I've just had the latest newsletter from the primary school and it states that letters will no longer be sent to parents if headlice are detected in the school.
Now, as a parent, I find these letters invaluable beause it means that I step up my checks, much to the distress of my small son who
hates them.
Given that I'll no longer get a "heads-up" (pun unintended) and if I want to ensure that we avoid headlice, I'm going to have to increase my checking to the level of what I call "amber alert". So, as a family, we'll be on constant amber alert.
The rationale behind this piece of lunacy is based on PCness and is to avoid stigmatising children. The instructions continue that if your child has headlice, you go along to the chemist, announce the infestation in public and you're given free nasty chemicals to get rid of them. And this avoids stigmatisation how, exactly?
They advise
simultaneous thorough and adequate treatment of all confirmed cases with one of the standard chemical insecticide lotions....Make every effort to discourage unneccesary or inappropriate treatment with insecticides.
Am I thick? How can you manage simultaneous treatment when the treatment is down to the parents and they won't let the parents know if and when there is an outbreak?
In addition the active ingredient in the recommended treatment is an organoposphate, malathion. While in normal doses and irregular use this should have very few side effects it is known to cause teratogenic, mutagenic and carcinogenic effects in animal models. It's also been shown that a single dose can suppress the immune system. Now, I have nothing personal against malathion-based insecticides for headlice treatment and infact used it on the one instance where there was a mega outbreak at school. I do, however, have a problm with using it as frequently as we will have to if the powers that be get away with this.
They point out that parents are the first line of defence, then jam our radar. On top of this they then have the audacity to suggest that reccurring or persistent infestations may be due to parental neglect!!! They actually state
Repeated headlice infection may be symptomatic of other family stresses or neglect
(boggle icon mine)
They go on to say, and this is the part that really took my breath away
If a child presents with consistent or repeated headlice infection despite information and support to parents to treat the recurring headlice infection, health professionals and school staff should jointly consider what action to take next. If the family is experiencing difficulties which prevent the parents from treating the headlice infection effectively, they may need additional or special help from the health service or local authority social work services at home. The Children (Scotland) Act 1995 requires the local authority to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in need, with the assistance of other agencies, including health services
To be honest, I don't think I can type enough boggle icons to express my disbelief at this statement.
I've posted this in Coffee house because it's a Coffee house topic and I'd appreciate some input. Am I getting this entirely wrong? I hope I am, because I wouldn't like to think that my take on the policy (that it will encourage the spread of headlice) was correct.
Any takers?