To think the Covid 19 crisis has revealed a scourge of ableism and ageism in our society?

[Madhairday]

I see it on every thread about lockdown. The elderly (over 60s) and vulnerable (of whatever age) are again and again dehumanised and cast as less worthy of help than the young and the fit, who should be prioritised because they have longer and healthier life left before them. Phrases like one I saw just now about how these people will die soon anyway so why are children suffering?

I am really tired of being othered. I am really tired of being made the reason for the suffering endured by many in lockdown. Really tired of being told I should be grateful others are suffering for me. Just really tired.

Before all this I'd never have dreamed these attitudes would come to light, but in the past months I've been repeatedly punched in the gut with some of the words thrown out against the aged and the disabled and chronically ill. It seems that we truly live in a world where not all lives are equal, where in fact many are worth less than others.

Lots of people are suffering due to lockdown and the effects will continue to cause suffering. The shielded know this and are affected by it as much as everyone else. I have lost my income as well as not being able to touch another human being for nearly 3 months. Many of my shielded friends mental health is shot, too, yet on threads about mental health the shielded are yet again othered and in fact blamed for the mental health issues of those not shielding.

Many are suffering in lockdown. We know this. We know the NHS has cut off much treatment (largely because the spread of covid in hospitals is so uncontainable that they cannot risk bringing already vulnerable people onto wards as covid would exacerbate conditions and kill in greater numbers, as well as the risk for frontline staff, yet many people here seem to think the NHS has narrowed down 'because only covid deaths are important to them' )

I am deeply concerned at the level of ableism and ageism I see on here every single day at the moment. If we said someone else's life mattered less because they were black or gay we would rightly be torn to pieces, but so many are saying lives are less due to age and vulnerability, and this is going unchallenged, again and again and again.

I see it. I see it every day. I feel it deep down, a sense of worthlessness because I have long term chronic illnesses. I am likely to live many more years, however, but that doesn't fit in with the narrative so many have built around the shielded and those dying of Covid, that they must be near death anyway.

Do lives really rank one over the other due to age and illness? Is this where we are now?

I agree lockdown is hurting people. I am not one of the lockdown should last forever people. I'm just getting on with shielding quietly and carefully. But I do fear for a second wave if it's relaxed too quickly.

I would like to ask for some compassion today in the way people speak. I'd like to ask that people don't denegrate others as less worthy or state that covid is just a bad cold. Have a care for those who feel othered and dehumanised by the rhetoric that flies at us day after day.

I do see your point OP. But in reality, I don’t think that elderly and vulnerable people can complain about ageism and ableism when we have now been in lockdown for 2 and a half months now to protect them - and as a result, children have lost a term or more of education, babies and toddlers have lost 2.5 months of interaction and socialisation, people have lost their lives as an indirect result of the lockdown, it’s a scourge on people’s mental health, domestic violence has increased, child sexual abuse has increased and 3.5 million jobs could be lost.

Yet despite all the negative effects, we remain in lockdown. Surely that’s the opposite of ableism and ageism?

@ Monkeynuts18 and don’t you think the disabled and shielded have been without social interaction and education as well then?

In fact whereas you have been able to go out for one period of exercise a day those who have been shielding haven’t been able to even leave their houses, in some instances haven’t even been able to go out into their gardens, for ten weeks.

And can we please get away from this notion that this was to protect the vulnerable? It wasn’t. It was to slow the spread so that the NHS wasn’t overwhelmed.

If it was to protect the vulnerable than why were some asked if they wantes to sign DNRs

It was to slow the spread so that the NHS wasn’t overwhelmed.

Well that was achieved weeks ago, so lockdown should be over.

@Monkeynuts18

I do see your point OP. But in reality, I don’t think that elderly and vulnerable people can complain about ageism and ableism when we have now been in lockdown for 2 and a half months now to protect them - and as a result, children have lost a term or more of education, babies and toddlers have lost 2.5 months of interaction and socialisation, people have lost their lives as an indirect result of the lockdown, it’s a scourge on people’s mental health, domestic violence has increased, child sexual abuse has increased and 3.5 million jobs could be lost.

Yet despite all the negative effects, we remain in lockdown. Surely that’s the opposite of ableism and ageism?

My toddler is one of the vulnerable and many children fall into this group. He would be hospitalised with the virus and I’ve seen from the charity supporting his rare condition that many have been severely affected.

