Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Did the benefits of lockdown outweigh the harm to children’s education?

577 replies

PoisedKhakiUser · 11/10/2024 15:24

AIBU to ask whether the benefits of lockdown - saving lives and protecting health - outweighed the damage it did to children’s education and future life chances? I feel like kids lost out on so much during this time, and I wonder if the cost was too high.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:07

I believe vulnerable people should have shielded and schools should have been left open.

There's no point in arguing about it now, but that's what I wish had happened. It was awful for a good chunk of children.

ComingBackHome · 11/10/2024 16:08

Honestly?
Knowing what we clearly know now,mthe impact on the brain of children from catching Covid, the fact Covid is in the air etc…, I’m much more wondering g why NOTHING is dinr to protect the children NOW from catching Covid (and any other viruses).

And before scream at me, I’m not talking masks.
Im talking ventilation, UV lights and not asking children to get into school no matter what (not just Covid btw but the flu, norovirus etc etc)

THAT imo is what is going to make the most difference.

The few months of lockdowns? Not worse what what children with serious conditions have experienced. And somehow it’s not what has ‘damaged theur education’

midgetastic · 11/10/2024 16:09

The problem was you couldn't shield the vulnerable and keep schools open - too many vulnerable

BMW6 · 11/10/2024 16:09

Since there is no way of knowing what the outcome would have been if lockdowns hadn't happened it's a pretty daft question.

Muchtoomuchtodo · 11/10/2024 16:10

Savingthehedgehogs · 11/10/2024 16:02

This feels goady or just another journalist!

CLEARLY the pandemic had a hideous impact on children.

On some children. Definitely not all.

PiggieWig · 11/10/2024 16:11

Absolutely not in our case. DS (ASD) was never able to return to school following all the disruption and four years on has struggled to get back on track with his education.

I think the figures show that countries that didn't lock down had no more excess deaths than those that did, don't they?

EasternStandard · 11/10/2024 16:12

I think the cost was too high

x2boys · 11/10/2024 16:13

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 11/10/2024 16:04

And no I don’t think it was worth saving the lives of a few elderly whether people hate me for that comment or not.

It wasn't about saving lives elderly or otherwise ,it was about not overwhelming the NHS ,so it could continue to be there for all of us .

GalaticalFarce · 11/10/2024 16:13

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:07

I believe vulnerable people should have shielded and schools should have been left open.

There's no point in arguing about it now, but that's what I wish had happened. It was awful for a good chunk of children.

I agree with this. It was a viable option put forward by some who were then vilified.
It should have been up for discussion and people should not have been called names, discredited or vilified just for having different opinion.
If anything, that was the biggest harm.

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:14

The damage done to kids because they didn't socialise in groups was awful. I think we owe our children a huge debt.

OrdsallChord · 11/10/2024 16:15

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:07

I believe vulnerable people should have shielded and schools should have been left open.

There's no point in arguing about it now, but that's what I wish had happened. It was awful for a good chunk of children.

Personally I think it's really important we have these discussions, as a society. We just need to factor in that there's lots we don't know yet. Things like, say, whether the lockdown era changes to the social contract on school attendance are the new normal and what impact that has if so.

BogRollBOGOF · 11/10/2024 16:15

It fucked a generation of young people over.

Children needing support already had long waiting lists and now they have to be at crisis point to be taken notice off and then still wait years for assessment protocols to be completed. Opportunities for early interventions were missed, aggravating needs.
This affects everyone because of the additional stretch on time and resources in the education system.

All children should have had the right to return to school in spring/summer 2020 after the initial wave subsided and all children should have had the right to meet and play with their peers in the winter lockdowns.

But those speaking up about it at the time were called names like "Granny killer"

The irony for my children was that despite months of lost education and socialising, care home rules and travel restrictions prohibited them from seeing their granny again; by the time restrictions eased, granny didn't know who they were anymore and died of her terminal illness shortly afterwards anyway.

