School district doesn't need to collect data on nits, lice
I agree with Christy Little's statement andquot;Our children are the ones in the schools (and) if this is not what we want, we shouldn't be forced to have it.andquot; (andquot;Parents skeptical of board's nit stance,andquot; Feb. 22). Why does the school district feel it has to get the statistics to see if the policy has been effective? We are the parents; numbers in this case don't really matter.
What makes it so hard is that for me and other working parents is it is extremely frustrating to deal with the treatment of lice as well as time-consuming, and many of us don't have time like that to spare.
I would suggest the board members take a day off from their regular schedule and work at the Healthy Start Center treating children's heads. Maybe then they will have a different outlook on the issue.
On the day I discovered my daughter had lice, I saw her scratching her head, so I checked her hair and found her to have quite a few fresh nits and live lice. Would you believe that while I was looking through her hair she told me that they did head checks that very day, and the school told her she did not have any nits or lice.
In addition, I did not even receive an exposure notice from her class, which means they did not find any nits or lice an any of the students hair - which I find very hard to believe. That is the only way she would have gotten them.
I don't know who preformed the head checks in her classroom that day, but they were very wrong. How many other children had their heads checked by this person? Those kids continue to have lice, probably some without their parents knowing.
In the meantime, if this policy is going to remain in effect, they should train the liaisons performing the checks to know what they should be looking for.
I am adamantly willing to help start a petition now! Why wait?! Please feel free to contact me, Christy and/or any other concerned parents. Let's get together and take care of this soon to be, if not already, epidemic. E-mail me at email@example.com.
Daylight saving time not about kids waiting in dark for bus
Thanks for the article on daylight saving time (andquot;What tonight means for your computer, VCR,andquot; March 10).
I must take umbrage at one statement, apparently from the wire service, however. Indeed, there are safety concerns for children standing in the dark waiting for a school bus, but these concerns are caused by the early start of daylight savings time.
Our local school district starts picking up some students by 7 a.m., or in a few cases a little earlier. With daylight saving time starting in March, a lot of students will be waiting for the buses in the dark instead of in the daylight. The sun will come up later in the morning, not earlier. The statement that andquot;Safety concerns for children waiting at bus stops in the dark has been also offered as a good reason to have daylight saving timeandquot; is wrong.