Even before lockdown we haven’t been able to access childcare for him as he requires one to one supervision when eating (disorder of the oesophagus) and it’s really hard to find. Yet despite this he is still socialised and interacts well, his language development is great. The months spent in hospital as a baby were more of a lockdown than this could ever be.

I’m not arguing for or against lockdown but children can be clinically vulnerable too.

I guess what it mean is, I wish I was in the position where I could worry about my child’s socialisation and education. I can’t because I’m too worried about his health, I believe he would survive the virus but be hospitalised with long term effects.

HearHoovesThinkZebras Anyway, regardless I'm shielding (letters and everything) and I still haven't got a delivery slot or anything else you mentioned so I feel justified in complaining that we haven't been well looked after and have been forgotten about.

Thoroughly agree.

I think it's really important that whilst easing lockdown, especially for those most suffering from it, we should also be ramping up support for those who are shielding. Treating everyone the same, whether we're talking risks of covid or risks from lockdown, is not the solution.

Why is it ok that we must manage with no social interaction or exercise? Most people have been going out every day, to the shops, more recently to beaches etc and are now chomping at the bit to get back to normal because they can't stand it anymore yet somehow the shielded, who haven't been outside for ten weeks, and have to social distance from our families can just make do with zoom calls?

I'm slightly confused as to what you would prefer to happen. I thought those shielding were now allowed to go out? In fact, the shielding guidance was only ever guidance, you can choose if you want to follow it. I understand if you wouldn't want to risk it though, and it's a shitty choice to have to choose to miss out to stay safe.

But... we ALL still have to social distance from our families and friends. I think this is more of a "who you live with" issue than a shielding one. Sucks for people on their own (I am, and it's my main reason for wanting amendments to lockdown). I feel your pain about people going to beaches and so on - I can't drive yet and sadly do not have my own family so it's really difficult to see people on a lovely jolly, almost normal, when I'm unable to be close to people or go outside my local area.

What should they do about exercise? I don't know. They need to have s think don't they? Maybe give us all a treadmill

I don't want to offer stupid solutions so apologies if this is impractical, but many have been doing online workouts. I know Joe Wicks does one you can do sat in a chair, although in general I'm not sure how many adapted workouts there are available.

*@ Monkeynuts18 and don’t you think the disabled and shielded have been without social interaction and education as well then?

In fact whereas you have been able to go out for one period of exercise a day those who have been shielding haven’t been able to even leave their houses, in some instances haven’t even been able to go out into their gardens, for ten weeks.

And can we please get away from this notion that this was to protect the vulnerable? It wasn’t. It was to slow the spread so that the NHS wasn’t overwhelmed.*

Of course I don’t think that. I haven’t written ‘we’ve all been having a shit time so that the elderly and vulnerable can have an awesome blow out party’ in my post. But that wasn’t my point at all.

And as to your second point @Nihiloxica got there first. Yes, we were told 10 weeks ago that it was to slow the spread and protect the NHS. But the peak was reached on the 8 April, some two months ago, and the NHS remained well within capacity. The newly constructed Nightingale hospitals sit unused. Deaths are now down to pre-lockdown levels - yet we remain in lockdown.

So actually, I think we need to move away from the idea that lockdown remains in place to slow the spread and protect the NHS - as that clearly isn’t the case.

@monkeynuts18

We aren’t in the same lockdown as we were initially. We are in lockdown easing. Yes it’s gradual and I’m sure we could debate about the pace and priorities but you make it sound like nothing has changed.

User

Yep, we’re gradually easing out of lockdown, after 10 weeks, when the peak was reached two months ago. But that’s not my point. My point is that it seems a bit unfair to levy accusations of ableism and ageism at society when in fact the majority of the population has made enormous sacrifices to protect the elderly and/or vulnerable (whatever people’s personal views on having to do so).

I understand it’s been rubbish for everyone and we all have made sacrifices. No one is doing well out of this.

The OP is about language not actions and I agree with it. It does come across sometimes as though people resent the vulnerable for causing this imposition on their lives and they are sometimes characterised as being on death’s door. I’m not saying you did this but it’s not nice to read as a parent of a vulnerable child.

