that.
You wrote a preschool allergyhandbook

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (01:01:30):
so it was written by me and, Gina
Manette Lee, who is an allergymom and special ed teacher.
And, she's done an awful lot ofwork in the food allergy space.
I think she was even advocatingbefore I was.
And so she wrote the perspectivefrom a teacher's perspective.
And then I wrote about the legalperspective.
And so she and I were goingaround and giving, um, talks,

(01:01:52):
you know, to preschools.
We were educating preschoolstoo, about what are best
practices.
So this is sort of like ahandbook for a preschool.
to give them ideas on how tokeep kids safe, how to make an
action plan, you know, things torealize that infants don't have
the right terminology todescribe allergic reaction.

(01:02:12):
So they might say somethinglike, uh, you know, there's a
frog in my throat or something,and to realize that that It
might be indicating they'rehaving a reaction,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (01:02:21):
Mm hmm.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-2 (01:02:22):
because we felt that there was no
guidance for preschools.
So a lot of the guidance thathad come out was for elementary
schools and high, but therewasn't anything at that time for
preschool.
So we said, we want to fix that.
So we wrote this book together.

squadcaster-1gff_3_0 (01:02:35):
Wonderful.
Thank you.
Yeah.
And it's it's I assume it's alsodifferent because preschools
aren't their private entities,right?
Not part of the public schoolsystem education

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (01:02:43):
no, so there's still, they're
usually, unless they'rereligious, they're still subject
to ADA.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:02:49):
Okay,

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (01:02:50):
And some of them get funding.
So some of them, just made inhead start or federal lunch
program.
So sometimes they're under 504.
But the issue becomes you're notguaranteed a preschool education
like you are an elementaryschool education.
So that's where the differencecomes in.
So, um, in schools under 504, solike an elementary school,

(01:03:12):
there's what's called childfind.
So the schools have anaffirmative obligation to find
any child that they think.
may need accommodations andreach out to them and evaluate
them to see whetheraccommodations would be
appropriate.
So that's something that the lawimposes on public schools like
elementary, middle school, highschool, because it's mandatory.

(01:03:33):
You're guaranteed.
what's called FAPE, a free andappropriate public education.
You're not guaranteed apreschool education, and you're
not guaranteed a collegeeducation.
So even though they still haveto accommodate, the rules for
accommodating switches in thosecases because, so for instance
in college, Because you're notguaranteed a college grad, uh,

(01:03:55):
college education like you are,you know, uh, uh, then, um, so
you have, so they make thecollege students self identify.
So child find goes away incollege.
So, The college student then hasto self identify about the
allergy and, and get theaccommodations, whereas in
otherwise, before that, it's theschool's responsibility.

(01:04:17):
So with preschools, it's sort ofthe same thing because you're
not guaranteed a free andappropriate Preschool education.
There's the same laws, butthey're applied differently.
So that's why we wanted to writethe book.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-2 (01:04:30):
There's just so many facets of it that I
think the average person doesn'trealize of what goes into how
things play out.
But while we're on the topic.
And if you have time, I feellike I could talk to you for
hours and hours.
But is there anything else youwant to add about the aspect
with college?
Because I know a lot of peoplewho are going into that.
And some schools are known forbeing great.
And I've had some People havereally bad experiences with that

(01:04:52):
and not be clear on what theirrights are when they make that
transition.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:04:56):
Yeah, I'm finding colleges are all
over the map.
I've represented some people whohave had real problems.
Sometimes it's hard to get thoseproblems resolved again because
you don't have the same exactrights as you do.
Um, so, for instance, my sonwent to Clark University, which
is a small university.
One of the things that we likedabout it is it had one

(01:05:18):
cafeteria.
So he got to know the cafeteriastaff.
They got to know him.
they had an allergen freesection of the cafeteria.
he said usually it was one ortwo meals that were pretty bland
and not, not interesting.
But they did have that.
And then also every dorm had akitchen.
So those were things that thatwe looked for, and we felt more

