Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Now we are a coupe of years on. Do you think the Covid lockdowns should have happened

543 replies

Rainbowdeer · 10/02/2025 16:16

I don’t we should have shut down the schools and I don’t agree with the lockdowns
the damage has been far too great
esp regarding children’s mental health

the economy been damaged far too much

work culture has totally changed

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Crushed23 · 11/02/2025 12:28

Yes, the lockdowns were a shambles.

But we're not a couple of years on, we're almost 4 years on from lockdowns ending in the UK.

I think most people are over it now.

FruitPolos · 11/02/2025 12:32

We can't say what would have happened if we hadn't locked down though. Because we did and therefore we have no way of knowing what the alternative was.

Maybe, if we hadn't locked down, the NHS would have coped. Maybe not. Who knows?

That was the problem the politicians and scientists faced in March 2020. They simply didn't know. So they risk assessed and concluded that a lockdown was the best option. That is what you have to do in positions of responsibility.

Did they get some things wrong? Probably. Did they get some things right? Also probably.

Be grateful that none of you had to make those decisions, knowing that either way, there would be significant consequences to the lives of millions of people.

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 13:31

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 09:18

Well, exactly. A little more realism about who we were "saving" and why would have been sensible. Most of them would be dead of something else by now anyway. And we through our children under the bus...

March 2020 we didn’t know who was vulnerable. Like I said before, parents of kids with asthma were pulling them out of school well before schools closed because we didn’t know whether they were more likely to die. Thank god it turns out they weren’t.

Bestthriller · 11/02/2025 13:33

Crushed23 · 11/02/2025 12:28

Yes, the lockdowns were a shambles.

But we're not a couple of years on, we're almost 4 years on from lockdowns ending in the UK.

I think most people are over it now.

In our Real life… yes. Unquestionably

but mumsnet makes me realise that for quite a few mumsnetters it remains very much a focus

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 13:41

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 13:31

March 2020 we didn’t know who was vulnerable. Like I said before, parents of kids with asthma were pulling them out of school well before schools closed because we didn’t know whether they were more likely to die. Thank god it turns out they weren’t.

I'm talking about the ongoing and subsequent school closures. We knew quite quickly (and realistically, before lockdown imo) that children weren't at risk.

admirible · 11/02/2025 13:47

Parker231 · 10/02/2025 22:00

None? - how would the hospitals and ICU’s managed ??

Maybe they wouldn’t have had to.

taxguru · 11/02/2025 13:48

Bestthriller · 11/02/2025 13:33

In our Real life… yes. Unquestionably

but mumsnet makes me realise that for quite a few mumsnetters it remains very much a focus

For people whose lives have been affected, it will obviously remain relevant, i.e.

Those who lost loved ones at unexpectedly young ages
Those whose mental health has been affected
Those who lost their livelihoods
Those who lost their homes/businesses
Younger people whose education was badly disrupted

People who only suffered temporarily can easily "get over it", but for those whose lives are now very different, it's not quite so easy!

scalt · 11/02/2025 13:54

vodkaredbullgirl · 10/02/2025 16:23

What's done is done, no need to dwell on it.

But it isn't completely done. Lockdowns could easily happen again, and be even more damaging than before. Although Partygate turned many people against the idea of future restrictions, that will be forgotten before long. The government has set a precedent that they can "protect" us from some external danger with lockdown, and any consequences of this do not matter at all. I can't think of a single politician who has wholeheartedly condemned lockdowns, and admitted that prolonged lockdowns caused massive, massive damage. We have seen how easily the government can use the power of the media to frighten the public into accepting a draconian regime with no resistance at all. Even now, there is a tacit agreement between government and opposition of "we don't talk about lockdown, only the pandemic". I will not believe that the threat of lockdown is "over" until there are some widespread and very public admissions from lockdown's cheerleaders that it caused incredible damage, and that in future, we must do everything we can to prevent LOCKDOWNS happening again.

And I'm not holding my breath for the outcome of the enquiry having anything to say about the damage caused by lockdown being totally disproportionate to the threat. For all we know, the conclusion was written before the enquiry was even commissioned: "We should have locked down harder, faster, longer, and we will next time."

