Are our kids being thrown under the bus

[Pixxie7]

Chris Whitney has said that children are safe to go back to school because they are at low risk of complications from Covid.is this another case of politics being more important than lives?

Covid magically doesn't exist on school buses, playgrounds or school buildings, didn't you know.

No extra money to schools for PPE, huge chunks of teaching time being spent hand washing/sanitizing/wiping down desks etc but hey we're open....

Every school in my catchment area has had to issue communication to parents at least twice in the (less than a) fortnight we've been open regarding their lack of social distancing at the start and end of the day 🤦‍♀️. No wonder there are so many schools reporting cases already.

I'd be pleasantly surprised if there's no second wave by Christmas (given the rest of Europe is already entering second wave, probably much earlier)

I’m really hoping there’s no second wave. I teach in secondary. I’ve decided (and she agrees) that once I go back to school me and my kids won’t be able to see her until

1. I’ve had it and therefore hopefully can’t pass it onto her.
2. There’s a vaccine.

It’s really shit. Schools have to reopen. I just wish there was a more sane plan as to how to do it.

If parents/staff follow the guidance, avoid crowded places, social distance, etc., outside school, then there's a much reduced risk of staff/pupils taking into school in the first place.

If covid is at low levels in the community, then schools in that community will also be low risk.

It really is up to staff/parents to take reasonable precautions outside school (as they should be doing anyway) to keep schools risk levels low.

Schools don't exist in a vacuum - they's integral to their communities.

Parents/teachers can't expect a normal life outside school at the moment (holidays, parties, socialising etc) but expect schools to be turned into some kind of special parallel universe.

'The risks to children are very low and similar to what they faced in the pre-Covid world' YES.

But current risks are not the same for adults in the post Covid world.

My own situation:
(now a) Single parent to two children with ASD. I am their Carer.
I have extensive nerve damage in legs so disabled (walk with sticks)
due to this i was also obese but am not any more (thankfully re C19)
but I have sleep apnea and use a fullface CPap mask each night, so am keen to avoid Covid if at all possible.
(the children's other parent is a 55 yr old obese bus driver with asthma - I am keen for him to avoid it too as there is NO other family)
The kids need both of us alive and functioning, in terms of care and economically. So does Society in general (as otherwise it falls on it)

Schools usually struggle to contain an outbreak of nits or norovirus.
They've not been given the funding to access extra resources.
The Govt has specifically told Secondary School kids and adults NOT to wear masks, contravening the WHO guidelines (a cheap and easy prophylactic, as would be enough handgel and a ?75%? timetable)
I would like my kids to return to school sustainably and for Schools to have the resources to allow SD so that kids do not become carriers for the wider population. We all want education back, the economy back, our ordinary lives back. But we have to do it sustainably.
It's all about money & risk. Closing the economy is ruinous: even so,
It is cheaper for the Govt to let my teens wear masks (for example) than to provide care for them if their current carer dies (unlikely, & a silly example perhaps but its all about weighing risks / benefits)
The risks to Primary kids are very low, to Secondary still quite low.
But to the wider population, less so.
Why not mitigate risks where we can? (masks in school etc)
THIS is what makes me suspicious of the Govts recs re Schools, (apart from the sheer jawdropping incompetence shown throughout)

@user1497207191

If parents/staff follow the guidance, avoid crowded places, social distance, etc., outside school, then there's a much reduced risk of staff/pupils taking into school in the first place.

If covid is at low levels in the community, then schools in that community will also be low risk.

It really is up to staff/parents to take reasonable precautions outside school (as they should be doing anyway) to keep schools risk levels low.

Schools don't exist in a vacuum - they's integral to their communities.

Parents/teachers can't expect a normal life outside school at the moment (holidays, parties, socialising etc) but expect schools to be turned into some kind of special parallel universe.

I agree. And that’s why I think it’s more important not less to stick to the rules now schools are back. Some parents don’t agree though and think that because schools are back everything else is fair game. The worry is their kids are then sitting next to mine at school and my kids bring it back to me. Maybe this is why much as I hate them masks might be an idea.

I think we need to be very careful with the use of the words "second wave".

The numbers of positive tests in many European countries is increasing. It doesn't however, seem to be linked to an increase in hospitalisations and deaths. This is likely because more people are getting tested and also many younger people that are catching it with less serious outcomes. In Scotland no one has died with covid for over 3 weeks.

So whilst I agree we need to be cautious, it does feel that we need to assess risk on both sides. Risk or continuing a subpar education for our DCs, risk of forcing many people ( mostly women) out of work by making teaching part time, risk for those DCs not being fed or looked after at home. These all need to be balanced against potential risk of Covid - and obviously risk for the teachers.

