lice policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also see this piece from Slate last spring: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2014/03/lice_in_school_let_em_stay.html

This makes my blood boil. How irresponsible.

It's easy to be dismissive when you have boys (or ugly girls). Beautiful hair is rare. I don't need to know who CONTAMINANT X is, but it's not unreasonable for you (as a school) to let me know that my friendly little child is rubbing up against a child with lice. I don't need to know who the lousy chlid is, but the heads-up means quite a lot.

And there's your problem right there: First, lice does not do any damage to one's hair. And second, someone with lice is not "contaminated." There is no health risk or infection associated with lice. They are a nuisance, for sure, but not a health risk. It's like saying someone with a mosquito bite is contaminated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also see this piece from Slate last spring: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2014/03/lice_in_school_let_em_stay.html

This makes my blood boil. How irresponsible.

It's easy to be dismissive when you have boys (or ugly girls). Beautiful hair is rare. I don't need to know who CONTAMINANT X is, but it's not unreasonable for you (as a school) to let me know that my friendly little child is rubbing up against a child with lice. I don't need to know who the lousy chlid is, but the heads-up means quite a lot.

And there's your problem right there: First, lice does not do any damage to one's hair. And second, someone with lice is not "contaminated." There is no health risk or infection associated with lice. They are a nuisance, for sure, but not a health risk. It's like saying someone with a mosquito bite is contaminated.

Not exactly. Child A's mosquito bites won't make Child B itch, but his lice sure could.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also see this piece from Slate last spring: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2014/03/lice_in_school_let_em_stay.html

This makes my blood boil. How irresponsible.

It's easy to be dismissive when you have boys (or ugly girls). Beautiful hair is rare. I don't need to know who CONTAMINANT X is, but it's not unreasonable for you (as a school) to let me know that my friendly little child is rubbing up against a child with lice. I don't need to know who the lousy chlid is, but the heads-up means quite a lot.

I am just speechless at the comment. Parents of boys or "ugly girls" may not care? WTF? i would not wish it on any child, particularly one with you for a parent as that must be some cross to bear already, but you kind of deserve to have to deal with a huge outbreak where your child is the friendly little "lousy child" that infects everyone.

[Anonymous]

I don't object to the policy, I don't want kids to be out of school. I just wish the school would make sure the child with lice is treated, so he/she is able to focus on school and not an itchy head. And I want to be told if there's lice in my classroom, so I can do some preemptive treatment.

My kids current school, there are announcements about an outbreak in a class, but never anything about the particular child. And lice don't seem to be that big of a problem At my kids previous school, no announcement, no nothing and lice was rampant.

[Anonymous]

The end of the no-lice policy is a mistake. I'm not sure why a policy that was working (no endless lice infection at our school) was changed
and I am very glad that in our charter the policy has not changed.

I lived in countries without this policy where the entire school year (!!!) kids had lice, day in and day out. Because no matter clean you are at home and clean you get your kids, if kids with lice are allowed to stay in school, the infection becomes endemic.

Where is the law that says that only "health threats" were good reasons to keep a kid away from school??
Parents won't care unless they are told that their kids cannot come back to school (and they have to miss work...) -- Then, they'll clean their kid's heads carefully.

Kids with lice should be sent home and cleaned up (try to learn and concentrate on a lesson when your head is on fire and you're itching!)

Lice may be not dangerous but show up at work with lice in your head and you'll see the reaction of your colleagues (yes, lice infect more than just kid's hair...)

Kids (and parents apparently...) should learn that having lice is not acceptable in modern society. There is no excuse to have a kid showing up at school with lice. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The end of the no-lice policy is a mistake. I'm not sure why a policy that was working (no endless lice infection at our school) was changed
and I am very glad that in our charter the policy has not changed.

I lived in countries without this policy where the entire school year (!!!) kids had lice, day in and day out. Because no matter clean you are at home and clean you get your kids, if kids with lice are allowed to stay in school, the infection becomes endemic.

Where is the law that says that only "health threats" were good reasons to keep a kid away from school??
Parents won't care unless they are told that their kids cannot come back to school (and they have to miss work...) -- Then, they'll clean their kid's heads carefully.

Kids with lice should be sent home and cleaned up (try to learn and concentrate on a lesson when your head is on fire and you're itching!)

Lice may be not dangerous but show up at work with lice in your head and you'll see the reaction of your colleagues (yes, lice infect more than just kid's hair...)

Kids (and parents apparently...) should learn that having lice is not acceptable in modern society. There is no excuse to have a kid showing up at school with lice. Period.

You are insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The end of the no-lice policy is a mistake. I'm not sure why a policy that was working (no endless lice infection at our school) was changed
and I am very glad that in our charter the policy has not changed.

I lived in countries without this policy where the entire school year (!!!) kids had lice, day in and day out. Because no matter clean you are at home and clean you get your kids, if kids with lice are allowed to stay in school, the infection becomes endemic.

Where is the law that says that only "health threats" were good reasons to keep a kid away from school??
Parents won't care unless they are told that their kids cannot come back to school (and they have to miss work...) -- Then, they'll clean their kid's heads carefully.

