Talk

Advanced search

Being allowed and not allowed

(6 Posts)
birthdaybelle Mon 22-Jun-20 19:51:54

I just don't get it... so Hancock is apparently going to announce that shielding people can form a bubble from 6th July.

Surely if people feel it's safe to do something they do it anyway, and if they don't then they won't?!

I don't understand why Hancock or anyone else is announcing what we are "allowed" to do anymore and from when?!

It absolutely baffles and astounds me that with all the cock ups from the start of this whole thing anyone is following these arbitrary rules?

If you're shielding and have been truly concerned about your safety and stayed indoors will you be suddenly happy to form a bubble on the 6th July?

Surely everyone is looking at the figures and statistics and deciding for themselves now?

OP’s posts: |
Bol87 Mon 22-Jun-20 22:40:07

I do think the use of ‘allowed’ is a bit daft. There’s no law stating shielders have to remain indoors. My mum is shielding & has taken measures ‘risks’. For example, her & my dad have continued to go for a drive to the moors near their house & park up and have a car based picnic. Just for a change of scenery! My mum has also driven to my house to drop off various things & likewise, I’ve dropped off shopping & stopped for a chat since day 1. My parents have been to sit in my garden & me theirs twice a week since we’ve been allowed to do so. My mum feels the risk is very low keeping a decent distance apart outdoors.

I’m sure other shielders may feel more anxious or take a different view but I never feel I’ve put my mum at risk, we’ve always kept well apart & nor do I feel she’s put herself at risk going for drives!

And no, my mum doesn’t feel that it’ll be magically safer come 6th July. The virus is still circulating & the risk to her remains high.

LilyPond2 Mon 22-Jun-20 23:26:54

I agree that the way the news about people shielding is being reported (on the BBC at least) is nonsensical. There has been no law forbidding shielding people from leaving their houses. What is actually happening is that withdrawal of the shielding concept is withdrawal of a degree of protection from a lot of very vulnerable people. I feel particularly sorry for shielding people who live in areas where infection rates are still high and who are unable to work from home.

Iverunoutofnames Mon 22-Jun-20 23:33:21

It doesn’t matter what the government says, it matters what your doctors say. DHs doctor has categorically not to go out and see anyone for as long as possible.
Shielded is too broad and too complicate a group to be advising in that way.

birthdaybelle Tue 23-Jun-20 00:06:42

That's it really isn't it. The media seems hell bent on this scenario where we're all waiting, completely dumb and uninformed, for what we're allowed to do next.

OP’s posts: |
LonginesPrime Tue 23-Jun-20 00:17:14

It doesn’t matter what the government says, it matters what your doctors say

Exactly.

It's one thing the government advising all extremely vulnerable people to shield - that makes sense as it's a precaution.

But when they started giving blanket recommendations to leave the house to everyone who's extremely vulnerable, regardless of what condition they have, severity, any comorbidy, other relevant risk factors, whether they're on surgery waiting lists, their home situation, where they'd be proposing to go, etc, I stopped listening.

Why would anyone with a serious medical condition take medical advice from the government anyway, let alone when it's blanket advice for 1.5m people with hundreds of completely different medical conditions? Utter madness.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »