Government reportedly considering schools going back in 3 weeks

[FiveFootTwoEyesOfBlue]

On BBC News 24 now, article in tomorrow's Sunday Times says that ministers are considering schools going back in three weeks time. Plus allowing some shops and social gatherings, but not pubs and clubs.

It's so difficult because the balance of risks changes depending on how vulnerable you are. So for me and my DC with no underlying conditions, the risk of dying if I catch COVID is likely 1 in 1000 or less. While not great (e.g. I wouldn't do a sport with 1 in 1000 risk of death) I'll accept that risk when weighed against the other risks of indefinite lockdown.

However if I was in the shielding group and my risk was more like (say) 1 in 10, or 1 in 5, then I'd be fighting for an approach that stops me getting it, especially if I also had young DC who would be left with no mum.

There's really no easy answer.

Glad we agree

(I think)

Bert I agree with you.

I do think 3 weeks is too soon.

But we need to be led by the correct science. We need to understand who is really at risk. They need to review the list of vulnerable people for example now they have a much better idea of who will die. Some additional groups may need to be shielded or become vulnerable and others currently identified as vulnerable may not actually be.

I don't think we agree the risk cannot be removed but Local authorities and Academies etc have a duty to their employees to assess the risk and minimise it.

Thanks effing. Glad the teachers and pupils at your school all seem to be OK.

Also I think it's wrong to compare teachers to nurses or doctors. Hospital staff have access to PPE.

Teachers won't and I can't see any teacher who would be able to teach wearing PPE anyway - imagine teaching phonics to a group of 5-6 year olds who need to see your mouth in order to be able to blend and segment words in order to read?

The youngest pupils in nursery and reception do so well because of the nurturing nature of the environment. Cuddles and small group work is the norm and in nursery we deal with toileting accidents on a sometimes hourly basis. I'd expect any teacher teaching those year groups to support cleaning and child as we normally do and also to give a hug to a child who was in distress.

I'd imagine some very distressed little people if that didn't happen.

Also teachers are not the same as NHS workers. No one thinks our lives are more valuable. But there is no ‘greater good’ reason for us to go back. We are not going to die for the economy.
It’s not the same as the necessity of the NHS staff who understand that risk of illness and disease and viruses is part of the nature of their job anyway. Only now it is horribly magnified. And that is awful of course.
But going back to school in May is not a necessity. Children being climbed together in tiny classrooms and dinner halls is not a necessity.
Also as a teacher I am always in close contact with kids. I love around the room,
I bend down to talk to kids about work, they come up to my desk, I work with them in groups on the work they’re doing etc etc. I am within half a metre of all of them.
We have to literally walk shoulder to shoulder at breaks and lunches walking down corridors and stairs.
I have to travel on the tube where we will be packed in like sardines.
For what??

@spudsarelife84

lots of people work in exactly these conditions, right now

Oh right? Please can you list those jobs where people are responsible for the health and safety of 1000+ under 16s at the same time in the same building.

I get that teachers are worried, but so am I every time I walk into work where social distancing is impossible!

Oh teachers would also have to GET to work, some of them using public transport or walk etc. I’m not talking about the journey to work at all, that would be the LEAST of your problems.

Same for DH, same for the people working in care homes, supermarkets, local shops, the Police etc.

I think I have explained in painstaking detail why it is DIFFERENT for people with other jobs who are dealing with adults or individuals. Even in care homes you don’t have 1000 unpredictable kids, the residents normally are fairly static and aren’t moving around in the same way.

None of us have PPE, we just mitigate the risk as best we can with frequent hand washing

Yes we have basins at work but being able to get to the toilet when you’re teaching is incredibly hard so you’re talking often hours and hours between opportunities. Not like in an office where you can sidle off calmly every hour or so.

changing clothes and showering before coming into contact with the others in our households and socially distancing from others when not in work.

Yes we can do this like we would do coming back from a supermarket etc. This is not the problem. Again it’s the actual role isn’t it that I’ve tried to explain in detail.

There has been no lockdown for many of us, and nor will there be.

