Mom's just trying to protect her kids the best she can. She thinks the lead in her house is better off under three layers of paint than floating around in the air or coating the floor as dust. I can't blame her for not wanting to fork over 100K for something that might make matters worse.

Most kids in Boston grow up in houses with lead paint. I did, and so did most of you. And most kids never get lead poisoning, because they don't eat paint chips and the lead stays mostly where it is unless disturbed.

Maybe the state should be asking parents if they have cheap Chinese crap around the house and try to mitigate that first.

This sounds nuts. The purpose of the lead paint law was to prevent landlords from leaving peeling, chipped lead paint in appartnments where tenants would be powerless to remove it, not to tell homeowners what they can and can't have in their house.

My house was fully de-leaded a few years ago for a price closer to $16,000 -- which included replacing nearly all the windows (including frames) in the house. As part of that, the workers doing the de-leading have to clean the dust out of the house so effectively that it passes a follow-up test.

While I'm sure the Wellesley couple's house is significantly larger than mine, I can't imagine that they have actually gotten a reasonable price estimate for de-leading. $100,000 sounds like a number made up out of thin air. Either that, or their house is worth six times the value of my house -- which means that they can certainly afford the cost of de-leading it.

On top of that, their child's lead poisoning level was extremely high. The Globe article noted that the child's blood had a lead level exceeding the 25 ug/dl that triggers state inspection of the house. The Globe skipped over the fact that, I believe, a much lower value (10 ug/dl) is the threshold at which doctors must report the poisoning to the health authorities (and thus trigger a health investigation). With such a high level tested for their child (37 ug/dl) the parents ought to be so worried for the developmental / mental health of their child that they remove absolutely every possible contributor to the poisoning -- or else risk harming her health much more through extended exposure to lead poisoning.

Experts on lead poisoning say that most of it usually enters children through lead paint, while much lower amounts come through drinking water or other sources. But even if the child's case was unusual in that the primary source was jewelry, there is a apparently a significant additional contributor coming from the lead paint (according to the state's investigation of the house). Save the child's future by fixing the house.

Public health codes exist for a reason and are based upon decades of research and analysis performed by trained scientists, epidemiologists, and physicians. Just because you're rich and think you know a lot doesn't mean that they don't apply to you.

It definitely strikes me as odd that the child tested so high for lead, but I would think they'd want to remove any potential contributing sources, as soon as possible.

Why right or wrong? Its a tough spot to be in, I've been there myself. Not long after moving into our condo is Rosi one of my twins tested just over the line, the other was fine. The state had a woman on my doorstep before I even had a chance to hear it from our pediatrician. The state's position was that our home must be inspected but heres the catch they wont tell you about unless you beat it out of them. If you let the state inspector in you have are required by law to preform the abatement they recommend, we're talking taking out door frames, walls, the soil around your house - whatever it takes to remove the lead. If you opt to use a private state licensed inspector he is required to file his findings but you may pursue the course you choose to fix the problem. If your child continues to test at high levels over the next 6 months the state will inspect your house and make you do it their way.

We decided to go the private route and so for about $300 a man who used to work for the state came out and did the same test the state does. Its actually an interesting test, with a neato radar gun and a detailed report on every surface in your home, it takes about 3 hours. He found the only interior source of potentially hazardous lead to be the family room where a previous owner had stripped paint off the wood trim and left traces. The main lead culprit was the windows where lead dust is generated by moving the window up and down. The lead was particularly heavy there because it was once a common practice to change screens and storms annually with a fresh coat of white paint.

Based on the combined advice of the lead inspector and our pediatrician we opted to have all of our windows replaced and capped (exterior trim). We also coated all of our living room trim in 3 coats of poly, and gave the entire house a wash down with TSP detergent. We redoubled our efforts at hand washing and gave our daughter iron drops as our pediatrician recommended. I'm very happy to report that in the follow up tests my daughter's lead levels dropped dramatically and have remained low. Nearly every home in MA has some lead, what I think made the difference was that our daughter drools and puts her fingers in her mouth more than most tots.

Not to fuel a fight but the inspector did tell me that the lead program needs to bag a certain quota of cases per year to keep their funding and they will go pit-bull on people even where theres room for a more middle of the road solution.

So the experts have successfully driven these parents to high levels of lead paint paranoia, and the same experts - and posters here - are surprised at their reaction? They're just followed enviro-nuttiness to its logical conclusion. Now you blame them for wanting to err on the safe side?

Tens of millions - virtually all - of Americans have lived in houses with lead paint. All the scientists, all the engineers, the novelists and the teachers. Presidents, judges, musicians, you name it, they lived it. If you think there is a scintilla of evidence that they were harmed by lead paint, you're dreaming. Lead paint can be harmful, in special cases. In a well-cared for house in Wellesley, it's a paranoid dream.

The child's blood lead levels may have been elevated before they moved in to their current home, but they failed to decline even after the parents removed the supposedly contaminated charm necklace.

Children's lead levels can decline quite rapidly if the parents are responding appropriately. For example, some friends of mine in NJ got their kid's lead level down from 21 to 13 in one month once they found out about the problem... and they took action wa-aa-aaay before their child's lead levels went over 25, much less over 30!

In that case, the child with the lead problem is one half of a set a twins; the other child had the same environmental exposure but could get the lead out much more effectively, so his lead levels never got above 12, iirc. That fact may be confusing the Wellesley couple, who are seeing that their other kid is o.k. and obviously not listening to those who know more than they do.

Sadly, their lead-poisoned child is in critical danger of life-long impairment because of their refusal to take effective action. So, the State is right to take action before their child becomes dependent on State-funded care all her life.

Their child would be oh so much better off if they removed all the lead in her environment and got her lead levels down asap. Who knows why they don't understand that? Who knows why they don't care about her welfare?

Let's just hope they are not also the type of ignoramous who thinks vaccinations are too dangerous. That poor child may survive the lead poisoning only to die or get brain-damaged from the measles!

Why should a hardworking family have to spend 100k getting this fixed while big oil and the paintmakers sit back in luxury? It's an outrage against the middle class.

Those bastards caused this in the first place and they must be made to pay.

SwirlyGrrl = informed, passionate, most likely correct compared to other commentators.

I appreciate what you have written and agree with you 100%