I agree with this article on older people

[Orangeblossom78]

Like many of us, i have been trying to emphasise to parents over 70 about staying in through this etc, and have been reading the several threads about others frustrated with there parents refusal to comply and get deliveries etc..

then I was reading this by Janice Turner in the Times today. It really made me think. I agree with what she is saying. We need to leave it up to them really.

How much of it comes down to our own need to feel we are 'keeping them safe' perhaps, so we feel Ok about that?

Here is the article:

The old have the right to decide what’s risky
Condemning the over-70s to long-term lockdown takes no account of an individual’s health, needs or desires

Janice Turner
Friday April 24 2020, 5.00pm, The Times
Share

Maybe it’s the sunshine, but something shifted this week. Social distancing in the supermarket queue has a bored, desultory air. People pass on pavements rather than leap into the road: evening strollers in the park are larkier, the mood less tense. Like a spring plant, the country longs to unfurl.

Yet the price of the majority returning to school, work, to pub reunions with friends, to regaining the million tiny pleasures we never knew we’d miss, will be the continued self-isolation of the old. Details are sketchy. The health secretary Matt Hancock has said it will apply to the over-70s for four months, others suggest the over-60s for 18. On Wednesday, health minister Lord Bethell refused to clarify if a grey lockdown will be advisory...

Link to full article (paywall).

[Post edited by MNHQ]

Meeting in driveways / gardens etc is good but better if everyone prepares their own food and drinks. And stays 2m apart.

I think politicians will have to address this problem very soon.

It's one thing being stoic and isolating yourself for 12 weeks, quite another to face staying inside for the rest of your life and never seeing your family again.

The other issue is support and declining health. People who can cope now may not be able to cope in 6 months.

However, as everyone else has said, if there are no restrictions, how will the health service cope? Even if people refuse hospitalisation, what does that look like if you live alone?

It's certainly a difficult one. We are close with DPs grandma - recently widowed.

Alone in her house after 60 years of marriage, she just about managed to get through the drudgery of the week with only the TV for company as the weekend used to be a flurry of her 4 children, 8 grandchildren and 3 great grandchildren visiting. You could see her face light up when a car pulls up outside, and she rushed to the kitchen to put the kettle on and get the biscuits out, absolutely elated at a couple of hours of having another human being to talk too. Sometimes, there would be three visits at once and you could see her sitting in her chair, smiling at the family that she created laughing and chatting in her home.

She is lonely now. No visitors for 6 weeks. Sure, her son has been dropping shopping on her doorstep and having a wee chat from the end of the path for 10 minutes but everyone else has stayed away, for the fear that if anything happened to her, well how would we live with that?

It breaks my heart to think of how bored, lonely, isolated and alone she must feel now when like I said, she used to find Monday to Friday tough enough when nobody had time to visit as we all have work, kids to feed and get to bed etc.

I don't know what the answer is, I know it is bordering on inhumane for nobody to visit her for another month though. We have been calling of course, but it isn't the same. She doesn't have the Internet (and no interest in getting it) so video calls are out.

Eventually it wil get to the point where we just have to risk assess the situation ourselves and weigh up the right thing to do.

I agree with it.

What I don't agree with is the fact that they're going to potentially spread it to others.......a young child who has cancer or someone with a long-term illness .might not be so happy to sign their own death warrant.

I'm in favour of lifting the lockdown btw. But while it's in place, I don't see why older people should get a special pass. That's not what's being suggested. What's being suggested is not to impose special restrictions when they've been lifted for everyone else.

While in the unusal course of events people can decide what level of risk they're willing to tolerate things become very different when they are likely to overwhelm our healthcare system.

How then do we as a society react? Do we continue to treat people who put themselves at risk - at the expense of other medical treatments. Do we allow them to infect others who didn't choose to put themselves at risk? Or do we simply refuse them treatment? How would that work in practise?

It's one thing being stoic and isolating yourself for 12 weeks, quite another to face staying inside for the rest of your life and never seeing your family again.

Indeed. In recent years we've put great emphasis on helping people with disabilities share as fully as possible - now we're looking at locking away the over 60s in the way that we did for those with disabilities in the first half of the 19th century.

20th century rather.

"What I don't agree with is the fact that they're going to potentially spread it to others.......a young child who has cancer or someone with a long-term illness .might not be so happy to sign their own death warrant."

You could say that about anyone in the population. Anyone could have it and pass it on. Advice to stay at home for over 70s is to protect them (and the NHS) not because of concerns of them spreading it.

I talked to my mum about this the other day. She’s 87, fit and well and still very active in the local community. The idea of her having to stay at home is heartbreaking, I honestly think she would just give up. She is only really coping now because everything has closed around her, so there is no choice - no church, no choir, her usual volunteering options closed. She’s never used the internet so has no opportunity to stay in touch with people apart from the phone.
Whilst she’s well at present, who knows for how long? She is perfectly capable of assessing the risk and making a judgement, what I do know if that she is desperate to get back to being with other people. I will absolutely respect her decision, whatever it is.

Hanful I think the answer is - as a society, calm down and stop assuming everyone is a leper.

I think the issue is that contracting COVID-19 at this point has far-reaching consequences beyond an individual level.

