Caprock turning into Craprock over shaved hair

It was meant as a gesture of solidarity: a girl in Grand Junction, Colorado shaved her head to support her friend, who is battling cancer. However, family members say the girl's school didn't see it that way and said it violated the dress code policy. Now, what started as a simple gesture is turning into a battle over whether hair should matter in school. For the two girls on the playground, though, Monday afternoon was all about sharing fun in the sun and sporting matching bald heads. "It felt like the right thing to do," Kamryn Renfro said. With her parents' permission, Kamryn shaved her head in support of her cancer-stricken friend, 11-year-old Delaney Clements. She lost her hair because she is undergoing chemotherapy in her fight against neuroblastoma, a childhood cancer. Delaney loved what her friend did. "It made me feel very special and that I'm not alone," she said. However, when Kamryn tried to go back to school at Caprock Academy in Grand Junction this week, she wasn't allowed in. Turns out, having a shaved head is a violation of the school's dress code policy. The school said in a statement: "Caprock Academy does have a detailed dress code policy, which was created to promote safety, uniformity, and a non-distracting environment for the school's students. Under this policy, shaved heads are not permitted." Seriously, what sort of crap is this? They let Delaney go to school with no hair, so why not Kamryn? And besides, the hair will grow back. Imagine what it would take for a little girl to volunteer her locks, and then to be vilified by her school for an act that should be met with praise, all in the name of a dress code! Speaking of code, city government in Birmingham, Alabama has voted to adopt standards from the International Property Maintenance Code to update existing - and outdated - housing codes. The city currently uses building codes derived from the International Code Council's International Building Code. Many of the current standards for property maintenance in the city's array of housing ordinances were passed in the 1950s and 1960s, and are out of step with those modern building codes, causing conflicting or confusing problems. "Some of the thresholds of the current ordinances are more stringent than the technical codes," a release from the city states. "This causes a conflict when we approve building a structure one way, then require maintenance of a more stringent method."