Kids with lice should be sent home and cleaned up (try to learn and concentrate on a lesson when your head is on fire and you're itching!)

Lice may be not dangerous but show up at work with lice in your head and you'll see the reaction of your colleagues (yes, lice infect more than just kid's hair...)

Kids (and parents apparently...) should learn that having lice is not acceptable in modern society. There is no excuse to have a kid showing up at school with lice. Period.

You are insane.

Not the PP, but how exactly is she insane? I read the Slate article and can't understand how these people can so casually contradict themselves. "It’s not that easy to get lice!” Duff exclaimed. “They don’t fly. They don’t jump. They can barely crawl through your scalp. They can only spread through head to head contact, and children in schools don’t usually have head-to-head contact.”

Well if this were true, then I wouldn't have to worry about my children getting lice from their classmates. And the classmates wouldn't be getting it either right? Since it's not that easy to get in the first place?

Except apparently it is, or we wouldn't have lice outbreaks. So which is it? Easy to get (in which case get the lousy kids out of school) or difficult (in which case, there shouldn't be a problem)? Since there are outbreaks, it's not looking that difficult. Keep your lousy children at home.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand who the parents are who want there to be children teeming with lice at their school. You will just have to keep treating and retreating your own children.

There is no excuse for lice in public in a civilized society.

[Anonymous]

I suspect a lot of infestation happens on school buses-the elementary kids sit 2 or 3 to a seat. 3 to a seat is very convenient for lice to hop from one head to another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand who the parents are who want there to be children teeming with lice at their school. You will just have to keep treating and retreating your own children.

There is no excuse for lice in public in a civilized society.

Pretty simple, really. The cost to society from keeping children out of school is higher (lower academic achievement, getting behind in class, as proved by multiple studies) than the cost of periodic lice outbreaks (general discomfort).

That's how decisions like this should be made, not based on your pronouncements of what you have decided is acceptable in a "civilized" society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The end of the no-lice policy is a mistake. I'm not sure why a policy that was working (no endless lice infection at our school) was changed
and I am very glad that in our charter the policy has not changed.

I lived in countries without this policy where the entire school year (!!!) kids had lice, day in and day out. Because no matter clean you are at home and clean you get your kids, if kids with lice are allowed to stay in school, the infection becomes endemic.

Where is the law that says that only "health threats" were good reasons to keep a kid away from school??
Parents won't care unless they are told that their kids cannot come back to school (and they have to miss work...) -- Then, they'll clean their kid's heads carefully.

Kids with lice should be sent home and cleaned up (try to learn and concentrate on a lesson when your head is on fire and you're itching!)

Lice may be not dangerous but show up at work with lice in your head and you'll see the reaction of your colleagues (yes, lice infect more than just kid's hair...)

Kids (and parents apparently...) should learn that having lice is not acceptable in modern society. There is no excuse to have a kid showing up at school with lice. Period.

The lice have become resistant to many of the first line treatments that kept them at bay a generation ago. Social acceptability doesn't have much to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand who the parents are who want there to be children teeming with lice at their school. You will just have to keep treating and retreating your own children.

There is no excuse for lice in public in a civilized society.

Pretty simple, really. The cost to society from keeping children out of school is higher (lower academic achievement, getting behind in class, as proved by multiple studies) than the cost of periodic lice outbreaks (general discomfort).

That's how decisions like this should be made, not based on your pronouncements of what you have decided is acceptable in a "civilized" society.

It's pretty uncivilized behaviour to infect and inconvenience others

[Anonymous]

So "the deciders" think it is fine for kids to just have lice? Do they really think it doesn't have an impact on the learning environment...a room full of kids crawling with head lice?

Or are they hoping that the "responsible" parents will do the hard work of delicing their kids over and over again to prevent the rampant lice infestation that would otherwise happen?

[Anonymous]

Sorry -- It is not a question of "resistance to anti-lice" treatments or any chemical.
There are special combs that do the job. No chemical needed (or maybe some essence of rosemary to prevent them to come back. That's about it.).

This discussion is very symptomatic of the idea that schools (and not parents!) should somehow be responsible to have kids cleaned up.
You're the parent. it's your job to make sure your kids show up at school clean and ready to learn. As for the "Low academic achievement", it does correlates very strongly with the involvement of the parents in their kid's well-being.
Letting their kids go to school with lousy heads (or thinking that this has no impact on their leaning experience) show indeed how little they are engaged. The law should not be encouraging this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry -- It is not a question of "resistance to anti-lice" treatments or any chemical.
There are special combs that do the job. No chemical needed (or maybe some essence of rosemary to prevent them to come back. That's about it.).

This discussion is very symptomatic of the idea that schools (and not parents!) should somehow be responsible to have kids cleaned up.
You're the parent. it's your job to make sure your kids show up at school clean and ready to learn. As for the "Low academic achievement", it does correlates very strongly with the involvement of the parents in their kid's well-being.
Letting their kids go to school with lousy heads (or thinking that this has no impact on their leaning experience) show indeed how little they are engaged. The law should not be encouraging this...

And the blatant disregard for how this affects everyone else says quite a lot.