Again, you're choosing this narrative of young and fit people making a sacrifice for the vulnerable, and therefore we should not level accusations of ableism. Unfortunately you are not listening to the many voices on this thread which recount their direct experiences of ableism in terms of the language used over and over - the 'gratutude' language being only the tip of the iceberg. Do you not believe a disabled person when they report that language used has dehumanised them?

The lockdown was to protect the NHS and thus society. We are so slow to come out of it because of a number of reasons: waiting for numbers to go down to reduce the possibility of exponential growth, waiting for test and trace to be operational in order to keep the virus in check, or some would argue the government's ineptitude and inability to make decisions. Whichever way you look at it though it's certainly not simply to protect the vulnerable as the shielding group are not coming out of lockdown and at the moment have no idea when we will be, so if what you posit were the case then lockdown for everyone else would have been released a whole lot earlier while still keeping shielded locked down. It's much more nuanced than that and unfortunately your use of language just contributes to the general melting pot of bad feeling towards the vulnerable and the othering of us, as well as ignoring the fact that there are shielding children and young people as well.

So yes, I can talk about my lived experience of ableism. I have experienced it for years in different forms and now I am experiencing it in the form of language that belittles and expects me to bow and scrape with gratitude to the young and the fit. And yet I am being told here on this thread that my lived experience is not valid.

Would you say that to someone who said they were experiencing racism, sexism or homophobia? I really hope not.

But... we ALL still have to social distance from our families and friends. I think this is more of a "who you live with" issue than a shielding one

You have to socially distance from the people you live with?

People who are shielding are advised to

Sleep in a separate room

Use a separate bathroom, if that isn't possible it must be cleaned after each person uses it

Eat alone

Not spend too much time in the same room as other household members

Stay 2 metres apart from other household members

So, that's what everyone has to do is it?

Yeah I have been sleeping in a kids sigle bed to protect dh. Either that or the whole family shields including kids. Eldest on the sofa.
Not the same at all.

I have noticed ableism, but around mental health. And also a sort of hierachy around what you're allowed to be struggling with during all this. My mental health (pre-existing but managed issues) has been really appalling at points. A huge part of this has been the lack of social contact, particularly close contact/staying over with loved ones. Yet I was ripped to shreds on SM, accused of wanting vulnerable people to die, because I said that people who live alone should have some kind of exception made to make a "bubble" with someone else/family. The fact that I came close to suicide a few weeks ago presumably doesn't matter (didn't dare bring this up in case it got more accusations). I just don't understand the mindset that can accuse someone who's vulnerable and suffering of not giving a shit about vulnerable people.

HearHoovesThinkZebras

You're not making any sense. You're not actually engaging with what I'm saying. You ask why the shielded have to make do with being distanced from everybody but you don't seem to understand the same is true for others too. I assumed you were living alone because I find it astonishing that someone would actually distance themselves from family they live with - apologies for my mistake. Nonetheless, I was replying to your question about why must the shielded have to put up with being distanced from everybody, yet you don't say what you actually want to happen instead. You are not required by law to distance from your own household, even if it's been advised. Frankly I think the household of those shielded should be supported so that the whole household can remain in a bubble and no distancing required within that. But that's because I think it wrong for anyone to have to be distanced from everybody.

I can empathise with how shit it is to be distanced from everyone you love. But I don't understand what it is you want - if you don't want to distance from your household, don't. But you can't expect everyone else to have to distance from everybody. We're already distancing between households which makes you better off than someone living alone, who can't even see loved ones indoors, and has been ordered to distance from them, not merely advised.

@paddling sorry you are having it tough too. I guess if you need support it could be construed as travelling for health reasons. It is a bit of a grey area.
A person shielding is advised to socially distance themselves from people living with them. It is either that or everyone stays home. This was just not possible at the start as I could not get delivery slots and dd has ARFID and the food she mainly eays is only available in a local store which doesn't do delivery. Yes I could call on friends or volunteers but expecting a volunteer to shop for a family of 5 is not practical especially when some days I had to go to 3 branches of the same shop to get food she would eat.
Yes I could get close to dh or let kids hug him but I would never forgive myself if he caught it from me or kids and died.
Life is tough for everyone right now and made harder by people going on about the sacrifices they have made for people shielding.

I find it astonishing that someone would actually distance themselves from family they live with

Yes, that's what shielding entails. You see, our families could infect us.

No one has been on lockdown to keep me safe. No one. The country has been on lockdown to stop the NHS from being overwhelmed and to preserve capacity.