EasternStandard · 11/10/2024 16:15

GalaticalFarce · 11/10/2024 16:13

I agree with this. It was a viable option put forward by some who were then vilified.
It should have been up for discussion and people should not have been called names, discredited or vilified just for having different opinion.
If anything, that was the biggest harm.

Yes there should have been discussion

You could see even on here how impossible that was

OrdsallChord · 11/10/2024 16:16

The decision not to reopen schools in summer 2020 in England and Wales was a particularly bemusing one. Cases were down, and kicking the second wave closer to flu season was a risky choice. People had this weird idea it was all going to be safer come September. Why?!

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:18

It was unbearable on here.

I once admitted I'd been to the supermarket twice in one day and was accused of being a murderer. I actually think Mumsnet was totally shit at moderating as well. So much violent language and misinformation.

Jackiebrambles · 11/10/2024 16:20

HermioneWeasley · 11/10/2024 15:34

The harms of lockdown on kids were profound and ongoing. There are 130k children who never returned to schools and nobody know where they are.

childrens’ mental health is on its knees.

This, it was a huge mistake in my view.

EasternStandard · 11/10/2024 16:20

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:18

It was unbearable on here.

I once admitted I'd been to the supermarket twice in one day and was accused of being a murderer. I actually think Mumsnet was totally shit at moderating as well. So much violent language and misinformation.

I said what about damage to young people. The attacks were ferocious

Healingsfall · 11/10/2024 16:20

I think it did at first because many children including my son got into the habit of working at home, so getting back into a routine of going full time into school was very difficult, and days they didn't feel like tried to argue why they couldn't just work from home that day.

Lots of children missed out on gaining vital social skills too, but to be honest society appears to be going that way in general with the rise of phones.

Enough time has passed now though that children should be well back in/used to school again, and the majority of children are really resilient anyway.

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:21

And anyone who started a thread about how miserable it was that schools weren't open was leapt on and accused of wanting to kill teachers. It was insane.

Fluufer · 11/10/2024 16:22

In my opinion, no. Closing of schools in particular was a huge mistake. Massively let down our kids.

Fairslice · 11/10/2024 16:22

Enough time has passed now though that children should be well back in/used to school again, and the majority of children are really resilient anyway

A lot of young teens missed important developmental stages and that has a trickledown effect.

Newmum738 · 11/10/2024 16:24

No. Our son was in nursery and able to stay there which I am so thankful for! T would have done him harm to not see anyone for long periods of time.

OnlyFoolsnMothers · 11/10/2024 16:25

x2boys · 11/10/2024 16:13

It wasn't about saving lives elderly or otherwise ,it was about not overwhelming the NHS ,so it could continue to be there for all of us .

Yes but we know which cohort wouldn’t have been saved is overwhelmed and quite frankly I don’t believe it’s worth adding 5 years to an elderly persons life in return for screwing up children’s mental health

GreenBeret01 · 11/10/2024 16:25

with google and the internet and wikipedia etc these days school is an outdated model , we educated and built society before modern schools,

Delatron · 11/10/2024 16:26

I think we flung our children under the bus for the elderly and I said that at the time. No benefit of hindsight I was very vocal.

Even if you agree with the first lockdown we should have never have kept the schools closed right through until the summer holidays. Pubs were open but the schools were shut. Such messed up priorities.

That decision making was wholly responsible for pushing the inevitable second wave in to the Autumn/Winter 2021 when everyone went back to school and work and uni at exactly the same time. And lead to further more harsh closures and lockdowns. We had a vaccine then too..

Far better to have let them go back after Easter when we were going in to summer and we were through the first wave. There were always going to be waves. But trying to artificially control them means you get higher peaks exactly when you don’t want them (winter when everyone is low on vitamin D and other viruses are around). It was all a shit show.

History will judge very harshly how we treated our children and the effects and impact will last a very long time.

We knew quite early on that kids were not seriously impacted by Covid.