So how come Australia is still locked down?

[Teddypops]

So Australia has approx 20 new cases a day and barely no deaths.

So how come they are still locked down?

I know of a young man who has lived in Australia for the past few years and has paid thousands out towards gaining his Australian citizenship.
He came over here for his grandfather’s funeral just before our lockdown and cannot return as Australia won’t allow him in due to their lockdown measures. His Australian flat has had to be rerented and he is in limbo at his family home here.

If you take the time to read my post, I WAS NOT ARGUING AGAINST LOCKDOWN. I was arguing for a shorter, more effective one. The kind that Dan Andrews didn't have the intestinal or political fortitude for. The kind Jacinda Ardern did. Forget Scomo, he's a pliable muppet with less nous than the average toddler.

Setting that aside your kids are being used as guinea pigs in an experiment. It's in online education and the psychological and behavioural effects of long term deprivation of contact with same age peers. The science is in and schools are safer than homes for kids www.smh.com.au/national/safe-as-houses-covid-19-study-clears-nsw-schools-for-student-return-20200425-p54n6i.html--so your choice not to send them back, should schools reopen, unless they are high risk really isn't backed by science.

So whose head needs a wobble?

Further, how the fuck is it science driven to have AFL, construction, and shopping malls but not schools and playgrounds? IT ISN'T. That is the very definition of special (male) interest and anti-child.

Yeah, I have construction 10m from my back fence 10 hours a day six days a week, and yes that is pissing me off--I'm extremely audio sensitive and so is the child I am supposed to be homeschooling alone while I look after 400 students (DH's job is one of the ones that can't be done from home because apparently COVID also doesn't spread in TAFE ).

But that really isn't the reason why I am raging against Dan Andrews and his misogynyit's because of the gross overall negative effects on child learning, health and wellbeing, and female safety, earning power, value and autonomy that is created by an extended, half arsed lockdown (instead of a shorter, universal onesee e.g. NZ). COVID isn't the only harm in the world, but you and Dan Andrews are pretending it is.

@CallItLoneliness did you read that link FFS. No evidence pupils have infected kids in NSW schools. Hardly fucking science is it.

Here's another link that contradicts yours and says children may be just as infectious - here

So yeah, I'd rather wait until it's a bit more conclusion than going off of your rant

Er....that link is about the UK. If I was making guesses as to which science was more applicable in an Australian context, I would use the science that had been done in...an Australian context. I would be very interested in hearing why you believe NSW science is not applicable in VIC, but UK science is. You might 'rather' not send your child back to school but that's not science

And yes, I did read the link, and the underlying scientific work. I'm a scientist. As a scientist, I understand that all treatments have side effects--including, as I outlined above, long term deprivation of social education. You are acting as though being at home has no negative consequences for your child: I would be simply astonished if that were true, unless your child is 14+ (and even then the literature on the efficacy of online education says it needs to be well planned and designed to be effective, not implemented in weeks). I thought about posting the science earlier, but thought that might seem high handed, now it is necessary

So, to the science:

• Microbiology, peer reviewed: Children less affected www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7102573/
• ArXiv, so not peer reviewed formally, but solid: School closures an ineffective means of preventing spread in Australia: arxiv.org/pdf/2003.10218.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3ODB8eB7iQOs7tU0lFOI5vM7LbKgX0CwKbWTMXX92akq58HaBdm1juxUY
• Metareview: School closures ineffective and potentially harmful: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3556648.

So no, Dan Andrews isn't a saint, and neither you nor he are basing your decision making on science. That's fine, BTW, you don't have to--but you do need to be honest about it. I'm angry, sure, but I am angry for a good reason: women and children have been shoved under an ineffective bus on this one. And I am angry because we could have eliminated COVID by now, but we didn't, and now there is not the political will to do so. VIC has had 17 cases n the past two days. NZ has had half that in a week. Again, Dan Andrews hasn't done the job people are giving him credit for, nor the job I wish he had done.

Finally--I love my children, just like you love yours. Do you really think, as a scientist, I would put them at unnecessary risk?

Look, we can disagree here and hopefully you're right but I won't be sending my DC back until I'm happy.

And I'm not basing my decision on science. I never said I was. It's too early to think anyone is right with the science here IMO so that's why my DC are staying off.

