As one of the whiter white people, this is deeply dismaying.

people with little melanin in their skin have a greater susceptibility to sunburn?

--any more than men should blow off breast cancer. Though much rarer, it is far more likely to be lethal if you aren't watching out for it to catch it early.

Office or nurse so a parent could be called to bring sunscreen. The administration should apply the same standard of care to the complaint ("I'm getting sunburned&quot if the remedy is considered a medication.

and requiring a parent to get a doctor's prescription before a student could bring it and apply it.

And lots of parents would have trouble leaving work to apply sunscreen.

like that. A note from the parent should be all that is required.

I remember what those burns are like, and if I don't have something like a 50 spf sunscreen, I still get the damn things.

Hats are mandatory, and big white cotton shirts somewhere in the gear are a plus.

Those poor babies.

It's criminal that they would let this happen to kids today. And one of those girls even has a 504 plan about it -- so the school should have told the mother about the sunscreen policy.

This is child abuse, pure and simple.

assuming the facts are as described by the mother.

Schools aren't drug stores, for economic and liability reasons. They won't even administer aspirin because they don't keep it on hand. If you want your child to take any over the counter meducation at school, you need to send it to school

This mother had already sat down with the school and discussed her daughters' sun sensitivity problems. At least one of them was on a 504, which the mother would have signed. And if she had sent sunscreen to school it would have been applied.

I fault the school for having the girls out in the sun in the first place but the mother also carries part of the blame here for not sending sunscreen to school. For that matter, as soon as she realized it was a sunny day, she should have gone to school and picked her kids up to be sure they weren't out in the sun.

A really pale kid could get sunburned over LUNCH.

But to expect the school to have it there when your child needs it is ridiculous.

If these kids were that sun sensitive, I don't understand why Mom even sent them to school on a day when she knew they'd be outside all day. Or why the school even let them go outside.

and to apply it on herself.

Just like a girl isn't allowed to bring a bottle of Tylenol and take it for cramps without having a doctor's note.

From the mother's blog:

"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."

It's every bit as much a legal agreement as an IEP. And every party on a 504 has a responsibility. The mother's responsibility is obviously to supply the sunscreen and the doctor's note. The school's responsibility was to make sure the sunscreen was applied. So they're both at fault here.

For that matter, if the child is so sun allergic that a 504 was necessary, I don't understand why the mom even sent her to school at all on Field Day or why the school even allowed her to go outside.

for next year. Why are you so determined to defend it when even the district is not?

The district's current policy wouldn't allow the girls to apply their OWN sunscreen. And the 504 apparently didn't address this situation. The girls came from another district with no sunscreen prohibition. I don't think the mother should be blamed for not anticipating how stupid this district's policy would be.

The blog also says these girls had never had a Field Day before, and that it was raining when they were sent to school. And sunscreen is supposed to be frequently reapplied. But the district wouldn't let the girls apply their own sunscreen as needed, without a doctor's note.

All children should be able to apply over-the-counter sunscreens as needed, without having to go to the expense of getting a doctor's note. So I am happy to hear this district will be changing their policy.

I think the mom screwed up as well. Why the HELL would you even send your severely sun allergic child to school on a day when you know she's going to be outside all day?

it was their first year in the school.

But what about all the other kids? Why should anyone have to pay to see a doctor just to use an over-the-counter sunscreen purchased by a parent? I know I sent sunscreen with my children to school and never thought about getting a doctor's prescription for it. Lucky we weren't caught.

How can the schools be worried about liability from a child applying the sunscreen she brought from home? Why are zero-tolerance policies carried to such ridiculous extremes? Have school administrators lost the ability to make reasonable judgments?

Christ. This again.

but I do think she should have called to confirm.

compared to other places where I could burn in 15 minutes.

I have to remind myself that I haven't grown out of sunburns.

caused a problem for her at school before now.

Besides, there are hundreds of other kids, including this girl's sister, who should have been able to bring sunscreen to school and apply it themselves that day. Why should ANYONE have to spend the money to visit a doctor just to get a note allowing them to use an over the counter sunscreen? Why isn't it enough that the parent bought it for them and told them to apply it?

Actually, it will be, in this district in the fall -- when they finish rewriting their stupid policy.

Yes, too much sun is always a problem for this girl.

But where we live, during this time of year, it is rarely a problem that she or anyone else has to deal with too much sun. Clouds are our friends.

