'Social bubbles'

[Disneylover4321]

Aibu to think It's not so people can have a nice fun social life, it's to help people who need childcare from grandparents or friends or other family members because they are key workers or there employer wants them to come back to work.

Probably. But if people can meet family for fun social times too, why not?

I'm in Scotland. No bubbles here.

Well my social bubble would include my ageing parents who have feck all to do with work, which I've been doing from home for weeks now. I wouldn't be caring for them, I'd be giving them a hug.

@wowfudge

That's fine and good. I only posted this because I had seen lots of people saying that if social bubbles are limited to 10 people that 10 wouldn't be enough.

Aibu to think It's not so people can have a nice fun social life

Christ, why do you care about someone else's social life? Provided they follow whatever the rules are, why is providing childcare different to having a glass of wine and a chat from a risk perspective?

This new puritanism is bizarre and pretty scary. You do you, let other people do them.

Of course it's not so that people can have a fun social life. Don't you know that every one has to suffer and nobody is allowed to smile or laugh.
Do please link to the government announced concept of social bubbles.

A lot depends on whether these bubbles include vulnerable people - I'm assuming not? So no grandparents or vulnerable family members. Seems impossible to police though, unless people are literally taking photos of a variety of people turning up at their neighbours' houses and reporting them for seeing too many!

That's fine and good.

That's very big of you.

Tbf, 10 people wouldn't be enough for most people. People will have to be selective.

My parents would want to have my siblings and their partners/kids in their bubble, so that's a fair few people grouped together straight off. Then my siblings will want their ILs. Then there's DH's parents and his siblings..... Everyone is part of a series of interlinking bubbles which, together, add up to far more than 10 people.

I doubt the figure of ten people has been plucked out if the air. It will be do with transmission rates, etc. I don't believe this has yet been confirmed anyway, so why try to do a hatchet job at this stage? It's better than being limited to having contact only with those people in your household!

Ultimately it’s a method of ensuring that if people are “breaking the lockdown” they are doing it in a way that is as safe as possible.

In my mind: Up until now the government has been following the “abstinence” policy of sex education. But it’s now becoming apparent that people need to see people outside of their households for various reasons so they are now teaching “safe sex” and putting in limits. If they stick with the hard line of no contact then people will break it anyway and end up causing much more damage.

We’re going to have a particularly hard time choosing - I’m due to have another baby any day now but my sister in law has separated from her husband and they have been going through counselling for the last 6 months. She’s moved in with my in-laws who are desperate to come and see the kids (and the new baby) but if we include BIL then we are too many (assuming that kids count in the total).

Yep, I would be happy with a bubble of 2 - my mother in law and father in law - so I could get some help with childcare.

If I was childfree, then, yes, 10 people wouldn't really let you do much socialising unless you have a tight knit circle of close friends. Being a parent gives you totally different priorities!

How’s it make sense that it would be ok to expose elderly parents for the sake of childcare but a set of young, heathy 20year olds can’t meet up and have a laugh?!

Surely it's so people can do whatever they want, but within safe rules?

God knows how it works in practice, as pp have said, because of the potential for overlap!

Bubble are fine - provided they don't overlap. Unfortunately, in many (most) case they will. Then social distancing is toast.

Surely it's so people can do whatever they want, but within safe rules?

An oxymoron if ever I heard one!

Like most blended families, we were already in a ‘social bubble’ of sorts. One composed mostly of people who don’t spend time together, and where we have absolutely no control over what the other adults do. In fact, some of the adults are only indirectly linked through the children.

I’m pretty sure the my ex (who has few friends and no family nearby, plus he loves rigidly sticking to anything that’s no fun) has been seeing absolutely no one but DS, and limiting time outside the house to the bare minimum.

We’re also pretty sure that DH’s ex has not been doing these things. She’s definitely been having her family visit, and also having her boyfriend over/staying at his (who lives with his family and works in a care home). But she habitually lies (even in the face of overwhelming evidence) and there’s no way to prevent her from doing anything.

I’d imagine that many people’s attempts to have any kind of hermetically sealed ‘social bubble’ of a particular size will be similarly impossible to regulate. How do you control what your brother does so that you can see your parents, for example?

The alternative to hermetically sealed bubbles of X number of people is probably worse. If every individual can just pick X number of individuals (with no overlap to the X-1 number of other individuals their spouse picks) then it seems a largely pointless idea. Why even bother with limiting social contact at all?

@Echobelly why do you assume grandparents are automatically considered vulnerable? My DM (Granny) is 59 and still going to work as a teacher? Not all grandparents are elderly and frail.

I could cope with a bubble. It would be my mum’s house, and my best friend’s house (assuming she was comfortable with that, we are both pregnant so equal risk) I don’t need much else

But I also don’t think bubbles are a sensible option because there’s too much complexity involved

We have done a ‘social bubble’ since the end of March with family as childcare was needed etc. Everyone spoke about it and the 3 parties Involved were happy for it to happen and it’s worked fine so far for us.

I’m a nurse in a covid ward and my husband works in a nursing home. No one would want to be in our bubble.

Presumably your best friend would want her own mum’s house rather than yours in the bubble though, @BuffaloCauliflower. (Which is, of course, where the complexity comes in).

No policy is going to work unless it’s clear, simple and easy to follow. Otherwise it’ll just be a farce.

But, given the UK approach so far, an over-complex and pointless farce is probably what we’ll get. 😩

I think the opportunity of mindfully socialising / sharing resources with a couple of households is going to have to happen shortly.

Asa family, we are only bothered about seeing my parents and possibly my grandma. I miss my friends but not in the same visceral, painful way. My parents will be sensible but might see my brothers (maybe not feasible as they live 150 miles away).

@Jaxhog Fair point

Hopefully you get what I mean within the context of the OP's question!

If you live a storybook life with your 2.4 kids and only works outside the home etc then perhaps social bubbles work but for those of us who don't it just is a crazy idea! So I can really dictate to exh how many people he can see so when I see my DD's I'm not doing over my limit, meanwhile dp has the same issue .... unless our "bubble" was 50+ just not possible. On a positive note we could just see our parents as neither are going out due to air and neither are seeing others at all.

@SporadicNamechange possibly not, knowing her relationship with her parents I think she’d rather have me! She’s also a childminder and likely to be looking after my niece (who lives with my DM) if schools go back, so would be bubbled in with us anyway.

But like I said, these complexities are why this option won’t really work