To think seeing family in their garden is safer?

[VodkaCranberry2]

So we can see one member of another household outside 2m apart... surrounded by other strangers 2m apart where we don’t know where they’ve been/who they’ve seen, but we can’t social distance in our family’s garden where we know they’ve been isolating/only going to the shops? Is this not ridiculous?

BBC are quizzing Matt Hancock now about the gardens vs parks issue and he seems to be struggling with the concept of people having gardens, if they have one, it being big enough to stay 2 metres apart and being accessible without entering the house. Most people I know meet all those conditions, so it's not that unusual is it?

So rather than saying 'if you have a front garden, it's fine to sit in it with a relative' he just kept banging on about meeting in the park. Idiot.

Crazy. I can meet my mum. My husband can meet my dad. But we can all meet together!!

I wouldn't suggest anyone comes and sits in my garden as it's only just over 2m wide so we're not always 2m from the neighbours. However, if I go and visit my uncle and his partner I can easily sit outside well over 2m from them on full view of anyone who might be sad enough to care who they are seeing.

It's not practical for him to meet me in a park so I'll go over to him and, if his partner wants to sit in her own garden at the same time, good for her. I understand the point of social distancing, but this is taking it too far.

The new guidelines about one person, meeting with one other person, outside, 2m apart was to address the Mental Health aspect of lockdown. The people struggling not seeing anyone in person or not being able to see their regular therapist or best friend etc

It was NOT designed for everyone to start filling up their diaries with 1:1 meetings back to back with all & sundry

The unlimited time outside re 'exercise & sports' was to address the fitness levels of people & to address the complaints people made about 'other sports' being no greater risk than cycling so why couldn't they do them?

The sunbathing/picnicking was mainly to address the complaints people living in places (especially high rise flats) had about not being able to spend any time outside &
If a parent sitting in the grass while their children run around

They were all intended to be small adjustments to make the lives of those struggling the most, more bearable

The main 'stay at home as much as possible' other than for the original reasons is still there.

The 'take home' is really stay at home as much as possible, but get some exercise & look after your mental health- so meet with someone if you really have to.

If you're a single parent then yes of course you can take your children - these easings are to help people in your situation - not make it even more difficult because you're a single parent.

The 'needing the loo' thing isn't 'stupid'. It's human nature to think 'this won't hurt' and it escalated & before we know it people are having a cup of tea inside because 'we'll stay 2m apart' & 'it won't hurt' and on & on.

If people could just 'stay at home' as much as possible & be (alert) sensible then it would be ok a small way to start easing things up, but threads in here have already proven they won't be-people are already planning on meeting up with many others & the virus will
Start spreading rapidly again 😢

How is it going to spread if I meet a relative in their open garden, sitting 2m apart, for half an hour?

How is it going to spread if I meet a relative in their open garden, sitting 2m apart, for half an hour?

Exactly. It will be quite the opposite if anything because we won’t come into contact with anyone else, much safer than being out with masses on a walk/in a park.

We’ve followed lockdown to the letter. I’m not following what is such a ridiculous rule. The rest, I will of course be maintaining.

I meant to add that it's no different to me sitting in my garden talking to my neighbour over the fence, other than I'll actually be further away.

BBC are quizzing Matt Hancock now about the gardens vs parks issue and he seems to be struggling with the concept of people having gardens, if they have one, it being big enough to stay 2 metres apart and being accessible without entering the house. Most people I know meet all those conditions, so it's not that unusual is it?

It’s so disingenuous to say this is confusing or difficult to understand. What would the posts on here say if the guideline was you can meet in a front garden, or a back garden that can be accessed without going through the house? Uproar! Well I haven’t got a front garden, what about meeeee! What about people in terraced houses, this new rule discrimates against people who aren’t wealthy with large gardens and detached houses! At the moment you can meet in a public place outdoors where the risk is lower, you don’t go indoors together, you won’t use the loo or mugs or glasses, or shelter if it rains. It’s pretty obvious why and everyone is in the same boat.

At the moment you can meet in a public place outdoors where the risk is lower, you don’t go indoors together, you won’t use the loo or mugs or glasses, or shelter if it rains. It’s pretty obvious why and everyone is in the same boat

Except we’re not quite. Now after the confirmation for longer exercise/you can drive further for exercise we will be inundated with people driving to my street. Like the first weekend of lockdown we won’t be able to be out/exercising so we will “stay alert” and “stay home and save lives” by having my parents in the garden.

It was NOT designed for everyone to start filling up their diaries with 1:1 meetings back to back with all & sundry

It might not have been designed with this is mind. However it is permitted so people are allowed to do so.

How is it going to spread if I meet a relative in their open garden, sitting 2m apart, for half an hour?

Quite. Surely the bigger risk comes from everyone going to the park. They were busy enough before the guidance changed. Now they'll be full of people playing sport, sunbathing, picnics, people exercising, and those who are meeting up with a person outside their household.

Common sense says people sitting in a garden 2m apart is much less likely to aid the spread of the virus, than 100s of people in the park. Yet one is permitted and the other isn't because... toilets.

I don’t live anywhere near a park. What am I to do? I’ll meet in a family garden, observing the 2 m rule. I’m doing my own risk management. I can cope without needing the loo.

Do the politicians not understand the concept that many many people live rurally and don’t have a park to meet in.

