AIBU to think it's unrealistic to expect people to self isolate with no income?

[AvocadosBeforeMortgages]

I honestly can't see how the government thinks people who any of the following can possibly afford to self isolate?

• on zero hours contracts and won't get sick pay
• employed by companies that only pay SSP (£95.85pw - I don't know anyone who can survive on that)
• self employed (NB even before COVID, stats showed around half of self employed people earned LESS than minimum wage, and many haven't benefited from any of the COVID related financial support)

You could get phoned up by contact tracing and told to self isolate for a fortnight = no income. This could happen repeatedly. The same happens if you're symptomatic and get a positive test.

No income = can't pay the rent or put food on the table - many of those in the groups listed above were already struggling financially before COVID - often even more so after COVID.

The government is putting people in an impossible situation. AIBU to think that many will have no choice but to continue working even if they should be self isolating - and that the government should be making payments to anyone of working age who is told to self isolate so that they don't have to choose between their 'civic duty' and keeping a roof over their family's head?

I agree it is not going to be perfect in larger businesses, but as they have a duty of care to their other employees, they will at least be trying to adhere to proper infection control.

I know my household has to run risks, and that the consequences fipor us are way more severe (real risk of death, so life not livelihood for one of us)

I cannot proof us against people actively choosing to ignore infection control. I can make choices which reduce it wherever possible.

There is nothing a larger business can put in place to tell them when an employee has been advised to isolate by track and trace and chosen to continue working anyway. It isn't just that their attempts will be imperfect, they will be non-existent. No mechanism exists for them to obtain this information other than through the affected employee.

It's obviously up to you what you want to do, but your best bet would be to at least try and find out who's paying full sick pay and who's paying SSP. Not the easiest thing in the world but you can sometimes find the info online.

Covid won't be going away any time soon, and I'm afraid the info you're hoping to base your decisions on simply isn't in the public domain

Yes, it's been shit to be shielding. It's a life-long condition that led to it, so we're sort of used to the idea that stuff won't be going away.

Including the continuing shit that some people have already decided to break infection control risks.

Which means out world has to remain smaller and poorer indefinitely

But yes, I want life in the literal sense to continue tomexist, so will make choices on that basis as best I can, ruling out businesses and types of organisation when I find info about lack of hygiene.

I'm not going to boycott all small businesses on the strength of a thread. I'm not silly. But if there were a choice between large and small, I'd go for the larger one (for reasons I've already explained) unless it featured on shit-lists for poor management standards

The government should have addressed this back then

Evergreen comment, sadly. Lockdown should have been used to contemplate life after lockdown, but it appears very little has been done.

Our furlough scheme, undoubtedly generous, was quite wasteful and poorly designed because it was wheeled out in a rush. They had opted not to do any economic prep for a pandemic, unlike other countries, so had no ideas sketched out.

@Orangeblossom78

Of course this will also impact mothers more, if children also have to isolate various times when they are back at school, as will need to stop work to look after them....

so not just about the adults self isolating either.

If a child is told to self isolate, wont the whole household need to isolate? If it was DH, I would shut him in our bedroom &ensuite and drop off food, but I wouldn't do that to a child, so we'd all be at home?

I guess they are hoping levels stay low enough that this is rare- it will also be worse in some areas than others perhaps, depending on flare ups and local rate of infection

wont the whole household need to isolate?

I think it is just the person contacted...would welcome clarification on this through

We will have two in secondary, different years, DH self employed in a factory also so hundreds of potential contacts this autumn, before anything like cafe's or holidays!

If we all have to isolate every time...

From the guidance here
www.gov.uk/guidance/nhs-test-and-trace-how-it-works#people-who-have-had-close-contact-with-someone-who-has-coronavirus

Which applies to both over and under 18s...

"Self-isolation means staying at home and not going outside your home at any time. If you live with other people, they do not need to self-isolate, but they should avoid contact with you as far as possible and follow advice on hygiene If you do not live with other people, you should seek help from others, or delivery services, for essential activities such as food shopping. Self-isolation can be particularly challenging if you are looking after children, or if you care for vulnerable people who cannot stay with friends or family.

If you go on to develop symptoms, anyone you live with must then self-isolate and you must report your symptoms and get tested.

You’d never know if a business knew or not that an employee should be isolating. I’d boycott a business that didn’t enforce the isolation if they knew it should be happening but wouldn’t boycott on the basis of pay as they have no control over how their employees socialise or if they travel etc.

