Is this discrimination, or a conservative safety-first approach being taken by a centre that, despite growing education about the apparent low risk in this scenario, has still had an information bombshell dropped on them.
The centre has been caught by surprise, and appears to have taken a conservative approach to establishing further information around the boy's illness.
It seems too early to cry "discrimination" until the centre has gone through the steps it says it wants to take regarding what appears to be a genuine offer to establish a care plan for the boy.
Perhaps the centre could have chosen to leave the boy among his peers while that plan was established. Perhaps, though, the boy's illness should have been disclosed earlier.
In taking the conservative approach, rightly or wrongly, the centre sent the boy home, but remains open to the boy returning.
That does not sound like discrimination but a well-intentioned precaution.