I would say its very dangerous, as there are a lot of people who have children under 25 and should they really refuse to sell you something than can stop a child being seriously ill especially as a temperature can cause seizure, I'm 29 but back when I was 24 I got ID'ed for strepsils in Sainsbury's, for which you have to be 14, this was when I was a teacher lol. I think they need to have a certain amount of sense and she should have called a superior. I would be tempted to put in a letter to them showing concern that they would not sell to you, especially since there are people who don't have driving licence and passport. What are you meant to do if your a teenage mum who needs paracetamol/ calpol quickly for your child, are you meant to find someone over 25 to go to shop for you to buy something a baby can have from 3 months
Febrile seizures aren't normally harmful, but I agree parents should have access to the medicine their children need. Do you really have to be 25 or just appear over 25 for them not to ID you? For instance in the US, I think you have to appear over 40 (maybe?) for them to not ID you for alcohol, but you only have to be 21.
I'm surprised the daycare didn't just have you take your child home if there was really a fever but honestly I haven't dealt with daycares so I have no idea what is normal!
Oh I know they are not that common or not necessarily harmful, when I worked in nurseries we had emergency calpol. It can be dangerous in certain instances, especially when their is underlying issues. I just think it is a silly policy (not blaming the worker) as not every parent will be over 25 and by not allowing parents to buy calpol or its generic equivalent will it not just fill up doctors surgeries more or hospitals, plus leave children not been able to have medicine to feel better. I didn't realise you had to be over 25 for paracetamol. I would have been in tears as a teenager with the bad periods I have if I hadn't been able to get some pain killers when started and parents were not there