General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsmom angry after kids badly sunburned during field trip (school ban on sunscreen)
?2
A mom in Washington state is steaming mad after her two daughters were so badly sunburned during a school field trip, they had to be taken to hospital.
Jesse Michener from Tacoma says her daughters, Violet, 11, and Zoe, 9, came home from school last Tuesday with severe sunburns after being outside for five hours during a field trip.
The girls were not allowed to bring sunscreen on the trip because of a school-board-wide policy that bans the creams, over fears of allergic reactions.
But Michener says the policy resulted in agonizingly painful burns for her daughters. She says when the girls got home, she brought them to hospital to be looked over by doctors and kept them home the next day because of their chills and fever.
Michener was particularly outraged because her daughter Zoe has very fair skin from a form of albinism. She said the school's staff are aware of her daughter's condition, but couldn't make an exception.
The school board says it has to ban sunscreen because it's state law.
http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120625/sunburned-kids-washington-school-120625/20120625/?hub=CalgaryHome
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)"She also couldn't try to protect her girls with sun hats because hats are not allowed at school, even on field days."
Yep - those kids look like gang bangers to me!
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)At my kids' school, they always sent reminders in the fall to be ready with hats and mittens when the weather got cold.
CaliforniaPeggy
(156,595 posts)How stupid can you get?
And the girls had to go to the hospital because they were ill from the sunburn.
Words fail me.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)(Repeat from down thread)
The reasons include:
Kids share everything in school including meds, and yes sun screen too. Since school staff cannot monitor this common practice on the part of kids, there is, in each district in the country, a form for parents to fill out and have a physician sign/fax or return to the school. Allergic reactions are no joke and its impossible to know what kids have taken/used. This process at least slows things down and kids are not carrying any form of medication in school. All of this information is provided to parents at the start of each school year and is usually repeated via home-school newsletters.
As for the hat business--schools usually restrict hats at school b/c they can be a distraction and b/c kids share those too which can potentially results in the transmission of lice.
Schools also provide information to parents about Field Days. Perhaps the mother did not get the flyer or notice. Either way, the parent did make the assumption that the school would apply a sun screen and I doubt very much that parents were told school staff would. Regardless, if a person is sun sensitive-and I am-a cloudy day makes no difference and mother should have monitored the situation more carefully.
Although California appears to be an exception, the practices about over the counter medication have been in place for years. Parents can bring in and administer items to students if they so choose.
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)A parent shouldn't have to baby-sit their school because the school is scared shitless of allowing kids any kind of freedom whatsoever to take care of themselves.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)A simple 'I disagree' would suffice citizen.
bongbong
(5,436 posts)They might be good reasons, but my oh my how did schoolkids from 18xx to 1980 (or so) ever even STAY ALIVE without all the rules? 
(Note: I know this is really because of the litigious nature of America, parents hoping to win the lottery in a lawsuit if their babies get harmed in the slightest way, and CYA by legal staffs on school boards, but still.....)
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Someone somewhere was allowed to bring in lotion, shared it, and cost the school X amount in a frivolous lawsuit.
Now this school will be sued for this and that will likely mean . . . not a repeal on the lotion ban but rather a ban on any outside activity lasting more than 5 minutes.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)pnwmom
(110,254 posts)of an allergic child applying someone else's sunscreen. So the policy increased the risk of harm, which is why it has been changed, in the state of Washington, at least.
blueamy66
(6,795 posts)or, on the other hand, you can enclose them in bubble wrap and they can move through life without experiencing a THING.
Grow up parents...let the strings go....they are people, let them live!
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)the field.
If they had smeared sunscreen on those children, who apparently have very sensitive skin, and had a reaction, there's be a post showing the horrors done to the children by the school putting sunscreen on the delicate children without parental approval!
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)what would be the problem with that? Don't you think their mother would know what kind of sunscreen would be okay for them?
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)say if Mom knew the kids were having a day outside, or she could have issued instructions to the school on how to handle the situation.
The article is missing information.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)brought from home without a note from the doctor.
Regardless of the girl's exact situation, it is the POLICY I'm objecting to, a policy that affected all the kids in the district. It will be changed as of next fall, fortunately. But it will still be the policy in most other states.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)she doesn't complain the school didn't allow the girls to apply sunscreen they already had.
The policy was that the school:
"it was school policy that a child requires a prescription in order to use medication, even over-the-counter kinds like sunscreen. One of the teachers even applied sunscreen to herself in front of her daughter, Michener stated."
