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]

“The over seventies” is such a huge group as other people have said. For vulnerable people in their nineties with serious health conditions and a life expectancy of less than a year anyway then in many cases the comfort of family visits is well worth the risk. But I’ve got relatives in their seventies with COPD but otherwise good health who have many more active years at stake: they can use the internet to entertain themselves, stay in touch with others, and pursue hobbies. And what they’d mostly want to do is go to galleries, theatres, cinemas, and on holidays, none of which is possible regardless of age. They’re not happy to be sticking it out in quarantine, no one is, but they see it as a price worth paying.

But what is completely missing from that article is an acknowledgment that during a global pandemic you cannot make decisions about your own health in isolation - all your decisions impact on others. You are not just making the decision that you’re prepared to risk your own life for a less restricted lifestyle, you are making the decision that you’re prepared to put others and the healthcare system at risk. The question is whether people have the right to do that.

I’ve just been out to do my food shopping. It’s like a normal Saturday out there, roads are busy. I had to go to BP to get petrol, nearly every pump was being used and all the car parking spaces

I’m also not convinced that what older people are being asked to do is that much worse than it is for other people. Yes, it’s a larger percentage of what they have left, but mostly what they’re missing out on is enjoyment and fun. Younger people are watching their businesses, careers, pensions, financial security, etc., disappear, children are losing their education and many their mental wellbeing, and this will have a huge impact on their future. People from all demographics are suffering. If older people have to isolate to protect the country as a whole as much as possible, I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

It irritates me when people still working with a routine scold older relatives who's lives have changed beyond all recognition. There is a tension there that isn't sustainable. We should clap for the isolated sometime! It's hugely stressful for many of them and making them ill in other ways.

@merrymouse I said in that post that my assumptions were coming from what was happening in other European countries. I am in France, and we get far, far more information, I think, about what is happening when and how, from the government and also from the media here. The UK has generally been following and doing similar things as France but slightly later. Also what is happening in France is broadly in line with advice from the majority of leading scientists which is also easily accessible info on the net. The scientists have made the point that it is not feasible to keep people locked up for months. But of course just assumptions on my part, I am passing comment in the same way as any other poster is.

Elderly people saying ‘ah I’ve had a good innings, I’ll take my chances’

....Yeah and take a doctor/young nurse with kids down with you!

My dad's feeling is that if an eased lockdown lets out low-risk people, but not him, and gives him no choice in the matter, it's discriminatory because while he may be more likely to die, he is no more likely to infect anyone than anybody else. Which I get on one level, but it's also a matter of NHS capacity/staff wellbeing - as @Wonderbag says.

I am in France, and we get far, far more information, I think, about what is happening when and how, from the government and also from the media here.

Yes - I think we are starting to suffer from lack of a PM in England (situation not quite the same for rest of UK). The difficult information is being delivered by scientists, not politicians and Raab is very much a sub, not a leader.

Yes, it’s a larger percentage of what they have left, but mostly what they’re missing out on is enjoyment and fun.

Many older people are worried that they won't live beyond the crisis, and a lot of them are right. The problem isn't lack of enjoyment and fun, it is lack of hope.

I actually agree with your Dad Echobelly. I don't know what the answer is, but it's not treating the elderly like children who can't make their own decisions.

My gran lives in a care home, she is 92. Before CV my mum would pop over a couple of times a week, my dsis and I once a month or so. Although she mainly stayed in her room she would go to the dining room for her lunch and dinner.
Now she is not allowed to leave her room, she’s not allowed any visitors. She hates it. She’s knows she doesn’t have much time left and would rather have that time seeing her family. She hates that people are having to put their lives on hold to protect people like her.

Just as well, really as Police records show that 70% of the people they deal with for rule flouting are young.

I would have my doubts about this. Not that police records are incorrect but that it's mostly younger people flouting the rules. I imagine the police would be less likely to ticket/arrest a pensioner for being out. Also, from my own experience, it seems to be older people out more, certainly in my village it is. I do realise my village isn't the whole world and might be wrong though, maybe police to charge pensioners at the same rate.

I have a neighbour who is 90, I've written about her before on here. She is outraged at the suggestion she should stay in and is carrying on life as normal (apart from the clubs) going on the bus etc. I've asked her if she actually WANTS to catch the virus because she's acting like she does. She says that of course she doesn't but she not spending the last bit of life she has hiding. Years in a care home with dementia (like many of her friends) is a much scarier prospect than CV though. As she said "lived a long active life and died after a short illness, that's me". If I was a police officer and came across her I'd probably just leave her be, although, thinking about it, I bet she'd love to be arrested

I don’t doubt it at all. All the flouting here seems to be by people under 30.

they must also understand the nhs might not help them at all if they catch the virus

Does that also follow for the smokers, the obese (due to overeating), the diabetics (who choose to eat the wrong foods) etc etc?

Yes it does. Not because it’s their “fault” but simply because if medical resources run short, the resources will be given to those most likely to survive.

I believe that everyone should be free to resume their normal life but with full understanding of their place in the triage queue.

What worries me is the possibility of over 70s (or anyone in the high risk group) resuming normal life, catching the virus and then saying they should have just as much priority for the limited ventilators as a healthy 30 year old.

(Of course if it turns out we have enough ventilators for everybody, and enough PPE to protect staff, none of this is an issue.)

@KenDodd a police officer is going to arrest an old person for being out. At this point there's is no rule that an old person shouldn't be out to do their shopping or take their exercise like anyone else. Your neighbour doesn't need scolding by you.

Also old people are not going to be congregating with their friends in public places, which is what younger people are being fined for.

For me, there are a number of difficult ethical issues

1. I don’t think it is a decision that can be truely left to individuals because of the massive system and economic implications of mass cases. If lots of over 70s ignore social distancing and then get poorly at the same time, we’ll all be back in lock-down.

2. lengthy isolation is not good for anyone but must be very upsetting for those who don’t know how many years of good quality life they might have ahead of them. The implications of a length lockdown on future quality of life might be quite significant.

3. while this sounds callous, I am more worried collectively about vulnerable people in younger age groups. They really are at risk of a two tier society emerging between those that can get back to normal and those they can’t. This will be extra complicated in mixed houses. Families for example with one child that is shielding and another not. How do they decide how much normality to give one child when it could risk the other?

Also old people are not going to be congregating with their friends in public places
In my village they are, everyday at the tables infront of the (closed) pub.

Your neighbour doesn't need scolding by you.
And I haven't scolded anyone.

We are starting to suffer from lack of a PM

I can't see anything being improved by the incompetent bumbling liar coming back.

My mum is in the shielded group, but she says that if the government expect her to be confined to her house for three months, they've got another thing coming.

That's not to say she's disregarding all the rules - she meets up with a friend sometimes and they walk two metres apart, and she sometimes sees people at a distance in her front garden. But she's of the view that living is more than just not being dead, and that she didn't survive cancer just to sit at home on her own and not see anyone. Like many over-70s, she was very active in the community - Ramblers walks, Tai Chi, parish council, village coffee mornings - that has all stopped now.

I've asked her if she actually WANTS to catch the virus because she's acting like she does.

Sounds like a scolding to me, @KenDodd
You're talking to her like a child.

Living is more than just not being dead is wonderful. I want that on a badge.

Sounds like a scolding to me

Well you're wrong, you weren't there, I didn't scold anyone. Besides, she wouldn't let anyone scold her even if they tried.

And I say nothing to the pensioners (including neighbour) outside the pub everyday.