[libramunoz]

To me the issue was the child's removal, the principal's apparent approval, and the failure of both the teacher and the principal to notify the parent.

It sounds like the teacher didn't want to a) be bothered with the child or b) wanted to have something negative to say about the child or c) felt the child was doing too well and had to do "something" about it. Of all the "reasons" for changing this child's classroom because of her "allergies" or "allergic reaction" to this hair care product, phuleeeze! I'm sure the woman could have done better than that.

Moreover, this girl had apparently been in this class for over a year, and just now, JUST NOW, the teacher seems to "notice" such an offending smelling hair product. It doesn't make any sense what so ever.

Both the teacher and the principal and the district have some serious explaining of this situation to do. The child should have never been removed from the classroom setting from the get go. The whole issue could have been resolved in many other ways than what the teacher did and what the principal/district allowed her to do.

Attending school in a very small town will teach you many things, especially about covert and overt racism, and to me, this is what this whole situation is about.