To resent parents who are still sending their kids to school on Monday

[letmeinthroughyourwindow]

Not the genuine cases, obviously.

But I'm a teacher and we will be opening for the duration because 40% of our pupils have at least one parent who is a keyworker.

Before the list was released, the government told us to expect 10% and we planned accordingly. In fact, we planned for 20%.

When the list was released, it was so broad that far more parents than we ever expected fell into one of the categories.

Now, if your need is genuine then of course I want to care for your child. I'm happy to do it, and proud that doing so keeps you working.

But we have so many parents who are allowed to send their child to school, but shouldn't be, that it's infuriating me.

If you are a keyworker but your partner is a stay-at-home parent should you be sending them in?

If you are a keyworker but your partner works from home or is allowed to work from home indefinitely, should you be sending them in?

My sister's employer is allowing all employees who are parents to work from home on full pay, but many are saying that they don't need to, because their partner is a keyworker so their kids can still go to school

Just because you can send them, doesn't mean you should. It shouldn't be the best or easiest option for you, it should be a last resort if there is nowhere else to keep them safe.

The number one, most critical piece of advice for keyworker parents is, 'if it is at all possible for children to be kept at home then they should be.'

Please don't think I'm lazy and cba babysitting these children. I cried when my class went home yesterday, and care about every child in school. If I am in work full time anyway, then it really doesn't matter how many children are in the classroom.

But so many people don't understand social distancing. They are walking around like they are immortal, or only thinking that they themselves will probably be ok if they get it. For social distancing to have the desired effect, then everyone who can be at home, should be. If there was a chance of your child dying from this, would you send them to school? Well then think about who might die because they came into contact with your child.

And all of this brought on by a friend who called me last night to say that she is thrilled to be able to send her child to school on Monday because she is a deliveroo driver, even though her unemployed bf will be home all day on the PlayStation.

It is not just schools though. Care and residential homes, buses, shops , pharmacies, GP/ vets/ dentist waiting rooms, hospital outpatients waiting rooms, tubes, trains, coaches, manufacturing companies, factories, hospital and industrial laundries .....

Non-essential travel is discouraged. People are asked to work from home where possible. People are asked to observe social distancing. Workplaces like factories have employees who are adults and can action good hygiene.

Hospitals...well, you got me there.

But children are regarded as "super spreaders" of this virus, due to poor hygiene, difficulties maintaining personal space, inability to understand social distancing, often a lack of ability to even understand what is going on because they're so young.

None of the places you mentioned have children in large numbers, in a small space (have you seen how small many classrooms are?).

Well sorry, in a climate where many still have to work and be put at relative risk, I think that mandate should still apply to all children who would benefit from it

That would leave schools well over half full, which would totally negate any benefit of them closing.

Stopping this virus spreading is the priority in the short/medium term. Then schools can get back to educating and safeguarding and all the other stuff we do day in, day out.

Apologies, I didn't read all 38 pages but FFS, some kids need to be in school. And if the teachers are resentful of this fact then you're in the wrong job.

@Really12345

Good point, a wake up call to remind the piss takers that if they don't isolate they have a higher chance of looking after their kids but with the whole family ill!

It really should be a last resort, school is not free childcare.

*Apologies, I didn't read all 38 pages but FFS, some kids need to be in school. And if the teachers are resentful of this fact then you're in the wrong job

Go read the thread.

YANBU OP.

TBF, as a secondary school teacher, I would support older children with 2 medical worker parents coming into school (I can't imagine many will/will want to at first).

The reason for this is that they may not be getting much adult contact at home, and their parents may even end up getting stuck at work overnight.

I think it's good for them to have a local base they can go to and alert someone if things are getting really tough at home- even at 15/16 the situation for them could be a lot to deal with.

If their parents don't work in a frontline role, obviously it's different.

Apologies, I didn't read all 38 pages but FFS, some kids need to be in school. And if the teachers are resentful of this fact then you're in the wrong job.

Should have read the thread!

grew up with a severely depressed mother. You couldn't see the colour of our carpets due to dirty clothing until I was old enough to do it myself. You don't need to lecture on how this affects children

Clearly I do if some teachers think they are a special group in this whole scenario. There are lots of essential workers on much less pay who are not fucking moaning about it, that's all I know.

You dont want to answer what happens to vulnerable kids, because you know what happens

Please stop TELLING me my supposed motives for answering/ not answering your questions - it's making me feel like I used to when my abusive exH used to do the same to try and make me question myself (who was also talking bollocks). I answered that before. I also asked you to provide evidence of there being ALL these piss takers. As in evidence, not anecdote. You don't have any, so moot point anyway.

Is there this much concern for children during the 6 weeks summer holidays, or are people simply trying to justify their own selfishness by using these children as a gotcha?

Apologies, I didn't read all 38 pages but FFS, some kids need to be in school. And if the teachers are resentful of this fact then you're in the wrong job.

If you bothered even reading the first post you would see OP is talking about kids, that DON'T need to be there.

Theres a lot of examples on this thread of people who claim their kids need to be there, but actually dont.

And what happens to the kids that need to be there when school end up closed completely. Because no one can answer that.

People taking piss are not helping slow the spread rate. In the end the teachers will be sick, kids will he carrying it and/or sick and these kids that need to be there, wont be able to be there.

It really should be a last resort, school is not free childcare

I still think it is for most. Only a couple of my many colleagues will still be sending their DC to school. A few people on MN saying they would struggle to WFH etc does not convince me otherwise.

