Sunscreen: Mom challenges school over kids' sunburn. Who's fault?

Sunscreen pros and cons aside, institutions, individuals, moms, dads, and kids have to start thinking more, and passing the buck less. There's a bigger social question about responsibility behind the story of two girls who got sunburned on a school field trip.

|
Reza A. Marvashti/The Free Lance-Star/AP
Sunscreen is at the center of a controversy in Washington State, where two kids were badly sunburned on a school field trip because they hadn't lathered up in sunblock. Their mom forgot to do it, the school wouldn't for liability reasons. Here, John Law, 10, applied sunscreen at summer camp in Fredericksburg, Va., last week.

Welcome to the land of bizarre summertime news.

If bus monitors-turned-almost-millionaires and ponytail-chopping judges weren’t enough, we also have this tidbit from Washington State: a mom irate about her children getting badly burned on a school field trip after school officials refused to give them sunscreen.

Because sunscreen, according to school policy, is dangerous. And a liability. All those additives and potential allergens, they explained.

And school district policy is clear that no medication – even sunscreen – can be applied without a physician’s consent.  (One teacher apparently even applied sunscreen in front of the girls, but said that she couldn’t share.)

So, mom Jesse Michener ends up rushing daughters Violet and Zoe to the hospital because they look about the same color as lobsters when they get home, while the principal apologizes for not having been able to do anything to protect them.

Um … where does one even start with this one?

Leaving the pros and cons of sunscreen aside (I wonder what the school district thinks about, I don’t know, soap), it seems to me that the whole story reflects a bigger social question about personal agency and responsibility. 

I mean, it seems pretty backwards for a school – you know, an institution ostensibly designed to promote independent thought – to have a culture where individual actors have lost the ability to make reasonable, case-by-case judgments. 

But it’s hardly rare. Talk to any number of teachers or administrators and you’ll hear similar stories.

And it’s not just schools. Remember that story of the airport monitors hauling a toddler off a plane for being on the terrorism “no fly” list? The sort of non-thinking rule following, often at the expense of logic, and often molded by some sort of liability fear, is pretty commonplace in American officialdom.

But it’s not, I might venture, particularly helpful.

Because I think it impacts, among other things, parenting.  

I certainly don’t want to pass judgment here – goodness knows how many times I’ve taken Baby M into town forgetting hat, sunscreen, diapers, even pants – but it’s hard not to wonder why, knowing her daughters were particularly sensitive to sun, Ms. Michener wasn’t a bit more proactive pre Field Day.

Now, a perfectly reasonable answer to this is “I forgot, but I expected the school – to whom I entrust my kids every day – would provide a little backup.”  I’d be sympathetic to that.

But instead, there’s widespread, accusatory outrage – the sort that suggests the harm is totally someone else’s fault.

And that, also, seems unhelpful.

Maybe the real lesson in this is that all of us – institutions, individuals, moms, dads, kids – have to start thinking more, and passing the buck less.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Sunscreen: Mom challenges school over kids' sunburn. Who's fault?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Family/Modern-Parenthood/2012/0627/Sunscreen-Mom-challenges-school-over-kids-sunburn.-Who-s-fault
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe