SIL wants her baby to 'catch a tan'

[LocksHear]

AIBU to be fuming?!

She refuses to cover him up and isn't applying any sun lotion. Baby is 10 months.

Apparently no one puts sun lotion on their kid's in her country, and they're just kept out of the sun when it's at its strongest (between 1.30/3)

She's adamant he doesn't burn, and she doesn't. Which is true. But burning isn't the only sign of skin damage by the sun. So is a sun tan. Any change to pigmentation is, isn't it?

I was at the park with her and all the kids yesterday, I made a point of putting sun lotion on all of mine, and made sure I had loads in my hands when I said "Oh I've loads left. Let me do yours. Might as well, loads left "

She was very and said I'd rather you didn't. I didn't know what to say to that. 5 minutes later she claimed to have a migraine coming on and left.

I've been advised to report her to her health visitor but I know she doesn't have one.

Deshasafraisy are you on drugs!!!!

Speaking as a someone who’s mum had skin cancer and she never sat out in the sun, your comments are not only unhelpful but dangerous.

Not using sun cream is reckless and stupid.

I agree OP. On hotter days my son plays outside in the morning and later afternoon. During the hotter period “11-3” we tend to come inside for lunch and a rest to avoid getting too hot and burnt.

I have a fair skinned redhead, I should get shares in sun lotion. Did you know you can get sun lotion for your hair!

She has to reapply regularly, stay out of the midday sun and cover up with a hat and lightweight clothes. Otherwise, she will burn within twenty minutes. Luckily being a redhead she makes extra vit d

My dd1 has olive skin and never burns even if she hasn't had sun lotion applied.

Everyone is different and has different parenting styles, I wouldn't worry about theirs.

www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/skin-cancers/by-country/

Here's skin cancers death rates around the world. Interesting what some posters are saying about attitudes in Croatia considering its got one of the highest death rates from skin cancer. I'm also really surprised to read that Australia has the highest rate as it's so hot there so assume they would be protected through referring exposure, but then I realised Australians (excluding aboriginals) have light complexions so less melanin and natural protection

Report her?
Get a grip.
Its up to her and not your place to interfere. Maybe she has a mind of her own and doesn't believe all they hype about suncream. Maybe she thinks Its a mass ploy for such companies to ensure your business. People have survived without suncream since time began. Who knows, maybe she is right. I grew up none the wiser. When I was little we had a bit of sun cream but it wasn't crucial. Even when I brought up my older ds's nothing much was said except about burning in the sun.
Do yourself a favour and park it.

I have had two basal cell carcinomas removed from my face. I don't sunbathe, but my consultant said the damage was done 40 years ago when I did sunbathe. Protecting your children from the sun now will save them from surgery and potential life threatening skin cancers in the future.

Agree with OP. I can't believe all these people saying not to interfere and that it's ok....it is not ok. That poor baby doesn't have a choice and is being put at risk. I would even go as far as to say neglect, no matter what country you live in, we all know in this century that the sun's rays are harmful for a young babies skin, she should be keeping the baby out of direct sunlight or putting cream on them. 5/10 minutes maybe acceptable, but longer than that and hoping they will get a tan is just irresponsible. As your nephew/niece (sorry I didn't note which!) you have a right to a say surely? It's making me cross !!

I thought suncream wasn't recommended for under 1s because they have too high a concentration of chemicals. Shading the baby is just recommended until 1 I believe.

They can still get their VitD in the shade, there's no need to leave a baby exposed.

Yes Hippity, even if she doesn't like the chemicals in the cream, she should at least be keeping them in the shade. Your body gets vitamin D with just daylight after 5 minutes.

It's all about balance. Of course you shouldn't leave a baby out in the sun for hours without cream.

However I agree, some people are too quick to crack out the SPF 50 and never let any sunshine on their kids. Mine are quite olive skinned so I know they are fine for a good 30 mins then I'll put cream on if we are staying out. Vitamin d is so important and we do get the most from the sun around midday, on the arms and legs, uncovered.

The vitamin D link (low levels of) and cancer is very interesting.

www.mstrust.org.uk/a-z/vitamin-d

think this makes an interesting read

I am actually worried about Lock's children who are never going to be allowed the slightest change to their pigmentation. Not even a freckle then? I don't know any adults with skin cancer, although there are plenty of other cancers around affecting adults I know and MS and bone issues and depression and auto immune problems like diabetes and arthritis. I don't lead a charmed life, but skin cancer does not seem to be affecting many of my parents friends, who all grew up in a era when children were encouraged to play outside in the sun without suncream judiciously. We actually think that my grandparents' penchant for sunbathing protected their health long term, they both lived with few health issues into their nineties.

