Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be depressed that lockdown would happen again tomorrow if there was another new disease

819 replies

Pavementworrier · 05/01/2026 07:35

We talk about all the things that are worse "since the pandemic"but government prep is based on all the same mad nonsense that caused the worsening

Grim

OP posts:
Bobiverse · 05/01/2026 08:00

YellowPixie · 05/01/2026 07:58

The problem with the lockdowns - here in Scotland at least - is that they carried on far longer than was needed to "protect the NHS" and work out that it was affecting certain groups.

I think everyone appreciates that when you are faced with a new illness, you don;t have a treatment and aren't very sure who the most vulnerable is, then restrictions are sensible. But the goal should always be to keep restrictions for the minimum time and get things moving again. I would not be complying again with rules about not seeing friends in your house or allowing children to play together again.

No matter what the disease though? I don’t ever think anyone who says “I will not” is ever correct. Blanket refusal regardless of the specific situation is just stupid.

If this was an untreatable hemorrhagic fever spreading through the country, would you be hosting play dates for your kids?

MojoMoon · 05/01/2026 07:59

If there is an Ebola outbreak, I would be isolating regardless of instruction!

Honestly of all the things you might be depressed about in the world right now, the potential for COVID lockdowns to return seems ridiculous.

Perhaps worry more about geopolitics instead?

Binus · 05/01/2026 07:59

Bobiverse · 05/01/2026 07:57

The OP is talking in general terms about any pandemic we could get, and how the plans would be to lock down.

If people were bleeding from every orifice and dying in the street, I’d bet my house that you’d comply with a lockdown.

Show quote history

If people were bleeding from every orifice and dying in the street, complying with a lockdown wouldn't be one of yours or her options. Because the people who need to work to make lockdown possible wouldn't be coming in.

UneAnneeSansLumiere · 05/01/2026 07:58

HeddaGarbled · 05/01/2026 07:37

I think few of us would comply next time.

I certainly wouldn't.

Smartjaffa · 05/01/2026 07:58

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

YellowPixie · 05/01/2026 07:58

The problem with the lockdowns - here in Scotland at least - is that they carried on far longer than was needed to "protect the NHS" and work out that it was affecting certain groups.

I think everyone appreciates that when you are faced with a new illness, you don;t have a treatment and aren't very sure who the most vulnerable is, then restrictions are sensible. But the goal should always be to keep restrictions for the minimum time and get things moving again. I would not be complying again with rules about not seeing friends in your house or allowing children to play together again.

Binus · 05/01/2026 07:57

I honestly don't get why people are so wedded to this assumption.

Lockdown isn't automatic. It's a policy that can only happen with a disease severe enough to frighten people into voluntarily limiting their behaviour, but not so severe that we can't keep the basic building blocks of society running because people are afraid to turn up to work. People often tend to ignore the need for the second part.

Covid happened to fall into that middle ground in 2020-21. There's no guarantee that any disease ever will again, and it certainly isn't going to happen any time soon because the public trust is absent and we couldn't possibly afford it. Personally I'm not sure a Goldilocks spot actually exists at the moment.

Bobiverse · 05/01/2026 07:57

vanillalattes · 05/01/2026 07:53

Yep. COVID is not fatal for the majority - it’s just unpleasant and makes you feel shit for a few days or weeks.

Show quote history

The OP is talking in general terms about any pandemic we could get, and how the plans would be to lock down.

If people were bleeding from every orifice and dying in the street, I’d bet my house that you’d comply with a lockdown.

GeneralPeter · 05/01/2026 07:57

Whether we should or shouldn’t lock down (or how or when) depends on the disease and the circumstances.

I think there’s a lot to criticise about how we did lockdown, but blanket opposition to lockdowns is just as stupid as blanket support.

Smartjaffa · 05/01/2026 07:57

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

EasternStandard · 05/01/2026 07:57

MrsRobinsonsHandprints · 05/01/2026 07:43

Of course people would comply if lots of children/young people were dying.

The reality is we locked down for the wrong illness

This is closer to my take. What people do depends on the symptoms and how much they concern people and possibly the age group although very young might just mean parents keep dc home.

But we’ll hopefully have a big gap because a worse virus soon would be very hard to lockdown for with the same financial support.

Avantiagain · 05/01/2026 07:55

"I think few of us would comply next time."

I think people would if it was something like ebola.

TheTruthHurtsSometimes · 05/01/2026 07:55

I loved lockdown

Frynye · 05/01/2026 07:55

It would absolutely depend on the disease and the risk factors. It’s the right thing to do in the right circumstances

WednesdayAllTheWay · 05/01/2026 07:54

What are you basing this on?

vanillalattes · 05/01/2026 07:53

onlyoneoftheregimentinstep · 05/01/2026 07:43

So you’d rather get ill?

Yep. COVID is not fatal for the majority - it’s just unpleasant and makes you feel shit for a few days or weeks.

itsthetea · 05/01/2026 07:53

Well perhaps the focus should be on how to manage lockdown better rather than overrun the nhs and let more people die ? What’s your suggestion?

vanillalattes · 05/01/2026 07:52

MrsRobinsonsHandprints · 05/01/2026 07:43

Of course people would comply if lots of children/young people were dying.

The reality is we locked down for the wrong illness

I don’t think they would.

RafaistheKingofClay · 05/01/2026 07:51

The vote and the comments are complete polar opposites so far. Which IIRC was what actually played out last time. There is a very small but vocal minority that they won’t follow the rules and that they won’t either. In reality most people either agree with the rules or think they haven’t gone far enough and do follow them.

YABU though to think we have a plan for a future pandemic.

Bobiverse · 05/01/2026 07:51

All this “no one would comply” stuff is nonsense. If a new hemorrhagic fever with no cure started spreading around the world, you’d all be inside and isolating.

Switcher · 05/01/2026 07:50

I agree entirely. It's absolute bullshit as a strategy but all you'll get on here is a bunch of lockdown lunatics who see no problem with economic meltdown.

Smartjaffa · 05/01/2026 07:50

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Smartjaffa · 05/01/2026 07:49

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

BettysRoasties · 05/01/2026 07:49

I think for a lot of people to be too bothered they would have to shut airports first.

Why ban going to your family members house when people are flying in and out the world. Stupid.

Garroty · 05/01/2026 07:48

I think now that we're seeing the long term impact it had on children and young people, there would be a very strong reluctance to lock down again in the same way unless it was children who were most at risk.