Doing this to a child is wrong

[fuckxmas]

BBC report : His said his 14-year-old daughter had not left her bedroom for four days, with meals being left outside her door, until the family learned the result was void on Thursday

This is so wrong to do to a child

DS' childminder's teenager had to self isolate for 14 days after a case in his school bubble. The knock on effects of closing the CM for two weeks (family income, other families' incomes) were too great so he (quite happily) stayed in his room.

lots of students have brilliantly decided to do this when coming home for christmas from uni and boarding or abroad..highly responsible.

@Nottherealslimshady

I agree, he had to stay home anyway so why not just be in contact with her, he would still have to isolate for the same length of time if she got a positive test. Seems like they didn't really think it through. Unless there's someone seriously vulnerable in the house.

Exactly. It’s likely they all have it anyway if they all live together in the same house.

I think most teenagers have been self isolating for years anyway so this is probably not that big of a deal to them. Pgrin[

As long as he had his Xbox, Sky phone and internet, my teenage ds would be quite happy in his room. For a younger child it’s pretty awful, and if the 14yo was miserable on their own it’s quite tough, but while waiting for a test result and making sure they are comfortable and happy, it’s surely quite sensible?

@flaviaritt Again you're being daft. Of course someone in their 40s can be vulnerable to covid. They might be overweight, have medical conditions, or be undergoing treatment which supresses their immune system. Leaving food outside the door literally just means they didn't come in the room. It doesn't mean they didn't talk, make their favourite meal, bring them treats etc.

Do you consider it imprisonement when teenagers have to stay in their rooms overnight?

Do you consider it imprisonement when teenagers have to stay in their rooms overnight?

I’m going to ignore the other things you said, because (of course) I didn’t say parents couldn’t be vulnerable. Of course they might. What I am saying is that this is unacceptable even if they are vulnerable, AND that it is unlikely the virus is going to kill people this age.

However, the above is a fair point. Of course we have the responsibility to prevent 14 year olds going out in the middle of the night. This is because of our duty of care to them. We need to keep them safe. That’s the only reason we have the right to stop them leaving the house. What I am arguing here is that this right must not be abused. If we are confining teenagers to their rooms, alone, for several days at a time, I believe that is an abuse of parental authority.

@flaviaritt

If you think staying in a room, probably voluntarily for a few days is worse for a teenager than losing a parent or making them sick I'm not sure you're capable of rational thought. Like everyone else I'm giving up trying to have a sensible conversation with you.

IMNOTSHOUTING

Voluntarily is fine, as I’ve said. Imprisoning them isn’t fine. If you think imprisoning them is fine, you have lost the perspective needed to be a good parent (IMO). Children are not property. We can’t treat them like they are.

@flaviaritt

IMNOTSHOUTING

Voluntarily is fine, as I’ve said. Imprisoning them isn’t fine. If you think imprisoning them is fine, you have lost the perspective needed to be a good parent (IMO). Children are not property. We can’t treat them like they are.

Every single poster on this thread has said the same thing.

We all agree that imprisoning teenagers in their rooms against their will is wrong.

Done.

Maybe you can go and create an argument about nothing somewhere else?

We all agree that imprisoning teenagers in their rooms against their will is wrong.

So you accept my point? Forcing a child to stay in their room against their will is wrong?

But you think I am the person in the wrong for saying it? That’s odd.

Or... you might be being disingenuous?

When did I say that?

When you said they were in solitary confinement.

Just out of interest do you have teenagers?

@flaviaritt

Yet again, where does it say that this child didn't receive her parents' support or affection? You can give both whilst staying two metres away, FFS.

To me, it said it when they said they left food outside the door. That’s isolation, not support and affection.

Since when did that statement equate to not talking to the child, telling her they loved her, checking on her wellbeing etc etc?

ILoveYou3000

Solitary confinement means you are being confined on your own. Someone being on the phone doesn’t mean it’s not solitary. You may disagree with that but I don’t believe it’s okay to give a teenager a phone and say “There’s your human interaction. Now stay in there for X number of days.” And I think if you think that’s okay, you’re not someone whose opinion I need to take into account.

