In this discussion many mention a ‘slippery slope’ – extending to examples of banning of perfume, latex, body oder, etc. This point is interesting, but what if we stand back for a moment and consider what the intended impact of a regulation like this could be? The clear sort of first order response you would expect would be to protect the livelihood / convenience of the sensitive members of our society. I would argue, however, that there is a more dangerous unintended consequence inherent in removing the responsibility of these individuals to be so cautious and concerned for their own safety; by promoting an ‘allergen free’ environment you dilute individual responsibility by distributing the liability evenly to those who travel with the allergic individual.
…More clearly: (hypothetically) packets of peanuts are banned on planes. Passenger A – allergic to peanuts, Passenger B – packs a snack containing traces of peanuts for his/her x hour plane trip. Serendipitously seated next to one another passenger A realizes too late that B has ____ – and ends up dead. Passenger A’s family wants to know who is responsible?
You can’t search everyone’s bag for explosives / sharp objects / and peanuts. You cannot ensure that everyone will read signs and participate willingly. If someone purposely or even accidentally brings a banned peanut on the plane – should they be arrested? or just scoffed at very harshly?
In my opinion, the question of a ban is absurd. I would gladly forgo my allotment of peanuts to preserve someone else’s comfort – but you’re not going to find any solidarity among a random sample of individuals. So I would assert that the most reasonable solution is that allergic people remain guarded in their own concern as this is the situation in which the most value will be generated to motivate proper management. Their steadfast concern for their own health, or that of a loved one will generate the safest environment for everyone involved.
Rather than debating where peanuts should and shouldn’t be, I believe we would be better off investing this energy in trying to find ways to help people better manage their own allergies. This situation (in my mind) does not mandate legislation – but instead reveals that we aren’t yet properly equipped (though tools and further understanding) to allow these members of our society a comfortable / regular life. « less
In this discussion many mention a ‘slippery slope’ – extending to examples of banning of perfume, latex, body oder, etc. This point is interesting, but what if we stand back for a moment and consider what the intended impact of a regulation like this could be? The clear sort of first order response you would expect would be to protect the livelihood / convenience of the sensitive members of our society. I would argue, however, that there is a more dangerous unintended consequence inherent in removing the responsibility of these individuals to be so cautious and concerned for their own safety; by promoting an ‘allergen free’ environment you dilute individual responsibility by distributing the liability evenly to those who travel with the allergic individual.
… more »
You can’t search everyone’s bag for explosives / sharp objects / and peanuts. You cannot ensure that everyone will read signs and participate willingly. If someone purposely or even accidentally brings a banned peanut on the plane – should they be arrested? or just scoffed at very harshly?
In my opinion, the question of a ban is absurd. I would gladly forgo my allotment of peanuts to preserve someone else’s comfort – but you’re not going to find any solidarity among a random sample of individuals. So I would assert that the most reasonable solution is that allergic people remain guarded in their own concern as this is the situation in which the most value will be generated to motivate proper management. Their steadfast concern for their own health, or that of a loved one will generate the safest environment for everyone involved.
Rather than debating where peanuts should and shouldn’t be, I believe we would be better off investing this energy in trying to find ways to help people better manage their own allergies. This situation (in my mind) does not mandate legislation – but instead reveals that we aren’t yet properly equipped (though tools and further understanding) to allow these members of our society a comfortable / regular life. « less