Mother's responsibility: keep the kids home on field day because you know the school is insane with its sunscreen policy

School's responsibility: keep the kids indoors with a monitor as soon as you realize there's a sun issue. Call the parent to apprise them of the situation.

There is so much neglect and idiocy in this story that it makes my head spin. Everyone's at fault here.

I also don't believe it's unreasonable to expect the parent to make sure the child is aware of the danger of sun exposure and to ask to be excused from outdoor activities. Kids know enough to stay away from bees and peanuts.

As difficult as I find both your statements to believe, I will accept them at face value.

That still does not excuse teachers and school officials from the need to remove a frying child from the hot sun. It would take five minutes to take the child into the nurse's office and call the mother.

And, unless the child is very, very young or has developmental issues, she should have been made aware (by her parent) of the danger of sun exposure.

Really little kids are told about and comprehend their peanut allergies and know enough to stay away from bees.

I knew what Field Day was when my daughter was in first grade. Were these children home schooled prior to attending public school? Field Day. Hmmm...could this possibly involve outdoor activities?

The mother should have drilled it into these kids that they should never be outdoors without sun protection. Since this is so serious, I am sure the mother lathers them up every time they have an outing. 9 and 11 is old enough to say to the teacher, "I can't be in the sun without sunscreen. I'll get sick."

Nobody's off the hook on this one. Not the parents, not the teachers, not the school.

That's a ridiculous policy.

She's had how long to get the sunscreen and the note?

in order for the girls to apply their own sunscreen. We live in a northern latitude with little sun all spring and early summer, so this hasn't come up for them before.

And the district has already apologized and said that the policy will be changed. So why are you defending it?

At the 504 meeting the mother was told she needed to supply sunscreen and a note from the doctor.

Of course it's a ridiculous policy.

But, the mother AND the child should have been aware of it, and the teachers should have known about the child's condition before that child was ever allowed out of doors.

Mom: "you can't go out in the sun unless you wear sunblock. Mommy talked to the doctor and she's sending a note so you can put your sunblock on before going outside."

Kid: "I'm not allowed in the sun because I don't have my sunblock with me today."

Teacher: "Janie, I'm sorry, but you have to stay inside today because the sun can make you sick. If your mom brings your sunblock and a note from the doctor, you can go outside."

Even ridiculous things can be worked around.

I didn't, and I live here (but in a different district). I just sent the sunscreen along and no one prevented my child from using it.

Even three-year-olds can understand things like peanut allergies and to stay away from bees.

Their parent had a responsibility to explain their condition to them and to ensure that they would not go outside without sunscreen protection. The teachers should also have been informed and a contingency plan arranged.

This is just dumb, dumb, dumb all around.

even if she brought it from home and had a note from her mother.

Requiring a special note from the doctor still seems unnecessary and harmful to me. I think it is dumb, dumb, dumb for a school district to do anything to discourage sunscreen use.

And the district will be changing their policy in the fall, so even they recognized that it made no sense.

I am merely stating my opinion that the mother bears some responsibility here. If sun exposure is such a danger to the children, then she should have been more pro-active about protecting them: learning what "field day" is (duh); investigating the hat and sunscreen policy; sending a note to keep the kids indoors; keeping them home from school, something.

If my kid had a serious condition, I would be all over the school to make sure that the kid was protected, and I would make it my business to know what's going on in case my kid might be at risk.

The teachers and school officials are idiots for not taking the kids indoors. The mother is an idiot for not informing herself about what was going on. It's not like field day is a deep dark secret.

as enforced by the school district, affected thousands of kids. Even today, from what I've learned here, the vast majority of states have a policy like this.

I just wanted to give a heads-up to other parents who don't know. I always sent my kids to school with sunscreen and never dreamed that some school person might tell them they couldn't use it.

Also, I'm so tired of hearing about zero-tolerance policies -- whether it's principals who suspend kids for drawing a picture of a gun, or states who ban the use of all over-the-counter "medications" without a doctor's note. When did we lose the ability to make reasonable distinctions?

A note from a parent should be sufficient for the use of sunscreen and related products. Do we need a doctor's note for Chap Stick yet?

I understand the concerns of others who don't wish to be exposed to some products or allergens. Perfectly reasonable. Make sure the kid applies the sunscreen in the nurse's office or designated area. Make sure all the kids understand what sunscreen is, what it does, and why it might not be good for some people. What is so difficult about this? The same should apply to ANY substance that could adversely affect other kids.

