DH broke lockdown but is making me feel guilty

[Anonandonandonandon]

DH agreed, in spite of my protests, to meet a few local friends last week, in the park our houses backs on to. They kept 2m apart, but there were 4 of them. They are mutual friends, but I declined to go.

He wanted to do this again today, but I’ve told him I think he is being selfish. He says the risk is minimal, and I probably agree, but I’ve made clear that it’s not legal, that the rules are in place for a reason and he is not above the law.

He’s agreed not to go, but he’s told the friends it’s because of me, which I think is unfair.

I’d arranged to meet 1 friend in the same park later, but DH has asked me to go somewhere else (which would involve a drive for both my friend and me), so that these other friends don’t see and feel slighted.

He thinks IABU, but I think he is. I don’t want to upset any of my friends and I’m now not sure what to do.

[Pacmanitee]

Also I'm amazed at how few people know how far 2 metres is, and that should be the absolute minimum.

It's actually a lot less in other countries, we seen to be using 2 metres to account for the fact many people will underestimate it.

[vanillandhoney]

Quite. This really comes down to whether or not people think it’s acceptable not to follow a rule they don’t agree with. In this case, where very few people (if any) are experts, I don’t.

The rules are in place to benefit the economy, it's nothing to do with people's health. Let's be fair, it's far more dangerous to be rammed onto a tube or bus with dozens of strangers than it is to sit in a park 2m apart from four friends.

But the former benefits the economy, the latter does not. I wonder why the former is legal

[Msmcc1212]

YANBU. The rules are indeed there to protect us all. If everyone went out to meet several friends, outdoor spaces would get busier and make it harder to stay 2m away. The rules in England are a bit crap but better than nothing. I personally think the bubble idea is better where you can mix with one other household but at the moment it is what it is and your husband and friends are being selfish. Some people (DCummings for example) seem to think the rules don’t apply to them for some reason. I’m not one for arbitrary authority and am a bit of a rebel with it but this is different. Children are being orphaned. NHS staff are exhausted and many have died. I am with you OP.

[Anonandonandonandon]

It's actually a lot less in other countries, we seen to be using 2 metres to account for the fact many people will underestimate it.

Yep, and we’re also being asked to follow paternalistic rules because most people will sway from them a little if it’s in their personal interest.

[SockYarn]

Goodness me, what a load of drama of nothing.

Exactly this. Your DH broke a "rule" by meeting 4 people instead of 2. He was social distancing, outside. But you want to put him on the naughty step and confiscate his toys?

This virus has turned people quite crazy with paranoia and if I never hear "it's against the rules" it will be too soon.

[Raaaa]

I think it's a bit OTT, my OH has broken the rules occasionally, as have I over this lockdown, we're both aware so we're not going to tell each other what to do, we're both adults at the end of the day that know the risks and if we pick it up it's our own fault.

[Anonandonandonandon]

But you want to put him on the naughty step and confiscate his toys?

Erm, no. We’ve had a perfectly calm discussion and he’s accepted my point of view. He’s just a bit embarrassed about his change of position, which I think is daft.

Perhaps I haven’t been clear enough. He doesn’t actually think my position on his plans are unreasonable. He thinks it’s unreasonable that I’d want to meet my friend in view of his.

[VioletCharlotte]

For me, the news about Dominic Cummings is the last straw. I've been following the rules, but from now on will risk assess and make my own judgements. My parents have been round this mornings and sat in my garden (over 2 m away) and tomorrow I'm meeting two friends at the park. It's DS birthday today and he's meeting 3 mates for drinks in the park. They're sensible and will keep their distance. I'm sick of being told what to do by incompetents who can't even stick to the rules themselves.

So in short, meet your friend and leave your DH to meet his.

[thirstyformore]

I'm a rule follower too, so I understand your viewpoint. However, the rules are totally illogical and everyone seems to be breaking them (whether intentionally or unintentionally) so I'm slowly getting over my natural responses.

I've met another family with my DS in the park this morning. The boys played football. Social distancing was observed and my son was SO MUCH happier for it. We've also had grandparents in the back garden. Both of these are technically against the rules. But if independently both families had decided to go to the same field at the same tine, that would have been ok? And you can access my back garden without going through the house so I see no difference between them standing on the path to the rear of my garden, or in the garden itself.

It's difficult to "break the rules" but I've decided to simply use common sense going forward.

[CoronaIsComing]

I think you should have left your DH to make his own decisions but I do agree with your DH that you should meet you friend somewhere else!

[PissOffStayAtHomeDogMum]

OP, I have been going with the DIY risk assessment all along, so I'd say you and your DH should be left to do likewise, without either of you trying to police the other. I am not a natural law-abider, though.

[TheStoic]

We’ve had a perfectly calm discussion and he’s accepted my point of view.