To the contrary, the mother's statements indicate that she had NOT sent sunscreen with teh girls to school. But I did find an article that the mother knew there would be a field day, but she assume it would
be held indoors because it was raining that morning:
"Michener recalled that it was raining the morning her daughters got burned,so she didn't apply sunscreen to her daughters because she assumed the field day would be held inside. Even if the sun came out, the campus had shaded areas and her daughters had never come home sunburned before. "
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57460721-10391704/wash-schools-sunscreen-policy-leaves-two-sisters-badly-burned/
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,455 posts)Furthermore, she ASSumed the kids would be inside or shaded? She was obviously wrong now wasn't she?
The mother knows she f-cked but doesn't want to take ANY of the blame.
Lazy parenting AND a failure of the school to catch and mitigate said lazy parenting.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)This mother's particular circumstances aren't that important. If it weren't for her speaking out, I wouldn't know that schools were banning sunscreen. My children didn't have a special medical condition, but they certainly needed sunscreen -- as do most people. And I had no idea that their school could have prevented them from using it.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)to a sunscreen that a parent selected and sent with his or her child.
My son had an allergic reaction to a sunscreen and I didn't buy that kind again. After that reaction, he knew to only use the kind we'd determined was okay. He wouldn't have "borrowed" anyone else's. What kid would, after going through the discomfort of an allergic skin rash? This is a situation that requires education, not bans. The teachers should TEACH the kids why it is important not to share sunscreens. The teachers should TEACH the kids about the consequences -- i.e., an allergic reaction. And, honestly, in the real world, where teens and adults pay money for sun exposure at tanning parlors, how often do kids share sunscreens? What is more likely, by far? For kids to share sunscreens, or for kids to not bother with sunscreens at all, even though they should be using them?
WA State no longer has this dumb requirement for a doctor's note. Good for Washington state.
Hats might be a distraction indoors, but what is wrong with allowing kids to wear hats outside? Do we ban shoes because kids might share them and pass on athlete's foot? Do we ban gloves because kids might share them and acquire warts? Do we ban belts because kids might share them and strangle themselves? Do we ban kids from wearing knit caps at bus stops and in the bus and on the playground in the winter -- even though they can spread lice? What about frost bite? Sometimes we take policies to ridiculous extremes, and banning hats is one of them.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)because the caps might be shared and transmit lice?
Caps are needed in the winter. Hats with visors are needed in the sun. Lice are nothing but a nuisance that can be dealt with. Common sense, people!
okieinpain
(9,397 posts)until personal force fields are invented.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts). . . unless, of course, they have too many other, more important things to think about and just cannot find the time necessary to even start bothering to protect their own children beforehand, before the fact of a probable sunburn---and especially when it's always possible, after the fact, to blame school staff for whatever the parents, themselves, neglected to do.
gateley
(62,683 posts)when they sent the kids off to school. Especially here in Western Washington. Countless outings have been postponed due to rain. I don't think her assumption was out of line for this area.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts). . . (IMO) that the parents should at least consider applying sunscreen (or, better yet, sunblock) every day, rain or shine, before the child goes outdoors---same as people with very light-colored eyes should wear sunglasses when they go outdoors (except at night, of course).
gateley
(62,683 posts)I wear it daily. "In Seattle!?!?!?". Even when I lived in sunny North Carolina people were surprised. I just tell them if it's daylight and you don't need your headlights on, the UV rays are present.
Even good parents think it has to be sunny and bright to warrant sunscreen.
Doctors need to be better educated, too.
blueamy66
(6,795 posts)Are kids porcelain dolls now?
Hats are a distraction and contain lice? Are you fucking kidding me?
Thank GOD I didn't have kids....their world is sooooo fucked up these days!
flyers, sunscreen, notes to parents, allergies....what a crock of shit
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,455 posts)Probably more the mother.
She didn't apply ANY sunscreen because it would have to be re-applied later? Really? You don't apply anything when YOU KNOW your child has a serious problem with the sun?
Doesn't make any sense.
That said, the hat rule should be waived on outdoor field trips. As should the sunscreen ban. Allow the kids to bring their own sun screen along with a note from the parent.
The mother, knowing the school policy, should have secured the doctor's note or kept the kid home.
Failure at every level.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)The teacher should have called the mom ahead of time to make sure she knew the kids would be outside all day. But the mom should have sent sunscreen and the doctor's note as well as applying sunscreen in the morning before sending her daughter to school.
They both screwed up.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)and if there was no such silly ass rule then maybe (though I cannot know for certain) the kids would have had the simple means to take care of themselves. Same goes for the silly ass hat ban.
I don't blame the teacher for not spending an hour or two phone treeing parents to alert them that field day is going to be <gasp> outside.
The fault is with the district or the state for dictating insanity. No head cover and no sunscreen but it is okay to be outside all day but kids couldn't possibly burn.