My daughter is 18 years old and until last week (she graduated), she could not carry Tylenol in school. When she was suffering from a serious condition, it was easier to keep her home from school than to jump through the hoops required to have her medication administered. Heaven knows what diabetic kids (or kids with other medical dependencies) have to go through.

And should we require a doctor's note to let our kids wear a cap in winter (someone here justified the school's ban against hats to protect against the sun by saying that they might spread lice). In our Washington state district, students can't wear hats or caps in the classroom. But they're reminded to bring hats and gloves for recess during cold weather.

I also agree with you about educating the kids about the allergy issues. This is a school. They should know how to do that.

That means Mom had met with the staff to discuss her child's medical needs which included sun sensitivity. I can't imagine the 504 not including the use of sunscreen for outside activities. And it's the parent's responsibility to send the sunscreen to school. So for her to complain now seems a bit over the top to me.

without a doctor's note. Should every child who needs sunscreen (which is most white kids who are out for 5 hours) have to spend the money to get a note from a doctor?

You are giving the school district way too much credit for being reasonable. Clearly, you can't lock your mind around the fact that some school people DO behave this stupidly.

Would you send your child to school for a day of outside activities if she was so sun allergic it's considered a medical need severe enough for a 504? I know I wouldn't.

The mom bears part of the responsibility here. I'm not excusing the school at all. They shouldn't have let the child go outside at all. But if she needs sunscreen and Mom knows that and she knows the school's policy requires a doctor's note, why didn't she get the note and send the sunscreen?

Excuse the shouting, but you keep missing this point.

"The girls had never taken part in field day before nor had they been outside for an extended period of time at school, so Michener says she didn't know anything about the sunscreen rule or that her kids needed a prescription."

Also, the mother says that if the school had bothered to call her, she would have been to school in minutes to apply it herself. So teachers were applying sunscreen to their own skin (in front of the children), and even commenting about the girls' burns, but no one thought it was important enough to call the mother of a girl with Albinism and a 504.

Because of the constant threat of litigation, they don't just make this crap up at the last minute.

Plus as I have repeatedly explained, the need for sunscreen and a note from the doctor was explained to the mother at the 504 meeting MONTHS AGO.

Sure it's a stupid policy. But the mom knew about it.

For that matter, is there a parent anywhere in the country who doesn't understand that over the counter meds at school must be supplied by the parent and accompanied by a doctor's note? My heavens there's a story in our media once a month about this topic.

was explained to the mother. She said it wasn't and you don't have any information to the contrary. Meanwhile, the district has APOLOGIZED. At least they, if not you, recognized that they goofed.

And what about all the other hundreds of kids in that school who don't have a 504? Why should they have to spend the money to get a note from a doctor to apply their own sunscreen to their own skin? Why do some schools have dumb zero-tolerance policies that cover even things like sunscreens? Why shouldn’t a child be able to use a parent-supplied sunscreen without paying a doctor to get a note? Why don’t all school administrators use common sense?

WA state law has been changed because our state legislators recognized that the old policy was a dumb policy.

When my kids were in WA schools, our district must have chosen to ignore the policy, because no one said a word when my kids brought sunscreen to school, and used it. Not that that was necessary most of the time . . . .

And of course the district apologized. They're worried about a lawsuit. That's a no-brainier.

what was covered in that individual's 504, in a school in a district in a state where you don't live.

Maybe whoever wrote that one isn't as smart as you are. Isn't that just possible?

You don't need to be psychic to figure this one out.

You're just hell bent on blaming the school 100% when the parent had a responsibility here and failed to meet it.

and the whole state, through its legislators, has admitted that the policy was harmful.

Why can't you see that?

If the mother wasn't aware the child needed sunscreen for the outing, then why is she making a very weak excuse for not applying sunscreen?

If she didn't know about the policy, why didn't she send the kid to school with sunscreen? Then we could all discuss the kid having the SC taken away and THEN getting burned.

Why not apply sunscreen in the morning? A high-block sunscreen would have prevented most of that burn regardless off her weak-ass excuse of not being able to re-apply. It doesn't even make any sense to skip sunscreen all together because you can't re-apply. And the "rain" excuse doesn't cut it. Ever heard of water resistant sunscreen? An umbrella? Does she send the kids out in the rain unprotected too? The water resistant SC I used when swimming must be a figment of my imagination.


