I’m frustrated with the article “Local braider takes fight to state” (June 20, Kent Reporter).
Quite a long time back I got a bad scalp infection. Ever since I must see a dermatologist, use special meds and strong prescription shampoo to keep it under control. This makes a strong case for anyone who works with the hair and scalp and touches people in anyway to be licensed though the state Department of Health and the state Department of Licensing which govern businesses of this sort.
This is serious business to allow anyone to work on hair and scalp. The laws exist to protect people from infections such as mine. There should be no exceptions made. It is hell to live with an incurable scalp infection. And since she isn’t aware of these health issues and the damage that can be done — she needs to be educated as to why these laws exist. Does she use a comb or brush? Are these properly disinfected as the state laws require?
She should be expected to obey all the laws hairdressers do concerning touching a person’s hair and scalp. She should not be allowed a license to work on heads, period. Unless educated, she can spread disease that can’t be cured.
Why is this even an issue? Salamata Sylla does not have the right to operate unless she abides by the laws that exist governing her “profession.” She’s doing hairdressing, regardless of the type. She’s dealing with humans that can get infected and she can spread it to others also. If a beauty shop infects someone, they are held liable. Who’s checking Salamata out to determine if she abides by the health laws for hairdressers?
– Amelia Albrecht
Talk to us
Please share your story tips by emailing editor@kentreporter.com.
To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website https://www.kentreporter.com/submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.