Sunscreen issues must be damn rare since an amusement park near me sets up stands and folks lather on as much as they want and too few have a reaction that results in them limiting their liability by getting rid of it which would also save them a pile of cash by not buying the sunscreen.
It is far more probable that an exposed kid will burn up than a kid is going to have a reaction to shared sunscreen.
I guess parents in general have blame for expecting perfection of prescience and omnipotence from a teacher with a job to do in managing their children who should also know what sunscreen they can't use and failing that not to be using anyone's but their own and also for allowing their state and districts to put in such hairbrained rules without common sense exceptions that their supposedly smarter than a poodle children can utilize for protecting themselves from a real and physical universe while one teacher who is one person does their best with all thirty or so kids.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Other students that might be allergic to the sunscreen. Maybe parents should have to get their kids allergies tested before school begins for them. It's ridiculous to have to put others through this if no child is allergic to sunscreen.
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,455 posts)That kid shouldn't leave the house without the strongest they make.
Does it come in hypoallergenic?
gkhouston
(21,642 posts)so banning sunscreen at school isn't likely to help much. When my kid has field day, parents are told to apply sunscreen at home and send some, plus a hat and a water bottle.
REP
(21,691 posts)I don't have a form of albinism, but I am very fair-skinned ... and allergic to sunlight (yeah, I know - weird and it's not lupus). Now and as a kid, 5 hours in the sun without a hat, scarf, long sleeves and repeated applications of sunscreen would leave me needing serious medical care. Hell, 15 minutes in direct sunlight makes me pretty sick - that's why I've never been in direct sunlight for 5 hours without hat, scarf, sleeves and sunscreen. I can imagine what my mother would have said if my school had attempted to do that to me!
Butterbean
(1,014 posts)and fill out the forms for stupid shit, too. I had to fill out a form and get it signed by my kid's pediatrician for his teacher to have permission to put neosporin and a bandaid on him if he gets a cut. Stupid as hell, but it's policy, so I did it.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)I'm not sure if mom considered putting hats on their heads or not. Contemporary kids might have attitudes about hats, I dunno.
I'm pretty sure great-great-grandma would have insisted on their having a hat or bonnet (maybe not great grandma cuz she was something of a flapper).
But the role of hats in protection from sunburn has deep roots in human culture.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)Children need to wear caps in the winter to stay warm; every winter our school reminds kids to wear hats and gloves in cold weather, both going to school and at recess. And in warmer weather, they should be able to wear hats to protect from the sun. Caps and hats aren't a distraction when worn outside, and lice aren't a health hazard, just a nuisance.
I agree that a note from a parent should be sufficient for bringing sunscreen to school. But in this case, the mother says she wasn't informed of school policy and I believe her. I live in Washington and sent sunscreen to school with three children, and no one ever said any doctor's note was necessary, or stopped them from using it.
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,455 posts)Her story doesn't add up.
No defense of the hat rule here. It's stupid.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)All I saw was that she hadn't put it on at 7 in the morning, and that school policy prevented the girls from applying it several hours later at school without a doctor's note.
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,455 posts)pnwmom
(110,254 posts)"The girls were not allowed to bring sunscreen on the trip because of a school-board-wide policy that bans the creams, over fears of allergic reactions."
And another link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/22/jesse-michener-sunburn_n_1618964.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
The girls weren't allowed to put any sunblock on though, and the reason cited was school policy.
Tacoma Public School district spokesman Dan Voelpel told Yahoo! Shine that, according to statewide law, teachers are not allowed to apply sunscreen to students and students can only apply it to themselves if they have a doctor's note.
And a link to the mother's blog:
http://lifephotographed.com/2012/06/burn-babies-burn/
Let me back up a bit and share what I experienced yesterday: after seeing the kids upon returning home from work, I immediately went to the school to speak with the principal. Her response centered around the the school inability to administer what they considered a prescription/medication (sunscreen) for liability reasons. And while I can sort of wrap my brain around this in theory, the practice of a blanket policy which clearly allows for students to be put in harm’s way is deeply flawed. Not only does a parent have to take an unrealistic (an un-intuitive) step by visiting a doctor for a “prescription” for an over-the-counter product, children are not allowed to carry it on their person and apply as needed. Had my children gone to school slathered in sunscreen (which they did not, it was raining), by noon – when the sun came out – they would have needed to reapply anyway. Something as simple as as sun hat might seem to bypass the prescription issue to some extent. Alas, hats are not allowed at school, even on field day.