Yes but I am assuming that’s because you’re not a teacher being asked to deal with thousands of children all day long I’m very close proximity.

I think teachers need to brace themselves for the fact that they will be going back to work without PPE and there won't be any choice afforded to them over it.

Thanks for your support. We should just get on with it, fuck our safety or that of our families.

I wonder if the online school will be for children shielding or vulnerable or in households with shielders/vulnerable; or parents who wont risk school; then school will have the other children in reduced numbers which would help and the teachers would only be expected to teach them not also provide online schooling. That was a big issue in the last two weeks where teachers had a class and were providing stuff to children at home. Or simply to supplement a return to part time schooling if social distancing remains for a long, long time.

I agree, we are at the very early stages of understanding this virus. We have only just learned that it looks like most infected people do not develop immunity.

I thought the Imperial work was showing a level of immune response though unlikely to be permanent? I know WHO have said that seroprevalence tests don’t provide evidence of immunity and should be treated with caution until the evidence base is better - but that is of course different. Can you share what studies you’re looking at on this?

If there is no immunity it would probably render the idea of a useful vaccine pointless - and a fast one very unlikely.

It will not be happening in three weeks. The DofE have just announced more funding for the NSPCC and a comprehensive online learning from home package. Schools can start applying for laptops from the 22nd of April for delivery to children. A new online school has been launched and is now up and running.

@HoffiCoffi13 It has been talked about everywhere. Initial research yes so needs further investigation, but in the sample most infected people did not show antibodies level that would normally indicate a level of immunity from further infection. Even BBC news talked about it last night. I think from memory only 4% of people showed any sign of immunity after infection.
I have not read the research to check it. But all along I have been saying we do not know enough about this virus yet to be making many of the statements made on MN and about our government.
A larger sample size might throw up the same low level of infected people who develop immunity. Or it might show more people develop immunity. But it is worrying initial research.

@alloutoffucks

We have only just learned that it looks like most infected people do not develop immunity

No that is NOT what the WHO said at all. The WHO are basically (correctly) trying to manage expectations regarding herd immunity and antibody testing by saying there is no guarantee that they cant be reinfected

news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011

this has the quotes. Because rightly they dont want it to be relied on as means of controlling the virus.

They are saying at the moment we dont have enough evidence of what immunity is rather than there is evidence of the contrary

It really annoys me actually that it has been reported in that way that there is no immunity whereas they are simply saying we dont have enough evidence of what immunity is. Completely different things

@SabineSchmetterling why do you assume all schools are doing online classes? My children's secondary isn't (they are looking into it but there are lots of child safety issues apparently).

@MsAwesomeDragon yes i worry a lot too. There's no way dd in y10 is getting anywhere near the same level of education working off PowerPoints and Seneca.

You do know why people are not getting treatments?
It is because either there are not enough NHS staff or because the risk of catching covid 19 and dying is higher than delaying treatment and dying. My friend has had her cancer treatment delayed because she has been told by her consultant that if she catches covid 19 she will die, but delaying treatment only slightly reduces her chance of remission.
And sad though it is that a terminally ill boy can not go to McDonalds, I don't think that is worth letting thousands of other people dying for.

In the short term it might be ok to postpone cancer treatments for some patients, but that can’t be said for all. How long will it go on, weeks, months? The outcome won’t be good either way.

It’s those that say find a lump and are at the early stages of cancer that can’t be seen. Their immune system would probably cope if they got covid but if they don’t seem fast they would get sick from cancer.

Regarding the children with terminal illness, it’s not one boy though is it? There will be thousands of children that are terminally ill that are stuck in they’re last few months. The argument could be had that some that did if covid would have passed away anyway. They’ve had a nice long life.. the kids haven’t.

It’s an awful situation whatever

My post was for @alloutoffucks
not @Thisisitisit

The DofE have just announced more funding for the NSPCC and a comprehensive online learning from home package. Schools can start applying for laptops from the 22nd of April for delivery to children. A new online school has been launched and is now up and running.

I am always touched by people’s faith that government is joined up and strategic.