Why didn't the mother know the policy? Is she stupid? Lazy?

Why didn't the mother get a note from the doctor? The kid has a known medical condition. A doctor could have faxed a letter. A doctor's note for something like that is the easiest type of note to get.

The mother had the FIRST duty to protect her child and failed - either out of stupidity or laziness or both.

The school had the SECOND duty to protect the child and failed - either out of stupidity or laziness or both.

Of course the school apologized. They failed in THEIR end of the deal. And their policy need to be altered. But the mother has a lot of nerve making those weak-ass excuses and failing to take ANY blame.

I read several articles, and they all said that the school wouldn't allow the girls to apply their own sunscreen unless they brought a note from their doctor.

You misunderstood the "rain excuse." It was not a question of waterproof sunscreen -- although the FDA recently said no sunscreen really is waterproof, no matter what they claim. The mother mentioned the rain because she mistakenly thought the rain would mean the girls would be kept inside.

But this whole thing with the mother is a side issue. Since most states have a law similar to the one Washington just changed, millions of children across the country are being prevented from using sunscreen at school, unless they bring a note from a doctor. And yet many school children don't see a doctor every year and their parents can't afford the unnecessary cost. These laws are unreasonable and should be changed.

No common sense is in evidence anywhere here.

When I've needed doctor's notes for things, they fax them to the school. I don't have to pay for a visit. I think that is pretty common.

I am having a hard time believing that 9 and 11-year-old children were kept ignorant of their own conditions. You want me to believe that the mother never said anything about staying out of the sun?

I'm not saying the kids are responsible for what happened to them, or that the teachers would have kept them inside if the kids had requested it, but it would give the mother a stronger case if that were true. If the kids asked to stay inside and were forced out, that's way more negligent than merely herding them outside with the others--ignorant or not.

much less argue for it at that age.

And every child there should be able to use sunscreen that the parent sent from home.

The second girl didn't have a special medical condition; she was like every other person who should be using sunscreen when out in the sun for a significant period of time.

Good grief, every Englishman and idiot knows enough to get out of the noonday sun. What is wrong with these teachers? Bring the child indoors. Call the mother. Really.

then:

1) A doctor's note should have been on file (which the school never requested), and

2) The teacher should have taken the kid indoors when the sun came out after two hours (the maximum time the kid would be allowed to be outside w/o re-applying sunscreen)

Yes the child should have stayed inside. If I was the mother I would have gone to school and picked her up.

of year. And when it stops raining (like it did after noon in this case), it tends to stop raining in patches. It can be sunny over a school, and still raining a few blocks away. So it could have still been raining where the mother was. And the mother didn't know that Field Day meant they'd be outside for hours, since they'd never had a Field Day before. (We never signed a permission slip for one.)

The teachers at the school were putting on their own sunscreen, talking about the girls' sunburn, and yet not picking up the phone to call the mother, or sending the girls indoors.

I don't know how you can justify that.

I'm sure they are scared of lawsuits because somebody in the school might, could, possibly, maybe have an allergic reaction from just looking at someone with the sunblock on them.

a child applied a sunscreen that the parent gave the child to apply?

Such a lawsuit would be laughed out of court.

costs money, time, & gains bad PR.

Kind of like the weekly "here's a new stupid thing teachers/schools did!" bulletin.

But in some districts that's what it has come to, with ridiculous policies like this one.

I'm a volunteer and supporter of public schools, who works for the levy whenever it comes up. But when a policy as dumb as this one comes up, it should be publicized and condemned. That's how policies change.

Eventually, at different points, each made a different choice.

And even though I no longer have children in the public schools, that doesn't keep me from volunteering in the levies whenever they come up. I still believe in supporting them.

If so, you haven't been doing a very good job.

threads.

public schools, teachers, unions, and questioning the testing mania.

That doesn't mean I don't think they run by human beings and capable of making serious mistakes that should be fixed.

the stuff on kids. I have seen parents have fits if their kids are without it.

http://www.greenlivingtips.com/articles/127/1/Sunscreen---protection-or-poison.html
Sunscreen - protection or poison?
By Green Living Tips | Published 06/24/2011 | health , family
Sunscreen, our health and the environment


First published July 2007, updated June 2011

The regular use of sunscreen lotion might provide some protection from sunburn, but it may also have quite serious health risks - for ourselves and the wider environment.