(01:05:42):
comfortable there as opposed toa larger school that might have
several cafeterias and may nothave access to a kitchen, And
then, another thing.
So with colleges that the kidsare at 18 or than adults.
So it's up to them to talk aboutthe accommodations, not the
parent.
So you've lost your right now totalk about, so it's really up to

(01:06:04):
the child.
What I tell parents too is, soif you're at a college, go to
the hospital near the collegeand sign a release form so that
the hospital can talk to theparent.
Because if your child has anallergic reaction and gets
admitted to the hospital and youdon't know about it, The
hospital can't call you as aparent unless they have written

(01:06:25):
permission.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22 (01:06:27):
That's right.
So they'll keep that on file.
They'll, they'll create a fileand keep that.
That's a brilliant idea becauseyes, so many with so many
factors, parents find that whentheir kids are off, like, Oh,
they can't speak to me without arelease now that the

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:06:41):
Yeah,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (01:06:42):
not a child.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-202 (01:06:43):
so be proactive and do that ahead
of time, have the child sign it,and then that way, if God forbid
they have to go to the hospital,the hospital's not forbidden
from, I mean, now the kid couldsay in the hospital, yes, I give
you permission, but if they'renot able to speak, um, then the
parent would have no idea.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:07:01):
Great point.
Thank you for sharing that.
I want to mention too, you're,you're, you have three books,
right?
The other one is how to advocatefor your food, allergic child.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:07:10):
Yeah, that's just basically how tips
on dealing with your schooldistrict.
I wrote that a long time ago, soI might want to update it
because I think a lot haschanged.
I mean, I wrote that probablyin, I don't know, 2007, 2008.
So I probably should update thatbecause I think a lot has
changed.
But yeah, just, just tips forhow to advocate and, I think the

(01:07:32):
biggest thing that I tellparents is that, you're there
again to educate the schoolabout your child.
So you're not there to fightwith them.
You're not there to, cause aproblem.
You're there to basicallyeducate them this is what my
child needs and let me explainwhy they need this.
Um, and I think if you can thinkabout what the reason the school

(01:07:53):
is giving for why they're doinga certain thing and have a
counter for that to explain, so,you're not going in there and
you're going to fight theschool.
I'm going to, you're going inthere.
I'm going to work with you andexplain why your reasoning is
wrong.
if you approach it as, I'mteaching them and telling them
why this is important, that goesoff a lot better than demanding

(01:08:14):
and saying, these are my rightsand I deserve this and that.
I think it goes over better.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:08:19):
Great point.
I agree.
And I have found that in, inmany cases that, we want our
kids to be safe or we wantourselves to be safe.
and it shouldn't fall on us, butit does if we can have
conversations in a way thatopens the line of communication
and educates and informs peopleversus, Making it into where
we're on opposing sides andwe're working against each other
because in most of the scenarioswhere these things happen, we

(01:08:41):
all want the same thing, even ifyou just walk into a restaurant,
not nobody, you or the waitstaff or the kitchen or the
owner wants someone to have asevere allergic reaction in
their restaurant.
Or in schools or like with thesummer camp that I talked about,
that again, it's a wonderfulprogram.
I know they want to do the rightthing, but the way that I
approach it could really affectthe direction that that turns
in.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:09:02):
Yeah.
Yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:09:04):
Well, where is the best place?
I'll list everything in thenotes, but tell everybody where
the best place for them to buyyour books and to find you, uh,
your website's really easy tofind.
It's just, it's

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:09:13):
Yeah.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-2 (01:09:13):
allergy lawyer, right?