My children indicated that several adults commented on their burns at school, including staff and other parents. One of my children remarked that their teacher used sunscreen in her presence and that it was “just for her.” So, is this an issue of passive, inactive supervision? Where is the collective awareness for student safety? If they were getting stung by bees, teachers would remove them. Staff need to be awake to possible threats or safety issues and be able to take action. Prolonged sun exposure leads to burns: either put sunscreen on or, at the very least, remove the child from the sun. A simple call would have brought me to that school in minutes to assist my kids.
Common sense missing + fear of being sued = my kids pay the price. Not okay.
EDITED TO ADD: a friend just posted to my facebook page that it would cost her about $110 in a doctor’s visit to get the required prescription for sunscreen. Incredible.
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,455 posts)The mother knew s/c wasn't allowed without a doctor's note. The mother knew the kids were going on a field trip.
The mother sent the kids to school with no s/c applied at home. Why?
Why didn't the mother arrange for a doctor note AND s/c for school use?
Why did the mother send at least one of the kids to a school field trip in a tank-top? With no s/c applied?
Why doesn't the mother know about water resistant s/c?
Why doesn't the mother of a child with a serious burn risk not know the child can STILL be burned on a cloudy day?
The mother failed - miserably. And now wants to gloss over her OWN stupidity and place ALL the blame on the school.
The school also failed. They shouldn't have allowed a child with a serious skin condition and lazy mother to attend the trip.
I have news for this mother. No one is going to look out for her kids like her. She should self reflect and learn from her kid's pain.
I don't know why she is griping about $110 dollars. Does she want her kids to be safe of not. Besides, I never met a doctor that would require a visit and fee for such a simple note. Especially for a child diagnosed with her condition.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)a doctor's prescription for a simple sunscreen. I've had three kids in Washington state public schools, and I've never heard of this policy. I guess we were lucky that our district was more lax about following it than the Tacoma district.
This policy requiring a doctor's note affects not just this family but millions of families across the U.S., in all the states with a similar law. For many families, the cost of visiting a doctor for a sunscreen prescription would be a burden. Millions of lower-income children don't see a doctor every year; schools don't require annual physicals. There is no good reason that a parent's note shouldn't be sufficient.
As far as this mother is concerned, she found out afterwards that she needed the note, not before. Even if she had applied sunscreen at 7 a.m., the girls would have needed to reapply before going outside. There is no such thing as truly water resistant sunscreen, although many are marketed as such.
bpj62
(1,067 posts)Okay there are 2 things here that need to be said. One if your children have a skin condition that causes them to burn easily and they will be outside on a field trip you can do one of two things. The first one is don't let your children go on the trip, the second one is get a doctors prescription for the sunscreen. As far as i know prescription medicines are still allowed in school. School District are legitimately freaking out law suits from parents for peanut allergy's or gluten issues. I hold the parent responsible here because she knew her children's conditions as well as the schools position and she still let her kids go. i won't comment on the hat issue other then to say that when i went to school no one wore hats in class.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)I am having a difficult time understanding a ban on sunscreen. I understand some people get bad allergic reactions to sunscreen, but a lot of people are allergic to a lot of different things. So maybe there is a secret fear that kids will try to get high off it. That theory makes as much sense as anything else.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)meds, and yes sun screen too. Since school staff cannot monitor this common practice on the part of kids, there is, in each district in the country, a form for parents to fill out and have a physician sign/fax or return to the school. Allergic reactions are no joke and its impossible to know what kids have taken/used. This process at least slows things down and kids are not carrying any form of medication in school. All of this information is provided to parents at the start of each school year and is usually repeated via home-school newsletters.
As for the hat business--schools usually restrict hats at school b/c they can be a distraction and b/c kids share those too which can potentially results in the transmission of lice.
Schools also provide information to parents about Field Days. Perhaps the mother did not get the flyer or notice. Either way, the parent did make the assumption that the school would apply a sun screen and I doubt very much that parents were told school staff would. Regardless, if a person is sun sensitive-and I am-a cloudy day makes no difference and mother should have monitored the situation more carefully.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)The child has a severe sun allergy that is serious enough for a 504, which was written MONTHS AGO. In the 504, the mom agreed to supply sunscreen and a doctor's note, which she has never done.
This is just one more in our constant series of stories about moms being mad at schools and refusing to acknowledge they also have responsibilities as a parent.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)Why wasn't she taken inside when it was obvious that she was being burned? Did anybody call their mother to see if they could make arrangements for her to pick them up, come put the sunscreen on herself or provide a doctor's note that day? Letting the kids get badly burned is not a reasonable option, no matter who dropped the ball.
If a kid in shorts falls over and scrapes their knee you get them a bandage, you don't tell them that it's mom's fault for not sending them to school in long pants.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Another said no they hadn't.
But I agree, she shouldn't have been outside at all.
