The mother of a five-year-old boy who died from an anaphylactic reaction to cow’s milk at school has made an emotional plea for MPs to vote through a new law which could ‘save children’s lives’.
Helen Blythe, whose son Benedict collapsed at Barnack Primary School in Stamford, Lincolnshire, after being accidentally exposed to cow’s milk, said passing a crucial amendment to a Bill going through the House of Commons on Monday would ensure all schools have adequate allergy plans in place to protect vulnerable children – and make it less likely that other families would go through the agony of losing a child.
The amendment, which has been tabled by former Education Secretary Baroness Nicky Morgan, would require schools by law to buy and store adrenaline autoinjector pens, often known as EpiPens – lifesaving medication used when someone experiences a severe allergic reaction known as anaphylaxis, which causes airways to swell.
It would also require schools to provide allergy awareness training to staff and adopt policies to deal with allergies and anaphylaxis, as well as action plans to deal with the needs of individual children with allergies.
The move comes amid a dramatic spike in the number of children with potentially life-threatening allergies to food such as nuts, cow’s milk, eggs and fruit over the last two decades.
Last week the Government was asking its MPs to vote against the proposed amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, because it said believed these measures could be achieved without the need to pass them into law.
But it performed a dramatic U-turn last night and said it would look to table its own amendment, which would also cover any advances in allergy treatments.
The Department for Education this week launched a consultation on new statutory guidance which aims to have the same measures in place by September.
While Mrs Blythe and campaigners have welcomed the consultation, they argue it does not go far enough.
They warn that without legal enforcement independent schools are not covered by the guidance, and that others could choose to opt out.
Speaking to the Mail, Mrs Blythe, who launched the Benedict Blythe Foundation to campaign for policy change in memory of her son, said: ‘While we’re grateful for the statutory guidance, which is far more detailed than anything that was in place before, we know that there is a “get out” for schools if they have a good reason.
‘A previous piece of statutory guidance which set out policies to help manage children with medical conditions in schools has seen 70 per cent of schools not implementing the recommended safeguards – including Benedict’s school. His inquest highlighted a systemic failure at the school yet there’s no-one investigating, there’s no accountability.
‘That would be different if the measures were legally enforceable. Not only might those measures have saved Benedict, they would mean that if things do go wrong there are consequences.
‘We know the Government cares about children and safety, and this is right at the heart of what they say is important.
‘The Bill gives them the opportunity to complete the job, to save lives, and make it less likely that other families will go through what we’ve been through. Benedict’s life mattered, and his death should matter too.’
Benedict, who had only started school three months before he died, suffered from asthma and had a number of allergies including eggs, kiwi fruit, nuts and milk.
His parents helped the school put together a personal allergy action plan to cope with his needs, and a specific process to store, prepare and supply oat milk for him which minimised any risk of cross-contamination.
But in December 2021, he was exposed to cow’s milk by accident when that process was not rigidly followed. He vomited twice before collapsing, and was pronounced dead in hospital a short while later.
An inquest in Peterborough last year heard there were delays in staff administering an adrenalin pen, which was a factor in his death. There were also missed opportunities to learn from a previous incident in which Benedict had been served pizza for lunch two months before his death, which led to him being sick.
One of the main arguments against the new law has been that it would be too expensive for budget-restricted schools to implement the measures.
But Mrs Blythe said any legal enforcement should come with additional funding to help schools.
Modelling also suggests that by prescribing auto-injector pens to schools themselves – rather than giving each pupil who needs one an additional pen to keep in school – would save the Government around £1million.
Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the NEU teaching union said: ‘Schools maintaining a supply of spare allergy pens could save the life of a child who has left their device at home or who experiences their first severe allergic reaction at school.
‘We would, however, urge the government to provide additional funding to cover this as the devices need to be bought from pharmacies and regularly checked against expiry dates.’
Alicia Kearns, the Conservative MP for Rutland and Stamford, said: ‘On Monday night, MPs have the chance to make sure no other family suffers as Helen’s has. The Government is whipping its MPs against this amendment. I urge Ministers to think again, and urge every MP to do the right thing and vote to save children’s lives.
‘Just as we don’t ask schools to fundraise for fire extinguishers or defibrillators, we should not leave schools to find the money to keep children with allergies safe. These changes can be funded without costing the Treasury a penny more.’
A Department of Education spokesperson said: ‘There is nothing more important than the safety of our children and we recognise allergy safety requires the strongest possible protection, that’s why we are legislating to make this happen.
‘We will be bringing forward our own amendment which will see all schools required by law to have an allergy safety policy and give the Education Secretary the power to introduce further regulations on allergy safety if needed.
‘Auto-injectors will soon become outdated, so our amendment will ensure regulations can keep pace with advancements in technology rather than quickly becoming unworkable.
‘This will deliver the key protections for children with allergy – and the flexibility for our requirements to evolve as clinical advice changes.’