Those of us shielding have been told to shield because medics know that if we catch it we are likely to become ill enough to need hospitalisation and potentially ITU. There are about 2 million of us shielding - that's a lot of hospital and ITU beds.

I feel very sorry for anyone that has been living alone during lockdown. It must be very difficult, at least you've been able to go out every day and more recently able to meet up with a friend, but I understand how difficult it must have been.

I also really feel for people who live alone and are shielding - to be kept away from everyone else indefinitely must be horrendous.

You ask me what I want - I'd like us to be able to get infections down to a level where everyone is able to get out of lockdown. But that requires everyone to do their part - socially distance, follow the new rules, wear masks when asked to do so, self isolate when necessary.

All I keep seeing though are posts where people justify not having to follow these rules - don't want to wear masks, don't want to stay away from friends houses, a school having to isolate a class of children because a child was tested for Covid but the parents didn't tell the school and didn't self isolate - low and behold the child is positive, potentially having exposed their classmates and five members of staff, and their families, so now they're all quarantined. That's why many of us are worried about stopping shielding - we can't be sure others won't put our lives at risk by being selfish.

But so many seem to be ok with some of us being locked down entirely so that others can just do what they like.

But that requires everyone to do their part - socially distance, follow the new rules, wear masks when asked to do so, self isolate when necessary.

Nah. I'd rather take my chances than lose my job. That's not living. Everyone can't 'do their part' if they can't afford to keep fecking self-isolating every time someone sneezes around them. That's not 'selfish' that's just survival.

This 'shielding', it's not house arrest. No one's locking people up. Those people are free to make their own decisions using their own common sense and risk assessment, too.

The government couldn't run a bath, it doesn't make sense to blindly follow whatever the hell they tell you to do.

It's more than just doing what you like, it's avoiding becoming unemployed with no savings as you were too skint to have anything to save and not being able to pay your rent or top up your power meter all over a virus that, odds are, won't kill you anymore than jumping in your car will.

Sorry, but that's how life goes. It's not fair.

No one's in prison here, this 'shielding' isn't a jail.

So if you develop a cough or a fever or if PHE contact you and tell you that you've been in close contact with someone that has tested positive you won't self isolate?

Then you say that shielding isn't compulsory and I should do my own risk assessment? How exactly do we risk assess for selfish people who decide they don't need to follow the rules designed to keep infection rates at a low level?

The fact that I came close to suicide a few weeks ago presumably doesn't matter (didn't dare bring this up in case it got more accusations). I just don't understand the mindset that can accuse someone who's vulnerable and suffering of not giving a shit about vulnerable people.

Yeah, see, in the mindset of so many, as long as you don't die from Covid, it's acceptable somehow. You're supposed to put the entire world first before your kids with no food in the cupboards or someone who's suicidal. Day 77 but so many would like it to drag on out for months and months more. No idea whom they expect to pay for it all when the money runs out but hey, Covid is king here!

It's more than just doing what you like, it's avoiding becoming unemployed with no savings as you were too skint to have anything to save and not being able to pay your rent or top up your power meter all over a virus that, odds are, won't kill you anymore than jumping in your car will

What exactly do you think those of us shielding are living on?

Do you think the government is sending a wheelbarrow full of money round every week?

I'll be going onto sick pay soon - what's that £95 a week is it?

How exactly do we risk assess for selfish people who decide they don't need to follow the rules designed to keep infection rates at a low level?

Assume that they've given up a quarter of a year's earnings to keep you safe and maybe can't afford to keep doing it?

Making our own assessments of risk was completely normal only 3 short months ago.

Gees, Hear, yes, it's so selfish to want to pay your rent and top up your meter and buy food. You're supposed to just throw that to wind for what could be nothing more than hayfever or a cold (yes, you can get fevers from those, too) and tell your employer just to suck it up in a time of record unemployment when there's a dozen people for every one job? Must be nice to not be on your own have someone else who can pay the bills whilst you're sat at home but that's not reality for a lot of people and until the government comes up with a plan to address that, telling such folks they are 'selfish' for trying to pay their rent and buy food is going to be like water on a duck's back to them. Welcome to the Real World REcession 2020.

I'll be going onto sick pay soon - what's that £95 a week is it?

It's more than £0, which is the amount of sick pay many people are entitled to, particularly if they're not actually sick.