Children under school age exempt from being a 'person'

[ihatecovid19]

Great news for us that have under school
Aged children.

[onedayinthefuture]

Should include all kids that can't be left alone to be honest.

[StatisticalSense]

Complete and utter joke. The more exceptions they make that only benefit parents the less chance they have of getting the childless to follow the rules.

[Underhisi]

I hope there is a similar rule for carers who live with disabled adults who cannot be left alone.

[Danglingmod]

Oh, come on. I've been eye rolling along with the best of them at "children shouldn't count" when you're talking 4-11 year olds, but it seemed pretty cruel to not allow a babe in arms to be discounted meaning a new Mum cannot meet up with anyone even outside for a walk.

I think this is reasonable, proportionate and right.

[Underhisi]

Some carers are also caring for adults 24/7.

[BunsyGirl]

@StatisticalSense I think that your looking at it the wrong way. Two single people could already meet up for exercise. But a parent with a baby couldn’t. It’s a very lonely experience being stuck at home all day with a small child, even at the best of times.

[MissBaskinIfYoureNasty]

I'll take my baby along and leave my 5 year old alone then..

[PickAChew]

Doesn't your 5 year old go to school?

[cologne4711]

I am not sure I agree with this. I totally get it with babes in arms and in the early days of the "rule of 6" said I thought it would be ridiculous to "report" a neighbour for having a gathering for 7, if one of the 7 was a small baby.

But toddlers and older children are their own people, they may attend childcare etc and may meet different people to their parents, and therefore be exposed to different germs. If you have two parents and two toddlers meeting, that is potentially four lots of germs. That said, the risk outside is very small.

[Numberblock7]

“I hope there is a similar rule for carers who live with disabled adults who cannot be left alone.“

There is indeed.

[Danglingmod]

I think I agree with you, Cologne.

Under walking age children are much, much less likely to have additional "germs" to spread to others, or the opportunity to do so.

[MadameBlobby]

It’s under 12 in Scotland and has been since the summer.

[LittleMissLockdown]

Thank goodness for that, some common sense at last!

[Danglingmod]

I think the Scottish stance is wrong. Under 12s are easily capable of having the virus asymptomatically and spreading it.

[MadameBlobby]

@Danglingmod

I think the Scottish stance is wrong. Under 12s are easily capable of having the virus asymptomatically and spreading it.

It didn’t seem to do anything to increase numbers over the summer and we aren’t the ones going back into full lockdown so 🤷🏼‍♀️

[Thatwentbadly]

@Underhisi

Some carers are also caring for adults 24/7.

They are included

[LJC1234]

Thank goodness!

I'm horrified at the lack of compassion from so many posters on Mumsnet mocking mums with young babies for wondering this.

This is brilliant news for those of us facing early days of parenthood with babies we cannot leave yet

[LadyCatStark]

Yet more confusing rules that are just asking to be ‘bent’ 🙈.

[Robs20]

I think this is very sensible.

[LittleMissLockdown]

This is brilliant news for those of us facing early days of parenthood with babies we cannot leave yet

The irony for me was that before this was announced I could hire a baby sitter to spend time 1-1 with my 10 month old but I couldn't take him in the pushchair for a socially distanced walk with a friend.

[BogRollBOGOF]

I'm pleased that it has been clarified for mums of pre-schoolers.

Single parents are able to bubble to see someone else anyway.

Two parent familes should be able to take turns to get out and have external social contact.

Children get social contact in school.

I know that life is not that simple on an individual level thinks of arsehole cyclists buggering off for the weekend leaving mum at home with the children all day but at least this is not depriving an entire vulnerable demographic such as a breastfeeding mum from the right to have social contact beyond her household.

When it gets back to the rule of 6, children (who can not reasonably be expected to remain at home on their own) should not be counted. It is wrong to deprive them of informal social contact long term, covering the majority of a year.

[x2boys]

Also the same for people with disabled children ,which I get, but my severely Autistic son has no concept that we are even in a pandemic and has no idea about social distancing ,so I would rather not .

[randomsabreuse]

Very sensible - otherwise SAHPs of preschool age kids are potentially completely isolated all week unless facilitated by a partner in the evenings.

Neither good for mental health nor helpful if there's any abuse going on...

[KitKatastrophe]

@onedayinthefuture

Should include all kids that can't be left alone to be honest.

I suppose the older kids will be able to socialise at school so wont be disadvantaged in the same way as preschool kids. Parents of school aged children could see friends while the kids are at school, or leave them with the other parent at the weekend to see friends (or, if single, with a member of their support bubble)

[KitKatastrophe]

@x2boys

Also the same for people with disabled children ,which I get, but my severely Autistic son has no concept that we are even in a pandemic and has no idea about social distancing ,so I would rather not .

Well that is your choice, the guidelines can't cover everyone's different circumstances