Did Boris Johnson just call us all bad parents?!

[Hermagsjesty]

Having watched that briefing I am incandescent with rage, less at what Cummings did - I understand people might have needed to make difficult choices and compromises during lockdown - but at the excusing of it. Why not admit it was an error of judgement and apologise?

I have three children. When my husband and I both became ill with what we believed to be Coronavirus in mid-March, we took turns to watch the children whilst the other slept. I lay on the sofa, feeling the illest I have ever felt, while CBeebies played on loop. We relied on neighbours we barely knew to drop off essentials. We would have loved to lean on family but we didn’t because we believed to do so would endanger them and the wider community.

A succession of ministers - and now the Primeminister himself - have suggested that Mr. Cummings behaved as any loving parent would. But many loving parents did not behave as he did. We struggled and made sacrifices in what we believed was the National interest. Are they now suggesting we just don’t love our kids as much as Mr. Cummings loves his?

I'm not saying he was right to do it, but he wouldn't have spread cv doing what he did

Well that depends - if he stopped at a service station, or to get petrol he could have spread it. Of course we don’t know if that happened, which was why everybody was given a very clear diagram of what measures for isolation you must take if members of your family/you have symptoms.

The issue for me isn’t so much that he did it, it’s the fact he is refusing to apologise when he could have done exactly the same and with a statement at the time would have diffused such a ridiculous situation.

No but if your really stupid or just want an excuse to be outraged you can pretend that he did if it suits you

Oooft how unfortunate...

sleepingpup

No I'm just aware of the facts and have opinions based on them.

olibar - are you a journalist, twising my words - my parents would insist on it, they wouldn't have it any other way - my son is an only child, no cousins on DH side and sees cousins my side every couple of years - why has everyone on MN suddenly become so bloody callous about their own children's welfare. Is it because you don't like Cummings. FFS.

If you would have done it. so be it. The Gov never expected 100% compliance to the lockdown.

But YOU @VenusTiger are NOT the chief advisor to the Government that bloody wrote and implemented the bloody Lockdown instructions.

You are not helping to lead this country.

It's got nothing to do with being callous to children. It's actually about PROTECTING the nation's children and it's citizens.

No I'm just aware of the facts and have opinions

But everyone else is "stupid " .

A big reason a lot of us wouldn't have done it is because choosing to put your child in a tiny, confined space with a symptomatic person for several hours is shit parenting. Exposing them to that risk when you didn't have to is what's callous.

Also tabbymumz, if there aren't sufficient facts in the public domain for people to say he did something wrong, there also aren't enough for you to say he did nothing wrong. Double standards.

Yes but there is a caveat in the rules about being able to go to another property if it would be harmful to remain at home

There is. Unless DC was at risk of domestic violence then he had no reason to leave the house. Given that he left the house with his wife and child and moved to another house together it is safe to say that he was not at risk of domestic violence from his wife.

They did not need to leave London in order to keep their child safe as they had family in London who would have been more appropriate to deliver shopping and help provide childcare than his parents.

These were the lockdown restrictions put in place on March 24th:

People may only leave home to exercise once a day, travel to and from work when it is "absolutely necessary", shop for essential items and fulfil any medical or care needs.

and these were the only reasons for leaving home:

1. Shopping for basic necessities such as food and medicine. Shopping trips should be as infrequent as possible

London has shops. It is not necessary to travel to Durham to go shopping

1. One form of exercise a day such as a run, walk, or cycle. This should be done alone or only with people you live with

Driving to Durham is not exercise

1. Any medical need, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person. This includes moving children under the age of 18 between their parents' homes, where applicable. Key workers or those with children identified as vulnerable can continue to take their children to school

With this guideline perhaps his parents might have been able to justify one of them leaving Durham to come to London. DC did not need to go to Durham since he was not going there to provide care and was not going there to help a vulnerable person as taking a person with corona virus symptoms to elderly people does not constitute providing care. The reason he specified was for childcare, this is not a medical need so that was not a valid reason.

1. Travelling to and from work, but only where this is absolutely necessary and cannot be done from home

He lives in London. He works in London. He's not an elected MP with a home in a constituency and therefore has no possible reason for travelling to Durham.

@sleepingpup - so the rule maker is exempt from using common sense and safeguarding their own child - get a fucking grip!

I'm not saying he was right to do it, but he wouldn't have spread cv doing what he did

How on earth can you claim to know that, @ITonyah? He hasn't denied that he would have to stop for fuel and toilet breaks.

But, more importantly, he didn't know that before he set out. Suppose he's had a breakdown or an accident causing other people to have to come to his help?

"Alsotabbymumz, if there aren't sufficient facts in the public domain for people to say he did something wrong, there also aren't enough for you to say he did nothing wrong. Double standards."

So, because there are no facts, he's guilty? Well that makes a lot of sense. Kangaroo court.

The word safeguarding continues to take abuse this thread.

@sleepingpup - so the rule maker is exempt from using common sense and safeguarding their own child - get a fucking grip!

Common sense? I think i can count about 4 people who thinks what he did was 'common sense'

😂😂😂😂

That sort of stupid would take your sort of logic tabbymumz. If you feel the facts we already have, which cannot be described as no facts, arent enough to make a call, that's ok provided you apply the view across the board. If people cant say he"s done something wrong, you can't say he's done nothing wrong. You can only say it isn't possible to make a call. Otherwise you're being a hypocrite, which I'm sure you want to avoid after your attempts at the moral high ground.

so the rule maker is exempt from using common sense and safeguarding their own child - get a fucking grip

Have your fucking grip back, @VenusTiger. Cummings could as easily have safeguarded his child in London as in Durham. It would certainly have been the height of folly to put his elderly parents at risk by asking them to look after his potentially infectious child. In fact, as pp have rightly pointed out, if anything it was much safer to leave his child in London than to shut him up in close proximity to his infectious wife for several hours.

Can anyone explain to me how DC was prescribed his child in all this?

@VenusTiger

"safeguarding "

emotive, disingenuous, and frankly taking the piss out of all the other parents looking after their children.

Can anyone explain to me how DC was protecting his child in all this?

@TabbyMumz, why on earth do you keep saying there are no facts? There are plenty of undisputed facts fully available. Or are you going to suggest that, for instance, it isn't a fact that Cummings travelled during lockdown? That it isn't a fact that the place he travelled to is over 260 miles away? That it isn't a fact that good medical care is available in London? That it isn't a fact that he is claiming this complied with the guidance? That the guidance itself isn't a fact? That it isn't a fact that his wife wrote an article about his illness claiming that they emerged into London lockdown?

So what I've gathered from the Govt is, if my husband begins to show symptoms, and I am worried that I too will become unwell, I can drive as far as I like to family on the off chance I'll need childcare for my son? And this was permitted the whole time?

How would the child be at risk of harm by staying in London?

Well he'd have been at risk of being in the comfort of his own home, of not being cooped up in a car with somebody with symptoms, of having all his familiar things around him and people available to drop off food and provide child care if necessary. His only risk is having DC and wife for parents seeing as they can't put him first.

jugglingbeans but he'd have been at risk of not having such a nice garden I suspect or being able to visit a castle

It was interesting that the BBC had Guido on the news this morning, I don’t think they will do that again. He highlighted the discrepancy between the way the media are treating the DC story and the way they treated the four labour MPs who were pulled up by the police for breaching the isolation regulations. They didn’t like it.

😂

It was interesting that the BBC had Guido on the news this morning, I don’t think they will do that again I heard that! Classic!

Ooh what was that one abort the Labour mps?