<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Schools roundup	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/10/schools-roundup-33/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/10/schools-roundup-33/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 22:18:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Hugo S Cunningham		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/10/schools-roundup-33/comment-page-1/#comment-328449</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hugo S Cunningham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 22:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=55430#comment-328449</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Might this be a place where our disability jurisprudence is helpful?  Can it be argued successfully that asthmatic students are &quot;disabled,&quot; thus putting the financial and time costs (up to $1000 a year according to one commenter) back on the school district for meeting their own paperwork requirements?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Might this be a place where our disability jurisprudence is helpful?  Can it be argued successfully that asthmatic students are &#8220;disabled,&#8221; thus putting the financial and time costs (up to $1000 a year according to one commenter) back on the school district for meeting their own paperwork requirements?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: gitarcarver		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/10/schools-roundup-33/comment-page-1/#comment-328446</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gitarcarver]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:03:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=55430#comment-328446</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[RE: Inhaler incident in Utah....

The school was not acting under it&#039;s own policies.   It was acting under Utah law.

 53A-11-602.   Self-administration of asthma medication.
     (1) As used in this section, &quot;asthma medication&quot; means prescription or nonprescription, inhaled asthma medication.
     (2) A public school shall permit a student to possess and self-administer asthma medication if:
     (a) the student&#039;s parent or guardian signs a statement:
     (i) authorizing the student to self-administer asthma medication; and
     (ii) acknowledging that the student is responsible for, and capable of, self-administering the asthma medication; and
     (b) the student&#039;s health care provider provides a written statement that states:
     (i) it is medically appropriate for the student to self-administer asthma medication and be in possession of asthma medication at all times; and
     (ii) the name of the asthma medication prescribed or authorized for the student&#039;s use.

To me that says that the school administration was only an accomplice in this idiocy and the lawmakers in Utah (and other states) are the true idiots.  

This is a case that typifies &quot;Overlawyered&quot; in that the school / law demands a letter or a form they designed to be filled out rather than the kid&#039;s possession of the inhaler being evidence of the doctor&#039;s approval to begin with.    In short, the law says that a piece of paper is more important than a child&#039;s health or a doctor&#039;s medical opinion.

That&#039;s simply nuts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE: Inhaler incident in Utah&#8230;.</p>
<p>The school was not acting under it&#8217;s own policies.   It was acting under Utah law.</p>
<p> 53A-11-602.   Self-administration of asthma medication.<br />
     (1) As used in this section, &#8220;asthma medication&#8221; means prescription or nonprescription, inhaled asthma medication.<br />
     (2) A public school shall permit a student to possess and self-administer asthma medication if:<br />
     (a) the student&#8217;s parent or guardian signs a statement:<br />
     (i) authorizing the student to self-administer asthma medication; and<br />
     (ii) acknowledging that the student is responsible for, and capable of, self-administering the asthma medication; and<br />
     (b) the student&#8217;s health care provider provides a written statement that states:<br />
     (i) it is medically appropriate for the student to self-administer asthma medication and be in possession of asthma medication at all times; and<br />
     (ii) the name of the asthma medication prescribed or authorized for the student&#8217;s use.</p>
<p>To me that says that the school administration was only an accomplice in this idiocy and the lawmakers in Utah (and other states) are the true idiots.  </p>
<p>This is a case that typifies &#8220;Overlawyered&#8221; in that the school / law demands a letter or a form they designed to be filled out rather than the kid&#8217;s possession of the inhaler being evidence of the doctor&#8217;s approval to begin with.    In short, the law says that a piece of paper is more important than a child&#8217;s health or a doctor&#8217;s medical opinion.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s simply nuts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
