I AM curious how you can see a diaper rash on a child at Target and ASSume that the mother doesn't think anything of it, though? Is it because she's not fretting and worrying out loud so you can hear her? Mighty presumptive of you, don't you think? My poor DD suffered from thrush rashes several times and I got some weird stares from folks who wondered why her butt was purple. I wonder if I should have been wearing a t shirt that read "It's gentian violet, dummy" so those who assumed the worst would know?
It may seem presumptive to you, it was just an observation. Presumptive would have been to say something or to call her out in some way. But every person makes observations and judgements in their daily lives, that's human analytical nature.
And although I would have taken DS to the ped for the rashes I'd seen, I don't actually tend to overreact to his stuff the way you're implying. I often find another, more holistic way to attempt to deal with the problem first, but I do look into everything I find suspicious. But with that rash I'd have been there.
I think they're not recalling the Carter's because there's no evidence that there was a defect, just that some kids may have been more sensitive. I guess a comparison would be that some people are allergic to wool. Not that I agree, because you have to label fabrics and you don't ahve to label these stupid tags that have chemicals in them. But I think that's the mindset with the company and regulatory agencies.
PS I'm not sure exactly why you would capitalize the first three letters of assume, but I'll assume you did it by accident. Otherwise, that would be really unkind.