Made worse because the likes of police, council officials and security staff were applying "laws" which didn't even exist. Even they didn't understand the difference between law, guidance and "good ideas". It was all a complete farce. Some police even managed to issue fixed penalty notices for "offences" which didn't exist - heaven knows how they managed that! It's hard not to believe that the waters were deliberately muddied here, to keep the public confused, frightened, and bickering among themselves. And what did Boris say later? "People should not have believed that the rules were there to be kept.", or something like that.

Bestthriller · 11/02/2025 13:54

If you are fully or flexibly furloughed, your employer: will pay you at least 80% of your regular wages, up to a maximum of £2,500 per month, for the hours you are furloughed (not working)

the limit for those employed.
so Sunak put parameters in for employed
just as he did for self employed
both approaches seemed very reasonable to me @taxguru

Bestthriller · 11/02/2025 13:56

Lockdowns could easily happen again

seriously? So many, including myself, would completely ignore this time around

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 13:59

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 13:41

I'm talking about the ongoing and subsequent school closures. We knew quite quickly (and realistically, before lockdown imo) that children weren't at risk.

Some children certainly are at risk.

You seem to think the only risk that matters is of the child dying.

And that children exist in some sort of separate world to the rest of the population.

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 14:01

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 13:59

Some children certainly are at risk.

You seem to think the only risk that matters is of the child dying.

And that children exist in some sort of separate world to the rest of the population.

That's not what I think, nor is it what I have said. I think the impact of missed education and socialisation on a societal level was a greater threat to children than anything else.

Bestthriller · 11/02/2025 14:05

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 14:01

That's not what I think, nor is it what I have said. I think the impact of missed education and socialisation on a societal level was a greater threat to children than anything else.

i agree 100%

JenniferBooth · 11/02/2025 14:15

scalt · 11/02/2025 13:54

But it isn't completely done. Lockdowns could easily happen again, and be even more damaging than before. Although Partygate turned many people against the idea of future restrictions, that will be forgotten before long. The government has set a precedent that they can "protect" us from some external danger with lockdown, and any consequences of this do not matter at all. I can't think of a single politician who has wholeheartedly condemned lockdowns, and admitted that prolonged lockdowns caused massive, massive damage. We have seen how easily the government can use the power of the media to frighten the public into accepting a draconian regime with no resistance at all. Even now, there is a tacit agreement between government and opposition of "we don't talk about lockdown, only the pandemic". I will not believe that the threat of lockdown is "over" until there are some widespread and very public admissions from lockdown's cheerleaders that it caused incredible damage, and that in future, we must do everything we can to prevent LOCKDOWNS happening again.

And I'm not holding my breath for the outcome of the enquiry having anything to say about the damage caused by lockdown being totally disproportionate to the threat. For all we know, the conclusion was written before the enquiry was even commissioned: "We should have locked down harder, faster, longer, and we will next time."

Made worse because the likes of police, council officials and security staff were applying "laws" which didn't even exist. Even they didn't understand the difference between law, guidance and "good ideas". It was all a complete farce. Some police even managed to issue fixed penalty notices for "offences" which didn't exist - heaven knows how they managed that! It's hard not to believe that the waters were deliberately muddied here, to keep the public confused, frightened, and bickering among themselves. And what did Boris say later? "People should not have believed that the rules were there to be kept.", or something like that.

Yeah Gaslighting fucker (Boris that is)

Mightymoog · 11/02/2025 14:18

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 13:31

March 2020 we didn’t know who was vulnerable. Like I said before, parents of kids with asthma were pulling them out of school well before schools closed because we didn’t know whether they were more likely to die. Thank god it turns out they weren’t.

we most definitely did know and were told right at the beginning that it would be a mild illness for the vast majority and that the elderly were most at risk

MargoLivebetter · 11/02/2025 14:19

Belarus, Brazil, Burundi, Iceland, Japan, Nicaragua, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, Tanzania, 6 USA states and Uruguay didn't lockdown. As far as I can tell they didn't all die there or suffer more greatly than those countries that did lock down. It was a dreadful, dreadful, dreadful thing to do and so many people suffered so awfully during lockdowns.

The enquiry we are doing here in the UK is going to take forever and its findings will be so very, very detailed and convoluted and will take so long to be published that it will be all but meaningless by the time it is published.

SheilaFentiman · 11/02/2025 14:21

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 14:01

That's not what I think, nor is it what I have said. I think the impact of missed education and socialisation on a societal level was a greater threat to children than anything else.