Mom had agreed several months ago to send sunscreen to school and a doctor's note but she never did.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)A note from the parent should be sufficient for an OTC medication, though I think it's a stretch to call sunscreen medication. Everybody needs it and it's harmless. That's like requiring a note to allow toothpaste for a kid with braces who needs to brush after lunch.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)My district even has a form for them to complete. We get the parent to sign it and we fax it to the doctor and the doctor signs it and faxes it back. Takes about an hour or so, not months.
AnneD
(15,774 posts)I have about 2 years to retire. Think I am going to get a countdown clock.
Common sense is not as common as it use to be.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)I have about 3 more. Maybe. Depends on the economy and health insurance.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)dangerous and subject to abuse because of mood-altering capabilities. I'm frankly surprised they allow the little darlings access to toilet paper these days.
B2G
(9,766 posts)I believe every state except for California has a law against children possessing sunscreen at school. The school is just following the law.
It's insane, but there you have it.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)Yes, it's a low bar, but there's just so many candidates!
B2G
(9,766 posts)I'm so glad my kids are out of high school now it's ridiculous.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)Really dumb law.
CleanLucre
(284 posts)joeybee12
(56,177 posts)And letting the teachers know that she must not take it off.
AND...what about applying sunscreen at home before they left.
The law seems a little over-the-top, but this is a bad mother.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)joeybee12
(56,177 posts)She should know that...and if she's that concerned keep the kid home...fight the rule later...she knew this might be a problem...she's an idiot.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)It takes a little bit for the "waterproof" sunscreens to be actually waterproof.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)Last edited Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:01 AM - Edit history (1)
The FDA says otherwise.
But that's beside the point -- the mother thought the kids would be kept indoors because of the rain.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/06/end-waterproof-sunscreen-and-other-new-rules/38808/
After 33 years, the Food and Drug Administration today released a new set of rules regulating sunscreen in the United States. . . . The rules also do away with "waterproof" and "sweatproof" labels on sunscreens, because such claims are impossible. "Instead, they will be allowed to claim that the products are water resistant for either 40 minutes or 80 minutes, depending upon test results, but nothing more."
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)to put sunscreen on my kid.
Of course, if I had done that, I wouldn't have been able to be on the TV news that night telling my story.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Huh?
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)The teachers my kids had would have sent a burning child indoors to sit in the office till her parent could come.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)these girls burn, wouldn't you have picked up a phone and called their mother? Or sent them inside?
Would you really have done nothing?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=861962
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)/only semi-sarcastic.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)http://lifephotographed.com/2012/06/burn-babies-burn/
Let me back up a bit and share what I experienced yesterday: after seeing the kids upon returning home from work, I immediately went to the school to speak with the principal. Her response centered around the the school inability to administer what they considered a prescription/medication (sunscreen) for liability reasons. And while I can sort of wrap my brain around this in theory, the practice of a blanket policy which clearly allows for students to be put in harm’s way is deeply flawed. Not only does a parent have to take an unrealistic (an un-intuitive) step by visiting a doctor for a “prescription” for an over-the-counter product, children are not allowed to carry it on their person and apply as needed. Had my children gone to school slathered in sunscreen (which they did not, it was raining), by noon – when the sun came out – they would have needed to reapply anyway. Something as simple as as sun hat might seem to bypass the prescription issue to some extent. Alas, hats are not allowed at school, even on field day.
My children indicated that several adults commented on their burns at school, including staff and other parents. One of my children remarked that their teacher used sunscreen in her presence and that it was “just for her.” So, is this an issue of passive, inactive supervision? Where is the collective awareness for student safety? If they were getting stung by bees, teachers would remove them. Staff need to be awake to possible threats or safety issues and be able to take action. Prolonged sun exposure leads to burns: either put sunscreen on or, at the very least, remove the child from the sun. A simple call would have brought me to that school in minutes to assist my kids.
GreatCaesarsGhost
(8,621 posts)who lets kids or anyone else out in the sun for 5 hours?
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)When mine were young I kicked them out in the morning and told them to I'd see them for lunch then dinner. It's the only way to survive summer with your sanity intact.
GreatCaesarsGhost
(8,621 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)threads about the deliberate destruction of public schooling in the us get maybe three?
no wonder the country is in trouble.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=852640
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)My kids are grown and over the counter meds were banned by their school when they were in school 20 some odd years ago. Why are we still expressing shock over this?
B2G
(9,766 posts)proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Yes it's a dumb policy but it wouldn't be necessary if parents didn't threaten to sue schools every time they are offended over a silly policy. Thus, more silly policies are created and it goes on and on and on.