There is no such thing as a sun tan - it's skin damage.

Check out skin cancer.org

"So is a tan ever a good thing? From a health perspective, certainly not! The low level of photoprotection afforded by a tan is far outweighed by the damage incurred in its development and maintenance"

Wanna be browner? - Fake it.

I also 100% agree with the comment about reporting everyone for everything all the flipping time.
People don’t need to be paid to spy on their neighbours, they just do it for funsies.

If she keeps him in the shade enough that he hasn't got any hint of sunburn when they were in the park for 2 hours at lunch time, then he doesn't need suncream on. I think you need to mind your own business and respect that she parents differently than you. If she was actually harming the child, misjudging it and he had sunburn then I would obviously understand your concern, but she's not, so wind your neck in

Oh ffs, you think a child doesn't need sunscreen on just because they tan well and don't burn?

Come on now, you can catch a tan in the shade, you can catch a tan wearing factor 50, you can catch a tan popping out to the shops for two minutes. The only way to avoid a sun tan is to avoid the sun. And that’s just stupidity.

Nettleskeins oh well if you dont know anyone with skin cancer we must all be making it up.

A quick Google will tell you that approx 1 in 50 of us will develop a malignant melanoma. That's just one of the types of skin cancer ( the most deadly) Basal cell carcinoma is more common. It is thought that somewhere around 85% of skin cancers are caused by sun exposure. It is also on the increase. The other important fact is that it is thought a lot of the damage occurs in people when they are young.

My children take vitamin supplements as the NHS recommend for children 5 and under ( they continue beyond 5) and they eat a healthy balanced diet but I protect them from the hot sun and would consider allowing them to burn as neglect. The idea that you would WANT your children to tan (i.e. suffer skin damage because of the sun) is ludicrous.

Oh and there are chemicals in everything. Do you use shower gel and shampoo? Do you take medication? Do you eat anything that is treated or processed in any way?

I am staggered by the ignorance on here. No wonder rates of skin cancer are on the up.

I'm not saying avoid the sun completely, nor am I saying cover up from the sun at the first chance of a glow.

But leaving a baby in direct sunlight for hours isn't sensible and is pretty cruel, all for 'a tan'.

But yeah, it's just a different parenting choice. One that can cause cancer later on in life, but that's fine. I should just completely turn a blind eye and be happy for her as she cracks on

Black people can get skin cancer. Burns as children are a big risk factor. She is being VVVU.

Why is skin cancer on the up then? Genuine question.
People are being more cautious now, not less.
So why isn’t it static, until this generation grow old, when you’d think it would start to decline?

It's England in April, presumably, the mother is outside with her baby and has an idea of how comfortable she is, so it really has nothing to do with you. Personally, I think constantly covering children in factor 50 sun creme is ridiculous. God forbid British children get exposed to any actual sun. I'm white and also from a hot country, my children don't walk around with awful burns like I see here because we're sensible about things. It has been warm for about 36 hours so I do expect to see the annual"holy shit they let my child play outside in 17c temperatures!" posts though

In north Wales over the last few days it has been around 19/20 degrees with clear blue skies definitely hot enough to burn. I should know because I spent half an hour outside yesterday and now my shoulders are burnt. Although I do burn very easily. I always put suncream on my dd if it is very hot/sunny and she is going to be out in the sun for extended periods. Luckily for her she takes after her dad rather than me so she isn't likely to burn through a car window. There is nothing wrong with a little bit of sun exposure but no sun cream, not in the shade and not covered up is surely dangerous for a 10 month old at midday?

But leaving a baby in direct sunlight for hours isn't sensible and is pretty cruel, all for 'a tan'.

Dairy I'm not overreacting. She is leaving him out well over 20 minutes at a time, in direct sunlight

Well over twenty minutes isn't hours though

KreigersClones I'm not a medic or a statistician but I can hazard a guess.

1.growing population means that people are living longer and rates of a cancer are higher the older you get

1. People started travelling abroad more in the 70s and 80s and this trend has continued. This means that people's skin had more sun exposure, it was far more common to burn back then in my experience

1. Less ozone layer means more harmful effects of the UV rays on our skin.

Ah ok thanks pineapple. I remembered something about exposure to the sun but not the detail. :)