My own children were certainly impacted by reduced socialisation and education, one badly and I can still see the effects in him.

On a societal level, though, we also have to think about the harm that would have been done to children if even more parents/grandparents had been severely or fatally ill.

Whatever each country decided, there was no way around it being a balance of harms. Some European countries had more severe lockdowns than the UK, requiring permits/reasons to be out of the house.

news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-greece-reintroduce-sms-authorisation-for-movement-as-country-enters-second-lockdown-12126181

Some were less severe, like Sweden, as discussed. New Zealand closed its borders more stringently and for longer than many countries, which will have impacted its tourism sector severely. So the UK was probably in the middle of the pack somewhere.

Digdongdoo · 11/02/2025 14:29

SheilaFentiman · 11/02/2025 14:21

My own children were certainly impacted by reduced socialisation and education, one badly and I can still see the effects in him.

On a societal level, though, we also have to think about the harm that would have been done to children if even more parents/grandparents had been severely or fatally ill.

Whatever each country decided, there was no way around it being a balance of harms. Some European countries had more severe lockdowns than the UK, requiring permits/reasons to be out of the house.

news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-greece-reintroduce-sms-authorisation-for-movement-as-country-enters-second-lockdown-12126181

Some were less severe, like Sweden, as discussed. New Zealand closed its borders more stringently and for longer than many countries, which will have impacted its tourism sector severely. So the UK was probably in the middle of the pack somewhere.

On a societal level, the vast majority of parents were never at any significant risk. And as for grandparents, they tend to be old, and old people sometimes get poorly and die. It's the order of life. I don't understand why covid ought to be any different. We're talking guaranteed harm to a whole generation, vs potential harm to a few of them. It wasn't justified.

Auburngal · 11/02/2025 14:42

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 13:31

March 2020 we didn’t know who was vulnerable. Like I said before, parents of kids with asthma were pulling them out of school well before schools closed because we didn’t know whether they were more likely to die. Thank god it turns out they weren’t.

Goalposts for asthmatics were changing all the time. There were talks of asthmatics that take a preventer inhaler as vulnerable and should SAH. Plus goalposts were changing for asthmatics for getting the vaccine.

My GP practice put me from group 10 to group 6 as I stated that it's not on that someone who is 40, works in an essential retail shop and is asthmatic, should get a lower pecking order of a fit 50 year old who WFH.

Mightymoog · 11/02/2025 14:43

@SheilaFentiman

My own children were certainly impacted by reduced socialisation and education, one badly and I can still see the effects in him.

well hopefully in the future you will prioritise your own child rather than what politicians tell you.

SheilaFentiman · 11/02/2025 14:46

Mightymoog · 11/02/2025 14:43

@SheilaFentiman

My own children were certainly impacted by reduced socialisation and education, one badly and I can still see the effects in him.

well hopefully in the future you will prioritise your own child rather than what politicians tell you.

Wow.

What a baseless and vindictive thing to say.

Schools. Were. Closed.

How exactly should I have sent my children to school?

Mightymoog · 11/02/2025 14:48

SheilaFentiman · 11/02/2025 14:46

Wow.

What a baseless and vindictive thing to say.

Schools. Were. Closed.

How exactly should I have sent my children to school?

oh, my apologies: I thought you meant they also weren't seeing friends or family which a lot of people imposed on their kids.
If it was just school then fair enough ( I used a very spurious key worker claim to get mine back in school as soon as I could!)

Mightymoog · 11/02/2025 14:54

oh, and used school times to meet up with other kids when schools were shut to all.
So glad we all made that decision; children were treated very cruelly by their own parents insisting on isolating/ not playing with friends etc. Disgraceful

yikesanotherbooboo · 11/02/2025 14:57

I can't see what else could have been done. We could see what was coming grime Spain and Italy and our already pressed health service, access to ICU and presence of areas of deprivation made us particularly vulnerable. The timing of the lockdowns and thus the length of them could probably have been better .

noblegiraffe · 11/02/2025 15:08

Mightymoog · 11/02/2025 14:18

we most definitely did know and were told right at the beginning that it would be a mild illness for the vast majority and that the elderly were most at risk

You knew about whether asthmatics were at greater risk or not before everyone else?

Swipe left for the next trending thread