There are also some children I teach who are extremely vulnerable- and I would rather they had the support of school for as long as possible.

I think for me the priority is:

-Younger children with 2 medical staff/emergency service parents.
-Extremely vulnerable children.
-Younger children with 2 parents who will be out at work all day everyday in a key role (e.g. supermarket staff).
-Older children with 2 medical staff/emergency service parents.
-Everyone else.

Luckily I am in a MAT where we are all able to work in a rota, and I have a head who gets social distancing and trusts his staff, so we are only to be called in when we are needed.

But in small primaries who aren't able to be part of a "hub" system, one child with a cough could lead to all teachers socially isolating, and what happens then to the children of frontline workers with no other support?

And what happens to the kids that need to be there when school end up closed completely. Because no one can answer that

Jeez - of course they can fucking answer it, perhaps they are not seeing the need to answer a question that is purely hypothetic if the only evidence of 'all these pisstakers' causing that POTENTIAL outcome is a few on MN who would struggle to cope with WFH and dc's.

Please stop TELLING me my supposed motives for answering/ not answering your questions - it's making me feel like I used to when my abusive exH used to do the same to try and make me question myself (who was also talking bollocks). I answered that before. I also asked you to provide evidence of there being ALL these piss takers. As in evidence, not anecdote. You don't have any, so moot point anyway.

Give over. You are arguing that all children who benefit should be in school. So that all children, who attend school normally.

You say you arent a politician so cant answer what happens when schools are closed. The politicians are saying school numbers need to be several reduced to stop the spread. But you dont believe that. Because it doesnt suit your narrative.

Theres piss takers in this very thread. People who are dealing with them.

Wheres you evidence that having too many kids in school wont help spread the virus faster?

Wheres your proof the, in the long run vulnerable kids are better off, with the schools closed. Because that's the next step.

I totally agree and also think why would you want to send your child unless there was no other option. I should imagine the parents HAVING to send their children will be really upset about having to do so. My husband is a key worker but I'm a SAHM so obviously there was no doubt they'd be staying home. Seems like yet again the selfishness of some people will have a knock on effect for people trying to do their best.

Also, most schools can't open as normal- under the social distancing rules, all schools I'm aware of bar 1 did partial closures last week.

Unless people are suggesting those are suspended for teachers too- and that really will cost lives.

Jeez - of course they can fucking answer it, perhaps they are not seeing the need to answer a question that is purely hypothetic if the only evidence of 'all these pisstakers' causing that POTENTIAL outcome is a few on MN who would struggle to cope with WFH and dc's.

No they cant. You said 'I'm not a politician".

You didnt answer it. It's not hypothetical. If it spreads round schools and to teachers, they will close their doors. That is how it works.

Yet you prefer to let people who dont need to out their child in school, to do so. Even though the science supports, that this would mean quicker spread, schools closing, potential lockdown and people not being able to get the medical care they need.

But it's ok, cause it's just a few piss takers. Just like it's only a few pusstakers buying up all the baby milk in the supermarkets.

who are not fucking moaning about it, that's all I know

Teacher aren’t “fucking moaning”. We’re trying to ensure school opening doesn’t utterly fuck up the strategy to stop the spread of CV.

If school opening does fuck it up, schools will close completely. That’s what has happened in many countries, we are trying to stop that happening.

So please, for the love of god, stop lecturing about vulnerable children. We know. We really, really do.

I think people have to bear in mind this strategy is a numbers game in the end.

It's all about causing the least harm to the least number of people possible.

Looking after children of medics means they can go to work and prevent harm, rather than stay at home with their kids.

Looking after lots of children increases the risk of the medic needing to self isolate, harming more people.

Looking after vulnerable children benefits the vulnerable child, but possibly risks others- but obviously I want to do that too. So anyone else who can keep their children home in any way at all needs to.

It's not about teachers moaning, I think it's more to do with teachers understanding the science enough to realize what is actually needed to make this work.

If people lose their jobs, that is awful- I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But if it is a toss up between someone's job and someone else's life, I think we know what we would all pick.

If I thought I could save lives by giving up my job, I would.

I don't see teachers moaning, I see the non piss takers wishing the piss takers would consider this serious enough to look after their own DC so vital NHS staff can work and vulnerable DC will be ok.

No none really needs to RTFT.

Some people say they would find it hard to cope with their DC's and WFH/ other reason
Others decide many of these have no right to feel that way and their reasons are invalid
They then decide to ignore all the eligible parents saying they have made alternative arrangement, but come to the conclusion there are so many 'piss takers' that the virus will spread and schools will have to close completely.
Anyone who questions the above that will then be informed of the reasons they have ignored or 'refused to answer' certain questions (even if they did)
Well - that's what I took from it

@todayisnottuesday you literally only have to be alive in the UK right now to see, clearly, it is absolutely full of pisstakers.

It's full of people who do not understand that this is a global emergency, a deadly virus, and this will kill thousands of people.

It's full of people who think their right to a social life, to work in peace, to make profits, to have 45 rolls of toilet roll in the cupboard, is more important than anyone else's.

I'm still trying to decide if you are one of those pisstakers who hasn't yet had their "oh shit" moment, or if you're actually just living under a bridge.

Going off on a slight tangent here.... I wonder if after all this is over, we will have more stay at home parents, in two parent families?

Well - that's what I took from it wink

Is it? Or are you just trolling? You don’t seen to have ANY concept of what is happening in the world.