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:09:15):
Yeah, yeah, or or Frank or law.
com.
my books are on Amazon.
you could also get them from mywebsite.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:09:23):
Thank you so much.
I feel very encouraged talkingto you.
Like I said, it's justreassuring to know that, there
are definitely those of youworking on our side and, and
that is encouraging to know whenwe feel helpless that we aren't
the ones who can do all of thosethings.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:09:39):
Well, thank you.
Thank you.
It's, uh, it's my, I feel it'smy life's work to, to do this
and, and I hope my son is proudof me.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (01:09:48):
Aw, I'm sure he is.
I, I, if, if you have time forone more question, do you

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22- (01:09:53):
Sure.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-20 (01:09:53):
Um, cause my podcast focuses on how
we're managing our anxiety andour, our trauma around food.
And obviously as a parent, yourstory to find your kindergartner
in the corner, having ananaphylactic reaction is about
as traumatic as it can get.
Can you talk about.
How turning this into your workhas, has influenced your journey
with that, with your trauma andyour, your struggle with the

(01:10:17):
part of navigating this.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-2 (01:10:19):
It's empowering.
Because you feel helpless, whenyou see your child struggling,
you feel helpless.
Like I said, we're not doctors.
We don't know what, what's goingon really.
It makes me feel like I can helpother people.
I can make a difference.
maybe I can turn some thingsaround, make it easier for the
next people coming along.
I feel like, okay, at leastwe've paved the way for other

(01:10:42):
people.
So some good came out of it.
We weren't just caught in thetrauma.
We turned the trauma intosomething positive

squadcaster-1gff_3_ (01:10:51):
Absolutely.
Thank you for doing that.
And yes, in your case,especially there's, there's so
much that you can see that, apositive that extends beyond
just your situation and yourson.
I appreciate your time so muchand you have been so kind to me.
Thank you for being so generousand, willing to spend so much
time.
I, I appreciate it so much

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08 (01:11:09):
education is the, is the, is the key, you
know, education is really thekey.
What's going to help all of us.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (01:11:15):
It is.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (01:11:16):
So,

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22- (01:11:17):
thank you for having such a big part
in that.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (01:11:19):
And I'm glad that you have a
positive bent because I thinkthat's missing in a lot of the
food allergy world.

squadcaster-1gff_3_08-22-202 (01:11:24):
It

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-2 (01:11:25):
There's a lot of blood.
And yeah,

squadcaster-1gff_3_ (01:11:27):
Absolutely.
And I think that's part of why Ilike the question that I just
asked you.
Like, we have to do somethingwith it.
Brene Brown is one of myfavorite authors.
She's a, researcher who talksabout all these, emotional,
social, emotional things.
And she says that, anger is agood thing.
Catalyst, but not, not goodcompany.
So I feel like I'm trying totake that spin of using the
anger to motivate us to dosomething, but not just to sit

(01:11:49):
and dwell with it because thatdoesn't get any of us anywhere.

squadcaster-h9j7_1_08-22-20 (01:11:53):
no, no, it doesn't.
It doesn't help our kids.
Well, if you do want to helphere are three action steps you
can take today to move forwardwith the abundance of
information that Laurel sharedwith us.
Number one by laurels books,flying with food allergies.
And how to advocate for yourfood allergic child, both
available on Amazon or on herwebsite, the allergy lawyer.

(01:12:15):
Dot com.
Number two.
And September Laurel did a freeworkshop with fair called
protecting food.
Allergic students in schoolsknow your rights and the replay
is available online.
Number three.
Check the section affairswebsite called know your rights
there's information on topics,including school guidelines.

(01:12:37):
Access to epinephrin restaurantsand even becoming an advocate.
If you're interested.
Links to all of these are in theshow description.
This podcast is for educationalpurposes only, is not a
substitute for professionalmedical advice, diagnosis, or
treatment.
If you have specific questionsor concerns about your health or

(01:12:57):
a medical condition, pleaseconsult your allergist or other
qualified health care provider.
I'm Dr.
Amanda Whitehouse.
And until we chat again,remember, don't feed the fear.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

True Crime Tonight

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Fall Book Club with Laurel Francoeur, The Allergy Lawyer

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}24/7 News: The Latest

True Crime Tonight

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Fall Book Club with Laurel Francoeur, The Allergy Lawyer

24/7 News: The Latest