The sunscreen industry is huge - worth billions of dollars annually. It rose to mega-profitability when a link was made between skin cancer and over-exposure to the sun in the late 60's/early 1970's. Yet the incidence of skin cancer continues to rise even though these products are widely used.

The latest investigation by the Environmental Working Group of over 1,700 sunscreens and other sun-blocking products currently on the market found only one in five sunscreens earned high marks for safety and efficacy. Leading brands were again this year among the worst offenders.

It's quite disturbing what's in some sunscreen preparations. Here's a partial list:

Aminobenzoic acid - possible carcinogen may be implicated in cardiovascular disease.

Avobenzone - possible carcinogen

Cinoxate - some evidence of skin toxicity

Dioxybenzone - strong evidence of skin toxicity and possible carcinogen; hormone disruptor and has been found in waterways, soil and air. Has been shown to have a "gender bender" effect in animals

Diazolidinyl urea - possible carcinogen, endocrine, central nervous system and brain effects, skin toxicity an compromises the immune system

Ecamsule - may be carcinogenic

Homosalate - endocrine disruption

Methylparaben - interferes with genes

Octocrylene - found to be persistent and bioaccumulative in wildlife, liver issues and possible carcinogen

Octyl methoxycinnamate - accumulates in the body, may disrupt liver and is a possible carcinogen

Octyl salicylate - broad systemic effects in animals at moderate doses

Oxybenzone - possible carcinogen and contributor to vascular disease, may affect the brain and nervous system in animals

Padimate O - suspected carcinogen

Phenylbenzimidazole - possible carcinogen

Phenoxyethanol - irritant, possible carcinogen, endocrine disruption

Sulisobenzone - strong evidence of skin toxicity, affects sense organs in animals

Titanium dioxide - suspected carcinogen when in nanomaterial form

Zinc Oxide - bioaccumulative in wildlife, evidence of reproductive toxicity

Fragrances, colors and preservatives - I hate to think

To prevent skin cancer, we need to slap on potentially carcinogenic compounds and chemicals that interfere with our immune and reproductive systems and that also pose a risk to the wider environment?

Millions of gallons of sunscreen is consumed each year. After application, it doesn't mysteriously vanish - it winds up either soaking into our bodies and accumulating there or is excreted (into the environment) or washed off; again - into the environment.

I'm now a little cynical about the claimed benefits of sunscreen. Sure, it may stop us from burning; but isn't that nature's way of telling us "get the heck out of the sun and don't stay out here this long again"? And aside from all the chemicals, does it actually stop melanomas, the most dangerous type of skin cancer, from forming?

Nobody has proven that sunscreen helps protect against melanomas as far as I know. In fact, some of the advice from researchers I've read basically states; "we don't know, but you should keep using sunscreen - just to be safe". How safe are we in applying these chemical cocktails?

One of the other problems with sunscreen is in order to be effective against less serious forms of skin cancer, you need to use a lot of it, and far more often than what the manufacturers recommend and regardless of what the SPF rating is.

If you're in shorts and a t-shirt and working up a bit of a sweat, the amount you'd need to use over an 8 hour period is the equivalent to a 100 ml or 3.5 ounce tube. Imagine if you worked outside each day and followed "best practice" sunscreen application - it would cost you a fortune, not to mention having applied many pounds of toxic chemicals to your body every year. Let's not forget about all that packaging too - mainly plastic tubes and pump packs that wind up in landfill - millions of them every single year.

By using sunscreen, are we swapping the risk of one type of cancer for more serious kinds, plus other health and environmental problems?

After many hours of reading on the subject; the cheapest, most earth friendly and proven sunscreen solutions I could find are:

- stay out of the sun
- stay out of the sun especially between 10 and 3pm
- if you have to spend time in the sun, cover up, wear a wide brimmed hat and uv sunglasses.

It's basically all just common sense.

I did come across earth friendly products that contained herbs and oils to replace some of the chemicals listed above, but I'm really not confident after the studies I've read as to how effective these might be in terms of preventing melanoma or other forms of skin cancer. There's also the issue of micronized and nanoparticle ingredients which are still often found in otherwise greener products. The Environmental Working Group has listed what it believes to be "good" sunscreens here; but even they say "the best sunscreen is a hat and a shirt".