It is frustrating when my parents can't take simple actions that would slow the pandemic because they want to pop to the shops or pick up some fish and chips or complete a myriad of non-essential tasks. They have a large house and garden. Meanwhile my siblings and I are cooped up in small garden-less flats trying to comply with the guidance we've received.

I think there could be better measures implemented to support the elderly in order to combat loneliness and the loss of independence that this pandemic has caused- e.g. allowing people who have strictly isolated to meet up with one another/organising or enabling safe trips for the elderly to low-risk areas etc.

I think the article is too emotive - yes it is awful that the elderly have been disproportionately affected by the virus. But people of working age have also suffered large losses career wise and in terms of financial security. It's the role of everyone to try and ease the burden as much as possible, as unpleasant as that may be. I just feel that many people of my parents generation have not understood the true gravity of the situation - it is not like anything they have encountered before in their lifetime, therefore their own individual "risk-assessments" are not necessarily in line with actual fact.

I doubt if the over 60s are going to be isolated long term. I don't see how that's compatible with the expectation of working until their late 60s often in jobs that can't be done from home.

My mum is certainly 'Oh, just leave us oldies to it and everyone else should go out and about' (she is 70, in poor health but not someone I'd class as 'COVID would be certain death).

I certainly think for the oldest, say 80+ it should be their and their family's call on what risk to take. My step-grandma is 90, widowed, in has a variety of deteriating conditions. She could die of a fall at home tomorrow tbh - it's horrible to think of her being alone, and family are visiting her outdoors but honestly, doesn't she have a right to choose the risk. She has a month-old great-grandchild she hasn't seen yet

Awful as it seem, might some people prefer to sign a DNR (which is not the same as 'do not care', 'do not treat' or 'ignore', btw) in return for being able to see their families?

@EricaNernie regarding your comments about residents in care homes having no life - obviously all care homes are different, however, I think that the residents in the home where my mum lives have a really nice life, plenty of activities to do and there is company there for them in the form of the other residents and staff. Yes it is a lot harder if the home they are in has a resident with symptoms and they are having to isolate in their own bedrooms but in general there is less loneliness for someone with limited mobility living in a residential home than living alone in their own home.

It does make it harder thinking of how you could safely visit your family member without compromising the other residents though.

I agree. I think more old people will die of the lockdown (missed medical appointments, neglect, lonliness) than would have died of the coronavirus.

I do agree to a certain extent that if they want to risk themselves then fine, whatever. But, they will be putting others at risk and I don’t think that’s fair. For example a poster on here mentioned her mum saying she wants to enjoy her last days with her granddaughter, personally I don’t it’s fair to risk the child.

Hello everyone. There's a copyright issue wrt posting this article in its entirety - we're taking the thread down while we contact the OP.

Older people are able to make up their own minds. They've raised the younger generations for goodness sake. But now they're to be treated like children by those younger people. With limited years left I would not want to spend what I have left within 4 walls. Thousands of older people die of flu each year too. Never heard anyone making a fuss about that before. But really this idea isn't for the benefit of older people. Its about freeing up the NHS. 🤷‍♂️

While in the unusal course of events people can decide what level of risk they're willing to tolerate things become very different when they are likely to overwhelm our healthcare system.

Agree, but when this started, Boris was suggesting that after 3 months things would be back to normal.

Now we are coming to terms with the fact that social distancing will be the new normal for at least the next 18 months.

The question is how to have a functioning healthcare system without condemning a large sector of the population to a life that isn't worth living.

but it is freeing up the NHS in its ability to treat all people.

it is surely not just older people but vulnerable people too.

Agree, but when this started, Boris was suggesting that after 3 months things would be back to normal...Now we are coming to terms with the fact that social distancing will be the new normal for at least the next 18 months I think that what was suggested and is still the case is that within a number of weeks things from now will get more back to normal, and it will then be a wait and see situation. I imagine "more" normal will mean that people will see each other more and socialise more, but that things like face masks and where possible 1 or 2 m physical distance will remain the norm. Also possibly that bars and restaurants and clubs and events will remain closed. Not that lockdown will remain as it is for many months.

That's not what's being suggested. What's being suggested is not to impose special restrictions when they've been lifted for everyone else I think older people would be expected to comply with the basic restrictions, and the special restrictions would be guidance to protect them but subject to personal choice.

I am basing this on what is being suggested and discussed in other European countries.

The concern is the second wave. If the virus mutates to something less deadly as has happened with previous pandemics for example then there will be a quicker return to normal.

But essentially we can’t make all these sacrifices for those we are trying to protect to not also make sacrifices

It’s got nothing to do with protecting older people, it’s about not swamping the NHS, which has masses of spare capacity right now. I’d happily waive my right to be treated if it was a choice between that and this half life for 18 months.

I imagine "more" normal will mean that people will see each other more and socialise more, but that things like face masks and where possible 1 or 2 m physical distance will remain the norm. Also possibly that bars and restaurants and clubs and events will remain closed. Not that lockdown will remain as it is for many months.

As I said, some form of social distancing, not necessary lock down, will remain for at least the next 18 months. However, it is likely that restrictions will be loosened first for the less vulnerable. Nobody has talked about how far restrictions could be loosened for people in vulnerable groups.

I'm not necessarily saying that you are wrong in your assumptions sossujunmash, but (as far as I know ) you are an anonymous person on the internet, not a politician. We are approaching the end of the beginning and need to start getting guidance on systems to cope with the 'new normal' from government.