We discussed it and both agreed that I am right.

[Scarlettpixie]

Why is meeting strangers any less risky than meeting friends? It's not.

I agree - but if you are trying to reduce contact between people rather than eliminate it, the easiest way is to ban contact by arrangement. You can’t help but have contact with strangers unless you stay home so they can’t ban that instead!

[thirstyformore]

Just to note as well, the application on the rules have totally different consequences for different areas. We live in a leafy market town with mounds of open space. I think you could have the entire population of the town all successfully socially distancing on one area of common ground and still have space left over! It's not an issue if larger groups meet up. I get that this might not be the case for other areas, hence why large groups congregating wouldn't work.

One size doesn't fit all.....

[BubblyBarbara]

It seems few people around here actually believe in the virus any more so let him fill his boots and be a second wave hero.

[KnockDownNinjas]

It's embarrassing because you're off to do the thing that his friends know he can't do because you told him off for it. You do need to do some personal risk assessments in a situation like this.
The rules (not laws) are for people who are incapable of taking on the burden of that responsibility.

[IneverHadTheLatin]

Can anyone remember the time when crimes were regarded as things like theft or GBH ? Now, a crime consists of going to the park to see your mates during the hours of daylight whilst eating an ice cream on a park bench. Strange days indeed.

[Rabblemum]

Your husband isn’t breaking the law. Unless you’re particularly vulnerable to Covid19 you shouldn’t stop your husband meeting his pals. Are you sure you’re not being possessive, imagine if a man stoped a woman meeting her friends, many would say that’s abusive.

[Anonandonandonandon]

It seems few people around here actually believe in the virus any more so let him fill his boots and be a second wave hero.

I think this is the crux of my issue. Things have improved, so everyone feels a bit safer, everyone has become an expert in what is logical and illogical around a virus we don’t yet understand and everyone thinks it’s okay to bend the rules if it makes them happier.

My bubble are primarily health workers (I am one), who don’t share the same view.

[Anonandonandonandon]

Your husband isn’t breaking the law. Unless you’re particularly vulnerable to Covid19 you shouldn’t stop your husband meeting his pals. Are you sure you’re not being possessive, imagine if a man stoped a woman meeting her friends, many would say that’s abusive.

Oh my goodness, this is quite a take! Both factually incorrect (it is illegal) and rather a jump.

[TeacupDrama]

I do not believe we should blindly follow rules or orders we are not automatons without a conscience

Generally when laws are good and make sense they are mostly followed
when laws seem arbitary and unfair and OTT they are less likely to be followed and eventually are abandoned as unenforceable and unpoliceable
While some people are stupid and don't use common sense these people were not keeping rules anyway
Rules and guidelines differ in different places WHO guidelines say stay 1metre apart in most of Europe it varies from 1-1.5metres
in Scotland from next week two households can meet ( not just 2 people) and in gardens which is more than England however other things are stricter like not travelling for exercise
Interpreting the science is also difficult it has to be balanced with political expediency if science was followed some counties would have almost no restrictions as so few in hospital others would be more restricted ( this happens in France paris is still a red zone while rural areas are green) Some parts of Scotland have almost no new cases in the past month others have a hundred a day

I think people have to act like grown ups and chose what risk they are comfortable with, ie the shielding were told it was advisable to self isolate for 12 weeks but it is not the law they don't have to in particular Chris whitty said someone with not long to live anyway may decide that shielding is not right for them

protests have led to bad laws etc being turned round or abandoned I'm not in favour of virtue signalling type of protests but genuine protests I'm all for
I think every Government knows as they are finding out in France and Spain that people will only tolerate loss of freedoms ( very dearly won) for a very limited period ie weeks not months, Italy and Spain are still reposrting just over a 100 deaths per day but restaurants etc are opening again I think the end of June is probably the cut off for most of the publics tolerance of hard restrictions lighter ones like no huge groups mass gatherings will be tolerated a big longer but there is no way they will be accepted for months on end going into next year

[Eckhart]

You're both trying to control each other's behaviours, and thereby disrespecting each other.

He's breaking the law, it's his choice. Do you come down hard on him if he does 31 in a 30 area? Do you ever do 31 in a 30 area? Would you be ok with him getting upset with you if you did?

Tell him you don't respect his decision because it's against the law, and that you'll be sticking with yours, because it's within the law. And leave it at that. Trying to change each others' behaviours will just breed resentment.

[onedayinthefuture]

Your DH isn't out murdering anyone. Get a grip.

[Lynda07]

If they are keeping a fair distance apart, what's the problem?

[Eckhart]

Your DH isn't out murdering anyone. Get a grip

Strictly speaking, he is increasing the risk of transmitting a virus that kills people, so he might be out manslaughtering people. So yes, you're right, by a whisker. And, missing the point.