It's a bit of a no brainer for me - of course DCs have to go back. If that means that shoos/pubs/restaurants/pools have to close again - fine I'll happily live with that, but don't expect me to not visit them in the interim as some sort of sacrifice for my DCs education, because it's not a clear trade off. Scotland is opening gyms and pools as cases have started to rise again.

That's what I fear will happen @RaspberryRuff

@user1497207191
I live in a rural area, have been following guidelines, haven't eaten out, have only had shopping delivered etc yet now I am reliant on other people being sensible...... forgive me for worrying they won't.

You will also get people like some of my colleagues that feel if they have to not worry at work, then they should be able to go on holiday, the cinema, eat out etc.

@user1497207191

If parents/staff follow the guidance, avoid crowded places, social distance, etc., outside school, then there's a much reduced risk of staff/pupils taking into school in the first place.

If covid is at low levels in the community, then schools in that community will also be low risk.

It really is up to staff/parents to take reasonable precautions outside school (as they should be doing anyway) to keep schools risk levels low.

Schools don't exist in a vacuum - they's integral to their communities.

Parents/teachers can't expect a normal life outside school at the moment (holidays, parties, socialising etc) but expect schools to be turned into some kind of special parallel universe.

Maybe Matt Hancock shouldn't tell people to go back into the office then. Children with parents wfh will be far less likely to have any illness than children with parents crammed onto commuter trains and buses. I appreciate that lots of children have parents who have to work out of the house, but they will also be a lot safer if their trains/buses aren't full of people who don't actually need to be there.

But provided people follow the guidelines they are allowed to eat out and go on holiday.
Or are we back to the days of "special mumsnet rules" ?

If you can explain why school age children are not going to spread it at school, but age 19-25s are being blamed for spreading it at the moment, then I will agree that schools should open with only the little protection they are being given.
Is it something special that happens on the 19th birthday?

I'd feel more comfortable about it if they admitted it will get spread so they'll put in the following measures to try and stop it rather than just saying the risk is minimal.

[quote StepAwayFromGoogle]@SoVeryLost. I'm very glad you have a kind, flexible employer who is happy for you to shift your day based on your child. I do not.
I have a five year old and a two year old. Me and DP were both working part time (longer half days) and trying to shoehorn full time jobs into part time hours. My 5 year old suffered horribly in lockdown, she developed severe anxiety and agoraphobia, it was heartbreaking to see. She wouldn't engage with school work, would just have a meltdown. On the rare occassions she would, the two year old would inevitably come over to get involved and start scribbling on what we were doing. I'd love to see how primary school teachers would manage to teach with a room full of toddlers running around too. It wasn't just me that struggled. I literally know zero parents who found home schooling easy to juggle with work or with younger siblings.
Without going part time I'm not sure how teachers can be protected? A class of 5 year olds can't be expected to wear masks or properly understand social distancing.[/quote]
I didn’t shift my working day (on the days I did think stopping at 4:30 and picking back up work at 7 and responding to emails). I shifted my DS’s working day. He had play breaks when he was stuck and I was busy. Otherwise I took a coffee break at the times he needed help, taking less time than I would normally. I don’t understand why two of you need to work part time hours, there is only me and I haven’t been able to drop down to part time hours based on the amount of work I’ve had.

I’m not saying DS hasn’t been affected (he’s primary aged, lower KS2). I’ve found on the whole he’s far happier at home than at school. Although now that we are venturing out I can see he is struggling with crowded environments.

I’m not suggesting that primary aged children wear masks at all, or even that they socially distance. Children of that age require physical contact. I am talking about senior schools when I discuss masks. In all honesty I don’t know how you can make primaries safer or even if you need to, if it is true that they don’t shed the virus in the same way adults do then that is brilliant and distancing should be an issue.

As an ex senior school teacher, I’ve managed to teach even with a toddler in the room. It’s not impossible, it wasn’t perfect but better than the alternative. I think parents might be shocked at how much teachers have to juggle, you struggled with two children try having a small class of 16 with 16 different abilities and 16 different interests.

He's said the overwhelming body of evidence concerning the short and long term effects of children not being in school is greater than their risk of being in school.

Yes this is it. And what he’s saying is correct. He also said it’s not zero risk.

@rookiemere

But provided people follow the guidelines they are allowed to eat out and go on holiday. Or are we back to the days of "special mumsnet rules" ?

I’ve eaten out and gone on holiday. I’ve not had gatherings of loads of people round my house and gardens and taken selfies with arms round people/heads touching etc or let the kids go out in large groups as many of the school parents on my fb feed seem to be doing.

@RaspberryRuff fair enough, I wouldn't condone big gatherings and breaking of social distancing.

No, they are not being thrown under the bus by returning to school. The overwhelming evidence from all over the world is that children appear slightly less likely to catch the virus (in the case of younger children) and if they do catch it they have few, if any, symptoms. There is a small number Of children with serious underlying health problems who are the exception to this, abd for whom alternative provisions will need to be made.