If we want to consider global analysis, this seems much more comprehensive about documented transmission than Christian drosten says there are similar amounts of virus in the respiratory tract in children, which doesn’t tell us much although it’s helpful for scientists to continue their analysis. Despite their similar virus levels these children are not getting as sick as adults, so it’s not hard to see that they also might not spread it as much as adults, which is what other studies show. adc.bmj.com/content/early/2020/05/05/archdischild-2020-319474
I don’t think primary school children from well off caring families are disadvantaged at all by a term or two at home. But for the sake of all the others schools should be a focus. I’d also happily send mine, which won’t come up as they are too young and I’m happily sending them to childcare.

While I'm not disagreeing with you, @CallItLoneliness, I'm interested in how that science stacks up for all the kids in far flung areas of Australia who have no choice but to learn by distance education - surely, since this has been a part of Australian schooling for many years, it's something that they should have a better handle on than, say, the UK?

I agree that the social side of schooling and being taught in a room by an actual teacher are more preferable - but is it REALLY that awful for them to NOT have that for a short period?

@ThumbWitchesAbroad they're not using the correspondence school stuff for kids who are currently off school--that would have meant significantly more contact time than kids are getting, and relies on someone available to supervise a whole school day. And it still has noticeably worse outcomes than in person education. www.mitchellinstitute.org.au/fact-sheets/young-people-in-rural-and-remote-communities-frequently-missing-out/

In VIC at this stage kids haven't been in school for well over 6 weeks; that's a significant chunk of the school year. For prep kids (the ones in their first year), this is a major disruption (my kid isn't this age), as it is for kids in their final years of high school (also not my kid). For kids with not-ideal home environments (that is my kid, see above about construction noise and audiosensitivity), for highly social kids, or kids where that is their major development need, for kids who can't yet type, this is crap. I wouldn't be so offended if we were really doing everything we could, but kids seem to be on the pointy end of this in a way that doesn't apply to other groups.

And quite genuinely, the leader who is getting plaudits on here is more concerned about getting football back on track than schools www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-11/coronavirus-restrictions-in-victoria-premier-daniel-andrews/12228524.

Thumbwitches the correspondence bit is odd. There is a whole distance learning unit in the dept of education and as best as I can see they haven’t even been involved... just dumb.
I really don’t feel footy is being prioritised over schools. Footy is consenting adults, there is a lot of angst over schools and a lot of stressed teachers frightened about being back in the classroom. I would happily send school age kids but don’t think daniel andrews is stiffing them the way you describe. Schools are currently making plans to go back fairly soon and he was probably pretty confident of their likely reaction but wanted it to be a school decision. I know some private schools are starting back in 2 weeks for prep 1 2 11 & 12 and a couple of weeks later for everyone else.

What about the teachers and the other school staff? What about their risks?

It's not so long ago when children spent extended periods off school. We may be unused to widespread deadly infectious diseases in the West but previous generations had TB, smallpox, etc. Even when I was at school kids would be off for several months with glandular fever. They managed to catch up - academically and socially. I had two friends at school originally from other countries. Both (at separate times) were off for a whole term visiting family. They caught up with school work and with friends. No psychological ill effects.

I don't think the patriarchy and the inequity of women in our society is going to overturned during a pandemic.

Just to provide a counter point.

My kid's schools/teachers have been excellent. Just bog standard State schools.

Plenty of work, plenty of contact, plenty of information.

I acknowledge the privilege that my kids have (techy parents, good equipment etc). But not all State schools are doing a poor job.

What about the teachers and the other school staff? What about their risks?

It’s minuscule, hence children returning to school. It’s been shown kids are not a significant risk to each other or adults, so as long as teachers keep away from each other (social distancing) it’s not an safety issue.

@ToffeeYoghurt couldn’t agree more. The British obsession with attendance is bizarre and socially harmful when later on it manifests as presenteeism in the work place. Schools are great for teaching literacy and numeracy but the majority of learning, especially for young children, happens outside of school anyway. They’re not going to be stunted for life because they did stayed at home for a term.

@ThumbWitchesAbroad it’s quite common here for families to send their children to live in town with relatives/friends for primary school and then to boarding for secondary school (I’m pretty sure there are no boarding primaries in Australia the way there are in Britain but if someone else has wider experience they may be able to comment). I don’t think that distance learning is as common as you seem to think it is.

I too think the risk is minimal but the stress levels aren’t, and that needs to be allowed for. You cant just tell a teacher the data says it’s fine and expect their stress levels to drop, it’s not rational. So some will be too anxious to come to work, and some legitimately have health issues (or their family do) that mean they don’t want to return to work yet.
Obviously some read the numbers think risk negligible, hate teaching from home and are dying to get back - good on them!