@alloutoffucks

There have been studies that show 4% of Californians and 10% Italians have antibodies as how wide spread it is not that 4% of infected people. But I am willing to be proven wrong of this understanding

I might be wrong but I did shout at the bbc when they said that and they went to Dr Michael Ryan and I listened to what he was saying which is that herd immunity is dangerous and cannot be relied upon.

I have a question too. I agree with those who say that we can't eliminate COVID, therefore the lockdown was originally planned to slow the rate of people catching it so the NHS can cope. Also agree that the implication was that many of us will catch it eventually (though this is of no help to those with a high risk of dying from it even if the NHS is not overwhelmed).

The fact that we were no longer trying to contain it was the reason for stopping testing and contact tracing.

However, now we've realised how many people will die if we let it go round, we seem to be moving back to testing and contact tracing, as those countries with low death rates have done.

Does this mean we are moving back to trying to contain it somewhat, at least in the medium term (say 1-2 years), until we hopefully have a vaccine and/or better treatments? I used to be in agreement the the lockdown and social distancing were just to flatten the curve and that the assumption was that most/many of us would get it, but now I'm not so sure and I think maybe they're hoping to also reduce the number who actually do catch it, ever. It's all unclear!

Reasonably sensible ideas grass but I'd like to see how that works for year 10 with option subjects and eg English Lit texts...given there is no nationally standardised route through anything.

I suspect the online learning will only be core subjects.

The thing that stands out for me the most on this thread is that people actually belive the government put their ideas out into the press as 'feelers' before deciding how to proceed

They might or not but are there any quotes or just ‘ministers say’. I don’t trust them not to just make it up.

@JassyRadlett It is some initial research on a small sample size. Links have been shared on MN a lot, but I haven't read the actual research. Should be on general ongoing corona virus thread.

Also I think it's wrong to compare teachers to nurses or doctors. Hospital staff have access to PPE

We've been told only to wear a surgical mask when we are working with patients who are known to have something contagious or they're coughing. Goggles when working with patients who are confirmed Covid. Fitted mask only for the staff doing AGP. Working with a typical patient, we have gloves and a plastic pinny.

However, we've been told that social distancing is impossible in our line of work so we're still going back to offices and changing rooms filled with people during the day with computers about 1m apart from each other. We're sharing pens and other things like phones. We're still hotdesking. We're walking around the hospital between wards and visiting other departments. Ppe isn't given for this.

We've been told to accept that social distancing just isn't possible for NHS staff in work. Ppe is given depending on the type of patient you're working with. If you're not around someone sick then you don't get Ppe. We don't just get to wear it as a precaution. That negates the purpose of it. Ppe is single use and needs to be changed every time you finish each task.

When I go back to the office that has about 30 staff crammed in to do our notes at the end of the day, do you think we get Ppe for this?

Teachers won't be around sick people. Why would they be given Ppe?

I am asking for a science and evidence based approach

We all want this, but a holistic one looking at all impacts on society. Not just Covid.

The sad truth is that for the overwhelming majority of children. Between the two options of death of a parent from Covid, or poverty/parental jobs losses/death from another reason/homes less ness, the latter is much much more likely. In fact overwhelmingly more likely.

Not sure of your point Jassy, it’s not happening, the DofE made a massive announcement this morning. This click bait headline is part of a Murdoch plant to blame Boris, hence the ST and MoS running it. Boris is out of favour, so it’s lies, misdirection and spin to turn everyone against him. I am always amazed people are so naive they don’t understand that. I suggest you actually look up the DofE announcements this morning. I know it doesn’t suit the back to school tomorrow agenda though, sorry about that.

@Hadenoughfornow I mentioned further up that I accept there will never be a situation where we are risk free. That is the reality of all types of virus and this one is no different.

That's why I have said there needs to be careful planning and the reopening of schools needs to happen when the rate of new infections is lower and in turn, the hospitalisations and deaths rate has come down considerably. Nothing is ever going to be risk free but posters suggesting schools should be open tomorrow whilst we have not enough contact tracing or testing in place is irresponsible and puts teachers and the families do those children who attend school at risk. I would argue it also puts the NHS workers at greater risk too if infections rise again.