Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

So many keyworker/vulnerable children at school this week!

188 replies

Crazyoldmaurice · 04/01/2021 23:11

All I've seen on mumsnet for the past month is people yelling into the void that unless we close schools to all that the numbers will just keep going up and up. And unless schools close lockdown is essentially like trying to brush your teeth whilst simultaneously eating a bag of wotsits.

I live in SW London in a very affluent area with the average house price at 750k+

Out of the 75 of my daughters year group, 48 or more will be at school tomorrow and for the rest of the week. I'm assuming most of these kids are going to be classed as children to critical workers due to the demographic.

I've seen on other threads others reporting very high rates of those at school in previous lockdowns and predicted for this one too.

If kids are causing so much of the spread I just dont get how having such high numbers still at school is going to help to drastically slow it down!

OP posts:
Original poster
Crazyoldmaurice · 04/01/2021 23:42

No it doesn't. But the proportion of vulnerable children is much lower in affluent areas. Therefore deducing that most of the spaces are for keyworkers.

OP posts:
Blueeyesparkle · 04/01/2021 23:58

Today 23:25 kowari

I don't think there should be any limit or cap, except for where there are not enough teachers or TAs to supervise. If there's that many keyworker and vulnerable children then that's how many should be in school.

Maybe if the school said only 2 keyworkers per family or single mothers got a place, that would scale it back, after all that’s the whole point of shutting the schools is to stop the spread of the disease

Original poster
Crazyoldmaurice · 05/01/2021 00:05

As only one keyworker is needed, and I read apparently just by not having the means or tech to access home learning automatically makes a child considered vulnerable for these purposes, it just seems like its govs way of sneaking past the schools Unions. They are closing, but not closing at all.

OP posts:
kowari · 05/01/2021 00:07

just by not having the means or tech to access home learning automatically makes a child considered vulnerable for these purposes
Just? They

kowari · 05/01/2021 00:09

*pressed post too early. They will be shut for at least six weeks, should financially disadvantaged children just fall behind?

Original poster
Crazyoldmaurice · 05/01/2021 00:13

OK, maybe a poor word choice there sorry. But for example my daughter does not have the tech or means to access home learning sufficiently. We have no printer, 1 laptop which is a work laptop and a mobile which is also a work device and on its last legs. She has no way of using Google teams.

I would in no way consider her vulnerable but according to what I've read she technically would be.

OP posts:
Original poster
Crazyoldmaurice · 05/01/2021 00:15

We are not financially disadvantaged, we just don't have a lot in the way of tech.

OP posts:
Onedaysomedaynowadays · 05/01/2021 00:16

I'm classed as a critical worker now but wasn't a key worker back in March. DC is at nursery so can still attend anyway but if he was school age I'd request a place.

In truth if both parents are working then I think their primary aged kids should get a place at school. You can't work from home and home school your kids at the same time and forcing parents to try just makes them spread the virus in other ways e.g. share childcare with other parents, get grandparents involved

kowari · 05/01/2021 00:17

I do think there is a difference between just not having a device now and struggling on a low income with no means to purchase one. If you are in the second category I would consider the child vulnerable.

Yorkshirehillbilly · 05/01/2021 00:27

There are children who automatically qualify as vulnerable eg have EHCP or social worker etc who must be offered a place.
The vulnerable criteria also covers others where schools or councils identify the children as needing a place eg young carer, living in temp accom, not able to access remote learning as no space or device, lower level SEN, other disadvantage.
So the second group would be more on a case by case basis and would be judgment for school / social worker etc that they needed to attend, not for parents. So schools should offer places to Group 1 and probably then rank group 2 according to need / availability of places.

LoveMyKidsAndCats · 05/01/2021 00:58

My mate has 3 kids at primary. She is a single mum. She works twice a week from 2pm -7pm at a care home (their dad has them while she works so would usually do school pick up twice a week) she has said she told school she needs the kids to go in everyday as her job is classed as an essential worker.