Certainly, the ‘in a park not a garden’ thing seems to be all about not trusting the general public. And to be honest, I can kind of see the point. Many do have common sense yes, but many do not.
The temptation to pop in to the house to use the loo, or have a cup of tea, or to have to actually walk through the house to access the garden.
I know plenty of people who have done the above already and swear blind they’re sticking to the rules.
Plus, as already mentioned, they can’t police people if they’re in back gardens.

I’m not quite so sure about the meeting of one other person only though. I haven’t seen my mom since before lockdown and she is desperate to see us again but my disabled sister still lives with her and she can’t leave her alone. So my mom, who has been by herself caring for my sister, can not even now get a boost by seeing her family?

What about people in terraced houses, this new rule discrimates against people who aren’t wealthy with large gardens and detached house

Utter bollocks. Even my first house, a traditional back to back terrace with a small front yard allows two people to meet the 'stay 2 metres apart' rule. Lots of people live in houses like this, there's plenty of choice for around £100k or so. Just the normal sort of house that single people, couples or small families live in. Gardens in most of various sizes - the ones round the back of us had massive gardens.

They've written the guidance with London flats in mind and not considered that in the rest of the country most people don't live like this and I'd confidently suggest that at least half of people do have access to at least a small garden, that allows two people to sit at least two metres apart. So why totally ignore them in favour of the city centre flat dweller?

They don’t really want people meeting up, we are still in lockdown after all. This is just a small concession. Hopefully, more concessions will be introduced if the R value stays under 1. More people finding ways round the rules will mean that won’t happen, and we will go back to a stricter lockdown.

I live in a terraced maisonette and the gardens are side by side so half the width of the maisonette so it’s not always easy to stay 2m apart. We have a 3’ fence one side so I can see my neighbour but a 6’ fence the other side so I have no idea where he is. There’s been a few occasions when we’ve been sitting either side of the fence less than 2m apart. It’s no big deal but for that reason I wouldn’t invite anyone else in but I certainly wouldn’t feel discriminated against!

The temptation to pop in to the house to use the loo, or have a cup of tea, or to have to actually walk through the house to access the garden

But you just don't, no matter how 'tempting' it is because that's more risky, so you don't do it.

I know they can't cover every situation, but they shouldn't stick to the blanket 'you can't sit in your garden' line, when it's the most common sense solution for some people.

I live 10 minutes drive from DM. She can't walk far due to arthritis and would need to sit down regularly, she doesn't drive. She lives in a fairly normal semi detached house (value £150-200k for those insisting this is a privilige inaccessible to anyone but millionaires) with several chairs in the front garden because that's where the sun is in the afternoon.

So I will visit her, sit and have a cup of tea etc in her front garden, always remaining 2 metres apart. When I leave, she will take my cup and put it in her dishwasher and wash her hands and I will go home and go to the toilet at home. And if anyone thinks that's unreasonable, I don't give a shit.

"but my disabled sister still lives with her and she can’t leave her alone."

People who are being cared for are not included in the 2 person rule so if your sister can go out it's fine for your mum to bring her with her.

People who are being cared for are not included in the 2 person rule so if your sister can go out it's fine for your mum to bring her with her.

I haven't seen this mentioned. Do you have a link, please?

The whole “what if you need a loo” is nonsense.

You can go out of the house for an 8 hour walk with someone from another household.

Yet an hour sit down with 2 members of a household in a private garden maintaining distancing is not acceptable, because “toilets”.

I can 100% guarantee that nobody visiting the beauty spot near me will be able to socially distance up to the required 2m at all times.

GrimmsFairytales it's not specifically mentioned in regards to this but a carer has always been allowed to have the person they are caring for with them if they cannot be cared for by someone else at home. Some adults actually require 2:1 care so outright banning of 3 people meeting wouldn't be reasonable.

it's not specifically mentioned in regards to this

It's a pretty crucial detail to leave out. Pushing the 1 person only narrative without clarifying details like this, will just mean those who have caring responsibilities will think that they're not allowed to meet up with another person. As demonstrated by the previous poster.

It may be government guidance for unpaid carers but I haven't checked.

It would also apply if someone with a disability requiring another persons support wanted to meet with someone else. In that case though it would be clearly discrimatory not to allow it.

They've written the guidance with London flats in mind and not considered that in the rest of the country most people don't live like this and I'd confidently suggest that at least half of people do have access to at least a small garden, that allows two people to sit at least two metres apart. So why totally ignore them in favour of the city centre flat dweller

I was just saying that whatever the ‘rule’ some people would have an issue with it not expressing my own view.

I don’t agree the guidance has been written with London flat dwellers in mind, it’s been written bearing in mind that any new concession will be pushed to the very limits of possible interpretation. So it’s clear, outside in a public place, everyone the same. Your circumstances don’t trump mine or mine yours.

Lots of details regarding people with disabilities and their carers have not been widely publicised. Eg special schools 'reopening' will not be done by year group.

This is what happens when they "follow the science" someone has probably done a projection based on what if we allow two people to meet up outside

But this doesn't take into account the practical implications for individual families

Science should inform the policy decisions but not be the decisions. Decisions are political and the govt shouldn't hide behind the science.

I'm generally in favour of BoJo but these nonsensical guidelines make them look weak imo.