But this is nothing new. That was my point. Being shocked this is a school policy is a bit over the top.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)It certainly wasn't an issue when I was in school, but I'm in California and we're apparently the only place that doesn't have this dumb law. Of course when I was in school we'd have all run afoul of the drug policy for our evil Midol-sharing ways, except that common sense hadn't quite died yet. 
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)It's not a law in my state but we do have a district policy about it.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)One more thing I'm glad I don't have to worry about.
Mosby
(19,491 posts)Among other things drugstores sell OTCs (over the counter medicines) and HABA (health and beauty aids). Sunscreen is in the cosmetic isle with other HABA items.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)We don't even encourage lip balm at my school. Kids share it. It's gross.
Mosby
(19,491 posts)But I don't think it's medicine anymore than "medicated" lip balm or anti-bacterial soap.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)krispos42
(49,445 posts)...with an SPF, would that make it medicine?
Iwasthere
(3,511 posts)They CAUSE cancer!! Doesn't take a lot of research to see how serious this is.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)mental status to purchase, possess, and utilize.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)Argue with whoever wrote these policies.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)OneTenthofOnePercent
(6,268 posts)government tries to micromanage our everyday lives. Ultimately they legislate to the lowest common denominator (read: morons) and it's extremely inconveniencing for the rest of the population.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)However, mom could have applied it before the children left the house for the fieldtrip. No?
On edit: I'd like to add, that if mom had allowed her children to be burnt like this, the state could have charged her with neglect or abuse.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)They have field day when the temps can be in the 90s. Put the sunscreen on before the child comes to school, or leave with the NURSE who can then reapply it later, or the child can themselves under her direction. No, they don't want them bringing it into school here either and sunburn can be a MAJOR problem in Florida all year.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)every couple hours, so four hours later when the rain stopped they would have needed to use more sunscreen anyway. The school's (former) policy didn't let the girl's use their own sunscreen even with a note from their mother.
bpj62
(1,067 posts)No one mentioned the main reason for the schools banning sun screen and that is simply the fact the school do not under normal circumstances want any physical contact between a student and a teacher or assistant. This way there can be no claims of child molestation. The schools in my county flat out tell the parents to sunscreen their children before they come to school on warm spring days.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Good thing they didn't have a bad reaction or anything.
HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)for long periods. Florida is BRUTAL for that. When I had to stay outside for recess or field days, I wore UVF protective clothing and carried a big golf umbrella. I cannot count the number of times the kids wanted to stand under my umbrella for a break. Sure. Nobody said anything about it, especially when there are no trees around. Hydration is very, very important. "I need a DRINK", many a red faced child would say to me. Go get one. Again, nobody ever said anything about that either. They got their water, and a rest in the shade under my umbrella.
I am a Mom too. I did for them what I would have wanted done for my own kids. Sometimes people are so concerned about the "rules" that common sense goes out the window. The kids SAFETY, not to get severe sunburn, must be the top priority.
ejpoeta
(8,933 posts)It seemed to me it would wear off by the time she even got to school. I couldn't send it with her as you would need a note and the nurse would have to apply etc. Luckily she did not get burned, but I sure was surprised.
Personally I have to wonder why no one noticed kids getting burned and remove them to a shady area. 5 hours in the sun with no sunscreen!
msongs
(73,682 posts)slackmaster
(60,567 posts)It really does burn.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)And with education like that, we wonder why our kids (and far too many adults) are friggin' idiots?
frazzled
(18,402 posts)(I'm sure others here have had the same), I can't tell you how short-sighted this policy is. Back when I was a kid they didn't even have sunscreen, and the sunburns I got then are beginning to have their effect a half-century later on me. I always put sunscreen on my kids (especially my daughter, who is very fair), but I missed it for one field trip when the class went skiing. Stupid me: since I'm not a skier, I didn't foresee the danger of sunburn in February. I worry to this day that the bad sunburn she got that day will come back to haunt.
Basal cell or squamous cell carcinomas are one thing: they are usually contained and are very operable. But it can be expensive and disfiguring in some cases. Melanoma, on the other hand, is another story (a friend of mine died of it). The Skin Cancer foundation states:
A person's risk for melanoma doubles if he or she has had more than five sunburns at any age.25
http://www.skincancer.org/skin-cancer-information/skin-cancer-facts
I'm not sure what sort of "allergic reaction" the state of Washington is worried about, but it should be their duty to worry about the future health of these children.
Our daughter's preschool has several very large tubs of it strategically placed on the premises. Parents apply it in the morning, teachers reapply during the day.
noamnety
(20,234 posts)"Benzophenones. Benzophenones have been used in sunscreens for 50 years, and are one of the most common causes of sunscreen-induced contact dermatitis in the United States. Other names for benzophenones include oxybenzone, Eusolex 4360, methanone, Uvinal M40, diphenylketone and any other chemical name ending with “-benzophenone”."