LoveMyKidsAndCats · 05/01/2021 01:03

They stay with their dad those 2 nights a week she works and he has them saturday and sunday so i say single mum as she is one but they raise them together. Seems a bit wrong to me though not that I'd say it to her. I guess schools don't ask if your actually working mon-fri

Mollymalone123 · 05/01/2021 01:16

Are you sure places aren’t being offered to children from other schools as this is what is happening elsewhere?our school is a hub so children brought in from surrounding area so just one big primary open with staff on a volunteer rota

Whatafustercluck · 05/01/2021 08:32

We kept ds home last time and struggled massively as both our workloads increased and we just weren't able to support him so he was left to his own devices for long periods of time. We did what we could, but the remote provision was minimal requiring considerable parental input. What was left of our evenings was spent marking the work ourselves and setting work for the following day.

As it was, very few children were in school last time and the teachers seem confident of coping this time - ours is a village school that is not a hub for others. They've confirmed that the children will have the same work to do as the children at home, but it'll be taught by a teacher in class. We've decided to send ds in this time around. We're permitted to after all. I think there will be more in school this time as most key workers I know who kept children home last time have decided to send them in this time as they either didn't do their work or didn't do parenting very well last time - they felt neglectful.

Iknowwhatudidlastsummer · 05/01/2021 08:38

The list of key workers is very long, and open to interpretation.

The amount of kids registered in my kids school is HUGE: because you need only one key worker, even if the other parent is a SAH, the child can go.

The requirement should be 2 key workers
(or a single parent obviously)
OR 2 parents who cannot WFH

It's not, so most of the children will still go to school. It doesn't make much sense to me but what do I know.

BathroomWork · 05/01/2021 08:39

@Yorkshirehillbilly

There are children who automatically qualify as vulnerable eg have EHCP or social worker etc who must be offered a place. The vulnerable criteria also covers others where schools or councils identify the children as needing a place eg young carer, living in temp accom, not able to access remote learning as no space or device, lower level SEN, other disadvantage. So the second group would be more on a case by case basis and would be judgment for school / social worker etc that they needed to attend, not for parents. So schools should offer places to Group 1 and probably then rank group 2 according to need / availability of places.

Is there anything about disabled parents who can't homeschool for health reasons but who's children aren't SN themselves?

jay55 · 05/01/2021 10:45

Would having disabled parents class the child as vulnerable? I'd hope so for this situation , especially if they are a young carer.

BathroomWork · 05/01/2021 12:24

It should do but unfortunately isn't listed. That's where common sense must prevail, with any luck!

IndecentFeminist · 05/01/2021 12:48

There will be more in our school than last time I expect, which is to be expected. Last time was meant to be short term etc so people thought they could juggle so didn't take up places they legally could do. This time round, given it is for a whole half a term at a minimum, I would expect more to take up a place.

MandosHatHair · 05/01/2021 12:52

Our house backs on the the school playing field, it doesn't sound all that much different to normal. Popped the radio on so my DCs hopefully dont notice while they work off an iPad Hmm

Jangle33 · 05/01/2021 13:13

The guidance doesn’t say anywhere that there can only be one key worker to qualify. The legal requirement is to stay at home.

There is a massive problem with the ridiculous interpretation by schools of allowing children that aren’t vulnerable in and key workers who are wfh or have partners wfh that could look after them.

The more kids at school who shouldn’t be the longer we will all be stuck at home and more people will die.

What/who can we pressure to get the rules clarified. It is critical for safety of staff and the children who genuinely need to attend.

MistleTOEboughski · 05/01/2021 13:17

In the first lockdown there were about 15 in our smallish school of 250 , this time I have been told it could be up to 100! They are deciding today.

Jangle33 · 05/01/2021 13:18

Who do we complain to?

MarshaBradyo · 05/01/2021 13:20

Yes I’m not surprised it’s higher than last time. I know many who didn’t use it last time but will this time.

Yubaba · 05/01/2021 13:20

Our school have said that only critical workers (not key workers) children can have a place and only if both parents are workers. We also have to give employers contact details so they can check.

They’ve said that fewer places will be offered this time round and that having a place last time does not guarantee one this time.