Why are you asking if I have teenagers?

Since when did that statement equate to not talking to the child, telling her they loved her, checking on her wellbeing etc etc?

Talking to someone you are keeping prisoner on the other side of a door isn’t love and affection and I am not going to pretend otherwise.

Thank god there are still some sane people left! That poor kid.

Did you wilfully ignore this part of the post you're referring to:

Turns out they quite enjoyed isolation!

Turns out they quite enjoyed isolation!

I did ignore it, because “turns out” means this was done to them whether they enjoyed it or not.

Even if I was vulnerable, I wouldn’t imprison my 14 year old in her own home. It’s wrong.

My dd is older at 18. I'm CV.

When she thought she might have been in contact with CV and she was in her way home when find out - she came in with a mask, refused to come into the room I was in and then she immediately took herself off to her own. She'd have been exactly the same had she been 14. No one asked her too but her first thought was that she needed to protect her family.

To be fair in her room she had access to TV, games, books, telephone, iPad. She could communicate with family and friends. She could have all food and drink brought to her. She has a bathroom next door which only she uses so could come and go as she pleased, have an hour long bath, catch up on uni work and relax with friends via zoom, etc.

As it happens it was a false alarm so didn't need to from the following morning, but was more than happy and chose to. We told her it would be fine to eat with us etc but she didn't want to take the risk at all. as it happened a couple of days later it was me who tested positive with Covid - caught from my school. So once back home from hospital I was the one who went off to isolate as much as I could, though my chose to stay in my bedroom was mainly down to being ill, as by that stage dh and dd had been with me before anyway.

This thread is mental!

14 yos who have the technology they need, staying in their room for 4 or 14 days is not imprisonment. It's common sense if they are self isolating!

I've had covid and have done the same, I was not imprisoned, I was keeping the rest of my family safe. I know a friend who was moved into her caravan on the drive for 14 days, as she has had to self isolate and her dp is CEV. Is she imprisoned?

If we want to feel sorry for people, let's feel sorry for the elderly, who aren't tech savvy, had been isolated for the majority of the year, a lot of the time of their own. That's where the mental health issue will be not a 14 year in a room with family on the other side and a world of friendship and learning online.

To me, it said it when they said they left food outside the door. That’s isolation, not support and affection

But that doesn't mean everyone ignored the child.
They may just not have gone within 2m of the girl.

So food tray is left at the door. The door maybe closed or ajar but they could still talk to her.

Most teens I know love spending prolonged time in their rooms. It's often done through choice and it's parents who are forcing them to come out of their rooms.

It's not really solitary confinement when they have a 101 ways to communicate with family and friends is it? I can't imagine they removed her phone or tablet from her after all, or left her in a bare room with nothing to do.

I barely left my room for several days, including being in an isolation room for a couple of days in hospital; now I'm an adult but the concepts pretty much the same as for a teen - telephone, internet, zoom, books, tv.... Hospital was harder as you couldn't physically see family, not even from a distance at a door way, but at home you can feel people's presence all the time even if they're not hugging you.

Why are you asking if I have teenagers?

I'd imagine people have asked because your views seem to underestimate the maturity of most teenagers.

if they are self isolating!

That’s the key point, though. SELF isolating means you are doing it. Someone else isolating you against your will isn’t self-isolating.

I'd imagine people have asked because your views seem to underestimate the maturity of most teenagers.

If I had teenagers, I would have (at most) three of them? I don’t think that would be a representative group or statistically significant factor.

It's not really solitary confinement when they have a 101 ways to communicate with family and friends is it?

So that makes it fine to imprison people against their will? Better let Amnesty know: prisoners aren’t prisoners if they have an iPad. Right.

I don't think you can make a 14 year old do much against their will (unless you spend months and years grooming them with mental abuse to convince them that actually they do want to do that thing, but I don't think an ordinary loving family trying to prevent the spread of a virus that no one had heard of this time last year falls into that definition).