"Salicylates. Benzyl salicylate was the first sunscreen used in the United States. Common chemicals in this group used today include octyl salicylate, homosalate and any chemical ending with “-salicylate.” Salicylates are rare causes of contact dermatitis."
and plenty more: http://allergies.about.com/od/contactdermatitis/a/sunscreens.htm
My daughter has allergic reactions to salicylates (aspirin among other things). She's got a medic alert bracelet for it. Even so, we still have some screwups. Last time she was here she used my body wash in the shower and had a reaction to it. Since she lives in another state, I don't think to check ingredients, and since she normally just buys the same brand of soap she wasn't thinking about ingredients. Soap's another of those things that's considered "health and beauty" and not medication.
The solution is for the mom to comply with the OTC rules and supply the school with the sunscreen, and hopefully the school will recommend this for future field trips for all kids, and put the suggestion right in the permission slip.
(I will also add that we recently had an end of year outdoor event at our school and one of the PTA parents brought sunscreen and left it out on a chair for anyone to use. I was grateful she had it and I used it.)
frazzled
(18,402 posts)But contact dermatitis versus cancer ... The sane policy would be to put the main concern on the more serious issue. Rather than exposing all children to cancer-causing ultra violet rays with no protection, why not simply monitor the rare allergic child from using or coming into contact with it.
noamnety
(20,234 posts)if salicylates get on their hands and then rubbed across their face, it can get on their mouth. Heck, we had an ER visit because my grown daughter picked up one of my wooden flutes during a visit and tried to get a sound out of it. A couple decades earlier (before she was born!) I had oiled it with something she was allergic to.
We do sunscreen and stuff, and I've had precancerous skin things removed off my face so I'm not dismissing the concerns - I live them myself. I'm just saying that the state probably had some liability issues they were trying to address, and some remarkably innocent-seeming things can and do cause emergency-level reactions in kids - if you have one in a hundred kids with a serious allergy to something, in an environment with a few hundred kids mingled together it becomes an issue.
We've had kids (and in one case a teacher) where I teach sent to the emergency room because of perfume being sprayed, and because of cleaners used to clean up a baby oil spill.
Obviously putting kids in a situation where they are being out in the sun with no protection is also not safe, I'm not suggesting that's acceptable.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Although Coppertone and Ban de Soleil were introduced in the '50s they were not widely used (and early "sun tan lotions" were not very effective sunscreens).
I was a kid on a farm in the '50s.
hunter
(40,665 posts)Now I go doctors and they'll call out to their colleagues, "Hey, take a look at this!" whenever they find some new and intriguing species of skin mutation. They debate about it a bit, "ooh, ahhh..." but it has to go to the lab before any of them will commit.
Then they cut it out of me, and I wait for the pathology report.
It's almost like an expensive hobby with an element of danger, something that can kill you like snowboarding or racing motorcycles, but it's not as fun.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)I'm not sure that sunscreen is a really good idea, because it encourages people to stay out in the sun without long sleeve shirts, hats, etc. to actually protect them from the sun.
shanti
(21,798 posts)i also grew up on the beaches of so cal, and i am naturally pale (thanks, dad, for the english ancestry). i also had several severe sunburns as a kid. for awhile there in the 90's i was seeing the dermatologist on a regular basis, and have had several basals cut or burned out. it makes you feel like you're going to turn into frankenstein! now, i hardly ever go out in the sun in the summer, and i'm very pale now but don't care what anyone thinks.
dad also was born/raised in washington state, home of the pale. it's unconscionable that people in washington state, of all places, would place this restriction on schoolchildren! 
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)If you're equating your own experiences with theirs then you don't know enough about what that sort of condition involves.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)She strictly limits the amount of exposure to direct sunlight.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Honestly folks, there's a reason sunscreen was developed; and especially for fairer skinned people (who don't tan but burn), it's critical. We're talking potentially lethal exposure here. There's really nothing to discuss about it. Sunscreen should not be banned from schools.
The Foundation believes that every child should have access to proper sun protection at school. Suffering just one blistering sunburn in childhood or adolescence more than doubles one’s risk of developing potentially deadly melanoma later in life; therefore protecting children from sun exposure should be a priority for school administrators and teachers. The Skin Cancer Foundation has always recommended that everyone, regardless of age and skin color, adopt a complete sun protection regimen. At school, children should be able to cover-up with protective clothing, including broad-brimmed hats and UV-blocking sunglasses. Additionally, they should wear a broad-spectrum sunscreen every day, and be allowed to bring it to school for easy reapplication. Finally, shade structures allow children to play outdoors safely during the sun’s peak hours, between 10am and 4pm.
http://www.skincancer.org/media-and-press/press-release-2012/schools
morningfog
(18,115 posts)of skin cancer to deal with.