Yes, it's been shit to be shielding. It's a life-long condition that led to it, so we're sort of used to the idea that stuff won't be going away.

@nether What I haven't mentioned upthread is that I also have a lifelong health condition. It's a condition where the primary effects are elsewhere in the body, but it does also affect the lungs.

From what I could gather about my rare condition, I was a borderline case for whether or not I should be shielding. Certainly if I hadn't had one particular surgery, I would have been told to shield.

Unfortunately, I haven't had the luxury of being able to shield. I have had to continue working. If I had stopped working to shield, then I would have lost the roof over my head - and I'm certain that the health effects of being homeless would have been worse than the risk of catching COVID.

Count yourself lucky that you have been able to afford to shield. Not everyone has that luxury.

And as orangeblossom has pointed out mothers are more likely to be adversely impacted because they are more likely to work part time or in a lower paid role. But even that smaller loss of income could be disastrous for some.

Need surgery? Whole household has to self isolate for two weeks beforehand. No sick pay available to cover that either.

My DH also had a shielding letter like the OP and is self employed

He is back at work in the factory now, works in manufacturing

Must be lovely to have the luxury of staying home forever

On surgery that may be changing, testing them instead apparently

Unfortunately, I haven't had the luxury of being able to shield. I have had to continue working

There are several charities campaigning in this very point. There are individuals who are in the shield group who have found themselves in that very position.

It's not a 'luxury' for those who do fall in to the exceptionally medical vulnerable. And none of them shouid have been forced in to the position of life v livelihood.

I hope you are never in those shoes

And none of them should have been forced in to the position of life v livelihood. I hope you are never in those shoes

I didn't bother asking my consultant at the hospital if I should be shielding as I knew I couldn't afford to regardless of what the answer was.

I'm on the waiting list for cardiology investigation (currently delayed for an unknown length of time due to COVID) and there's evidence that COVID causes 'silent' heart damage in 78% of patients www.statnews.com/2020/07/27/covid19-concerns-about-lasting-heart-damage/

Regardless, I have to keep going out to work, sometimes seeing hundreds of people in a day, just to keep a roof over my head.

I am more scared of the certainty of losing the roof over my head than the risk of losing my life.

It was a bit further upthread but you could actually be forced to isolate under Public Health legislation.
www.magonlinelibrary.com/doi/full/10.12968/bjon.2020.29.5.326

Consideration is being given to using testing after a week to cut the fortnight of isolation demanded by NHS Test and Trace amid concern that the cost of taking two weeks off work is reducing compliance. Less than a third of Britain’s daily capacity of 338,000 tests is being used.

in the papers today

[quote Northernsoullover]It was a bit further upthread but you could actually be forced to isolate under Public Health legislation.
www.magonlinelibrary.com/doi/full/10.12968/bjon.2020.29.5.326[/quote]
As it should be. Sad it takes legislation though rather than peopledoing right by others not just themselves.

Officials are also looking to use testing to halve the two-week isolation demanded of contacts of confirmed cases of the coronavirus in Britain.

Tom Riordan, who has just stood down as the government’s tracing lead, said the system was now “pretty good” but argued: “The one thing that I would be most concerned about is self-isolation. If you look at the maths there’s hard economics about it. If you’re on the minimum wage working a typical week you get three times more than statutory sick pay.

“People on such tight budgets need help from either employers or the government. Shorter self-isolation periods would also help but only if the science supports it.”

Yesterday Baroness Vere of Norbiton, a transport minister, confirmed that the government was considering ways to use testing to cut isolation periods.

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-smart-tests-for-covid-poised-to-halve-quarantine-within-days-sh9gjrfrn

Icecreamandcandyfloss how do you propose society supports those who will lose their income if they have to isolate.

@nether

Unfortunately, I haven't had the luxury of being able to shield. I have had to continue working

There are several charities campaigning in this very point. There are individuals who are in the shield group who have found themselves in that very position.

It's not a 'luxury' for those who do fall in to the exceptionally medical vulnerable. And none of them shouid have been forced in to the position of life v livelihood.

I hope you are never in those shoes

It doesn't sound like she's too far off them, frankly.

I hope you are never in those shoes

PP just said they are...

As it should be. Sad it takes legislation though rather than peopledoing right by others not just themselves.

And what about society doing right by these people who would face financial difficulty through no fault of their own @IceCreamAndCandyfloss
You talk about doing right by others but seem to think it only works one way.
We are talking about this potentially happening repeatedly to people? Should they simply go hungry and risk losing their homes? That’s not really doing right by others is it!