Children need to be at school both to gain an education but also for their mental health and local development. In my view, closing the schools should only be done as a very last resort- and be the very last thing to shut in a further outbreak/ first to open again. Anything less is throwing our children under the bus, IMHO

There had been precious little logical about the approach to controlling the virus so far. Most of it has been a political reaction (such as opening pubs so early on compared to other businesses).

The decision to reopen schools is likewise an entirely political decision. I've listened to what Prof. Whitty has said around this and to be honest it is a confused mess. He seems to vacillate from expressing genuine caution about further opening up of society and being specifically confident about certain aspects. That is because he is having his messages largely controlled. After all look at what happens to experts that go off piste, you never hear from them again (chief nurse, deputy CMO).

The reality is that the virus is low risk to children, it isn't low risk to certain school staff and it isn't low risk to members of the children's families. Control measures such as bubbles get totally undone because of siblings that in many schools they are pointless. In one of my children's classes there are 14 kids with siblings at the school for example.

I'm probably going to send my kids back as we don't have any significant risk factors, but if I did I'd probably be much more cautious.

@jacks11

No, they are not being thrown under the bus by returning to school. The overwhelming evidence from all over the world is that children appear slightly less likely to catch the virus (in the case of younger children) and if they do catch it they have few, if any, symptoms. There is a small number Of children with serious underlying health problems who are the exception to this, abd for whom alternative provisions will need to be made.

Children need to be at school both to gain an education but also for their mental health and local development. In my view, closing the schools should only be done as a very last resort- and be the very last thing to shut in a further outbreak/ first to open again. Anything less is throwing our children under the bus, IMHO

Is anyone suggesting schools don’t reopen? I haven’t seen anyone suggest that, I think the majority of people who are skeptical are commenting along the lines that I am which are reopen but look at how we can ensure staff and parents are safe as well which is especially true in senior schools.

What 52andblue said.

Parents with fragile health are being totally thrown under the bus by this insistence on kids going back to school. It could at least be voluntary with distance learning support as an alternative.

I have reluctantly taken the decision to homeschool. I realize we are fortunate to be able to do that. It is definitely not in my DCs’ best interests to be orphaned by Covid and governmental intransigence.

My previously bright, confident, sociable, sporty seven year old is now anxious, unwilling to engage in schoolwork, extremely reluctant to go anywhere/do anything and is self harming. We have massively downplayed the risks of Covid from the start so we haven't fuelled this. He needs to be in school.

@StepAwayFromGoogle I completely sympathise. As a teacher with a child and a toddler as was in the same situation so remember we were all struggling please. I can’t wait to be back full time, much easier to teach 30 children than trying to teach from home with a toddler and also homeschool. Although it is not going to be schools as was before but it certainly is important for the children. Just a reminder that teachers are often parents too.

@WutheringTights with all due respect that does sound a very extreme reaction to the situation and very unusual.
I live very close to the school I work in and have seen so many of our families during lockdown and have spoken to them endlessly from a distance.
Yes, their dc are bored etc and parents are obviously desperate for a return to normality for them but your ds behaviour sounds very worrying/extreme and I hope you are seeking help for it?

No extra money to schools for PPE

Presumably state schools have cancelled all sorts of activities they would normally budget for during term time? Trips in the school mini-bus, drama workshops from touring theatre groups etc? Science practicals have been reduced in secondary schools...

Parents/teachers can't expect a normal life outside school at the moment (holidays, parties, socialising etc) but expect schools to be turned into some kind of special parallel universe.

Interestingly, Taiwan banned school teachers and students from all overseas travel for 4/5 months - non-school trips as well - (I'm not sure if the ban has been extended) although teachers complained that the ban was discriminatory against their profession.

As an ex senior school teacher, I’ve managed to teach even with a toddler in the room. It’s not impossible, it wasn’t perfect but better than the alternative. I think parents might be shocked at how much teachers have to juggle, you struggled with two children try having a small class of 16 with 16 different abilities and 16 different interests.

I'm confident that I could have been an amazing teacher to my 3, 5 and 7 year olds if they had their peers around them, I had a properly equipped classroom, I wasn't also working full time in a demanding job as well as acting as school secretary, cleaner, cook, dinner lady, wrap around care provider, caretaker, sports coach and head. And I had the training and classroom experience of an actual qualified teacher.

It's a damming indictment of teaching profession that we think that amateurs with no knowledge or training can teach their kids in their spare time just as well as actual qualified dedicated teachers.

@Clavinova

School mini bus! We wish!

Trips / visits would only take place if parents contributed- we can't afford it otherwise.

Maybe we should ask parents to chip in and help with the cleaning!

@Bunnybigears

No it proves our children were badly let down by the government by the schools being shut in the first place.

Nonsense.