Zalatix
(8,994 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)that the fear of "allergic reactions?" Good grief, there must be some way to accommodate that. Have the parents provide the sunscreen and sign off that they knowingly provided it for this kid today?
Tikki
(15,127 posts)water-proof and sweat-proof sun screen now-a-days. Might not have stopped all the burn
but blocked some of the day's sun.
Tikki
REP
(21,691 posts)I have a sun allergy - been there, done that, had chils and fever for three days afterward 
Response to Liberal_in_LA (Original post)
devilgrrl This message was self-deleted by its author.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)Response to Liberal_in_LA (Reply #83)
devilgrrl This message was self-deleted by its author.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)no wonder the country is going down the tubes.
Response to HiPointDem (Reply #132)
devilgrrl This message was self-deleted by its author.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)let alone the canadian who found this local issue "pertinent" (to the similar education deform being undertaken in canada)
i
rebecca_herman
(617 posts)If they can't make exceptions for kids who need it, they shouldn't be having field trips to places with a high risk of sunburn. I am extremely pale and if I'm in the sun for more then a few minutes without sunscreen I pretty much cook - so I feel terrible for those kids, it's really painful. 5 hours in the sun with no shade and no sunscreen on a hot day sounds more like torture than a fun trip.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)
mrs_p
(3,236 posts)she thought field day would be moved indoors.
http://lifephotographed.com/2012/06/your-questions-about-our-story-answered/
mrs_p
(3,236 posts)A couple of thoughts. I don't know her, so am not trying to defend her. But, this is a reminder to me of how judgmental people can be without knowing all the facts...
It was raining in the morning. This is Tacoma, WA (where I grew up). Although we get hot days, this is not like Colorado (where I am living now), where you go outside and burn right away. We often have constant cloud-cover from about September to June. Seriously. I don't blame the mother for not putting sunscreen on in the a.m. It was raining - she thought the field day would be moved indoors.
Teachers were commenting on the children's sunburns. This mom is actually an advocate for teachers (in fact, our mutual friend is married to a teacher). She was upset with the policy. She wasn't bashing teachers in general. But the policy that would not allow them to intervene.
Finally, read her blog. She lays out her reasoning. And an update says Tacoma Public School policy will be changing. http://lifephotographed.com/2012/06/your-questions-about-our-story-answered/
Lars39
(26,535 posts)I wonder how all this is handled in Australia.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)Ban outdoor activities.
Vinca
(53,922 posts)A ban on sunscreen??????? Idiotic. If a kid is allergic to anything he/she should be taught to stay away from it and they should always have a remedy for contact close by.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i also didnt take kids out in the hours where it is the worst. they always had shade. and it was only so long. i also watched them. they never had a sunburn.
one summer my kids were staying with in law. my light skin youngest that had not been in the sun yet, this particular summer, did not get sun screen put on him. and the adults did nothing responsible in taking care of him. i get a call about a "pretty bad" sunburn. when i got that child back a couple days later and saw what he went thru, i was so angry. it has been years and i am still so angry that any adult would be so GD stupid.
everything about this is wrong. i get the moms anger.
Iggy
(1,418 posts)Mom didn't know about the sunscreen ban??
It's her job to know-- don't count on idiots to take care of your kids.
Even IF there is a "ban", Mom could put sunscreen on her kids one hour before they left for the
outing-- WHO would know? It's invisible.
Buns_of_Fire
(19,138 posts)This is after getting 2nd-degree burns on the beach in Ft. Lauderdale (living the following few weeks slathered in Noxema), riding my bicycle (and motorcycle) without a helmet, and occasionally cavorting with women of questionable virtue, I figure I should have probably been dead twelve years ago.
Robb
(39,665 posts)Better?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)You know you have a child with a Albinism, yet you didn’t do everything you could to protect her from sun exposure. Why?
Quite simply, I relied on previous experience to make a decision. Knowing what I know now, I sure as heck wish I would have been more proactive in my approach to understanding the field day program. The truth is that the girls are taken care of SO WELL in our day-to-day interaction with the school (again, my concern has never been about vilifying the school or staff), it was not on my radar. I’m human and I made the best choice I could based on my experience with the staff and school.
http://lifephotographed.com/2012/06/another-question-another-answer/
she went public to get a revision in the sunscreen policy & she got it.
but du-ers are still enraged, for reasons of their own.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)wha?
CleanLucre
(284 posts)under those conditions, with "very fair skin from a form of albinism" 
or dress them as beekeepers. SHIT!