Some people just aren't meant to spend lengthy periods in the sun - and light skinned Caucasians are a group most at risk. People with lighter features are 20 times more likely to develop melanoma than African Americans.

Perhaps it's just another case of us needing to work with the environment instead of trying to beat it all the time.

Same as every other state with the exception of California.

Not as of June 7th, when the state law changed.

And just because the laws are practically universal doesn't mean they're not dumb.

If a parent sends sunscreen to the school with the parent's note, that should be enough. Anything else is bureaucratic CYA nonsense.

First, why does the school require a doctor's note for OTC medication? In our school district, a parent's note is sufficient. My kids' school nurses have given my kids OTC meds in many situations. Tylenol, Advil, OTC allergy medicine, even cough drops (which require parent note and nurse dispensing). She put OTC medicine on my daughter's gums the day after she had teeth pulled. That seems pretty dumb to me that a doctor's note is required to give a kid a cough drop.

Second, if the kids were getting sunburned, why did they have to stay outside? If a child is ill, he or she goes to the nurse and then, if needed, home. The adults don't just watch the kid being sick wishing the kid had brought a doctor's note for something to help them. There was some serious lack of judgment or supervision or something for these poor kids.

Third, how has this never come up before? Is field day new at this school? My goodness, at my kids' school on field day you practically need a gas mask from all the sunscreen being sprayed. I'm not saying anything about the mom here or what she knew or didn't know. But the school and teachers must have known IN ADVANCE that the kids would be in the sun that long. I think I received about 5-10 emails from my kid's school before field day that the kids had to bring water and sunscreen and/or have sunscreen on. The teachers asked the kids before they even went out if they had sunscreen on. (of course thank goodness their school is reasonable and lets kids bring sunscreen and put it on at school). If a doctor's note was required for kids to have sunscreen at school (as stupid as I think that is, instead of simply parent note), they should have told ALL the parents that before field day.

I don't think Field Day is new at this school, but this family was new to the school and the mother says she didn't know what Field Day entailed.

Also, it's cloudy so much in the spring that most years this might not be an issue (we're also at a northerly latitude). When the mom sent the girls to school, it was raining. Unfortunately, it cleared up later in the day.

I'm curious what state you're in, since I've read here that almost all states have a law like this one. Though I also live in WA, which till recently had the doctor's-note-only law, I wasn't aware of it, and I always sent my children to school with sunscreen on Field Day. I didn't send them with my own note, either. It never occurred to me.

I had a friend in school who had albinism. Even back in the dark ages of the 1980s, he knew he needed to wear sunscreen outside, just as he knew he needed to wear his sunglasses and his hat. The school had an IEP in place to deal with the sunscreen and glasses and hat issue and the teachers were all aware of his condition.

never having been through one before. When she sent them to school it was raining.

She says she didn't know that the district had a policy requiring a doctor's note in order to use your own sunscreen.

When my kids were in public schools, it never occurred to me that there was a policy on this issue -- I just sent them with sunscreen, and no one told them they couldn't apply it.

Having lived there for six years, I know this time of year it may be raining in the morning, but you may get a sunbreak later in the day and the temps will soar to the 80s. I also learned never leave something to chance with the schools, even though I supplied glucose tablets for my diabetic daughter, they never thought to send them with her on a field trip. Thankfully I was a chaperone and had brought my purse with an extra tube. Otherwise she would have been out in the Puget Sound on a whale watching trip and I don't want to imagine what would have happened.

Edited to add: Yes I had to have a doctors note for the glucose tables (OTC) and I supplied the school with one bottle every three months, just in case. Some months she never needed them but they were there. This mother should have done the same with sunscreen.

and the state recognized that when they changed the law. The new law was already in effect when this happened to the girl; the district just hadn't changed its policy yet.

For argument's sake, the rule is idiotic, but she KNEW the rule and let her kids get burnt...lock her up.

As for the teacher using sunscreen, ever hear of liability, idiotic mother? The state has the rule because of liability to children, not to the teachers.

Again, this mother is pathetic.

I know some burn quicker than others, but most people, including those with brown skin, will burn spending 5 hours outside, including mid day hours, from spring to fall. I put sunscreen on my child and I if we are planning on being out more than an hour during mid day and would recommend it for anyone in those circumstances. Anyone should have a right to use sunscreen in those circumstances regardless of the color of their skin or sensitivity.