While I'm not disagreeing with you, @CallItLoneliness, I'm interested in how that science stacks up for all the kids in far flung areas of Australia who have no choice but to learn by distance education - surely, since this has been a part of Australian schooling for many years, it's something that they should have a better handle on than, say, the UK?

You are talking about something completely different. It’s School of the Air. This has been set up since the 1950’s but to say because Australia has a school of the air system all kids across Australia can now do it is baffling, and pretty ignorant. It’s a very specialised infrastructure and technology. It’s every child’s right to have an education so the States here must accomodate that including provision of required equipment etc. The teachers are specialised in remote learning models. These particular teachers and children are set up with equipment and technology. You can’t just suddenly transpose this system onto every child in Australia who has to stay home for school.

You are also working on the basis that every child in Australia could happily stay home and have access to infrastructure and parent real assistance for a school/homeschooling model. That’s not right. Unfortunately many children come from disadvantaged situations. They don’t get internet access, access to a computer, don’t have literate parents, parents don’t speak English or poorly, they rely on a face to face classroom situation. It’s also where many groups of children are fed. I know of several schools in disadvantaged communities, including some pockets of social housing in affluent suburbs, where charities provide money for breakfast club before school, lunch packs, after school care and they feed them dinner before going home as they simply don’t get any food at home and resort to stealing packets of chips etc from local stores otherwise. These kids often have at least one parent in jail at any one time and are from historical socially disadvantaged groups (not solely indigenous but many are), many areas also have a high percentage of refugees where kids have unique needs. Face to face school is required for safeguarding, for giving kids pens, pencils and paper to work on, after school for people to assist them with homework and computer literacy, a safe space to talk and relate to people - all things they can’t get at home. These kids need to be monitored and taught face to face and there is not a few of them here and there, it’s widespread. But sure a term or so off school trapped at home in unsafe and neglectful situations can’t hurt right! Wow.

The other examples given of kids having a term off as they are sick/recovering or overseas visiting relatives don’t relate either. All of this relies on having caring parents who engage, taking kids places, doing things with them, answering questions about stuff they see/experience around them. I agree, in that situation it won’t hurt any child. Not all kids are in that situation. It’s to the point it’s not even solely pertaining to disadvantaged households at the moment. Two professional people working full time from home can’t necessarily tag team it and that leaves some kids who rely on teacher/classroom situation for direction and assistance struggling as by the time mum or dad can get away from their job it’s 4pm and the kid considers they are done for the day, they don’t want to start up at that time for their learning day. Not all employers are flexible with parents being able to assist younger kids at home with schooling as required.

Kids need to return to school as the priority.

@Reginabambina schools here look very different than what I have seen in the UK--lots of play-based and inquiry-led learning, lots of focus especially among younger kids on managing social interactions. That stuff isn't replaceable at home, especially not when all other social interactions have been cut off at the same time.

@Startuprepair I didn't hold out much hope either, but it is depressing to see a man who has entrenched it further lauded as some kind of hero.

@timeisnotaline I agree that staff mental health is important, but why is it more important than the mental health of parents who are trying to hold down a full time job and educate their children at the same time? Genuine question. Also, there is a plan for footy going back. There isn't a plan for schools going back. Why has footy even been discussed?

It’s not a case of more important but it is a case of responsibility and rights. Staff at my childrens childcare have the right to say I’m on sick leave, I can’t possibly work. As an employer you have a responsibility to your staff, you deserve to be sued if you say Hey jane, stuff your anxiety you need to be in at work tomorrow! All schools are working on plans to return though, yours will be soon surely?
Parents don’t get to not turn up to parenting, it’s hard and stressful and right now that includes schooling.

With football, I don’t really follow it. But I do see the lift it gives to a large proportion of society- it’s not just a workplace as Daniel andrews says, it contributes to the net happiness of Victorians, which is worth doing. It’s really not a trade off of I want footy so we can’t have schools. It doesn’t help anyone imagining it’s like that.

We've been incredibly fortunate in Australia for several reasons. The population/housing is not as dense , we've just come out of summer, we're not as physically demonstrative and we had fair warning seeing the terror unfold in Europe. I'm not a fan of Scomo, he's been ok is his response but I am really impressed with the state premiers and they've been working well together managing the individual needs of their states. Unfortunately we have not gone for irradication but I do see the need to get the economy going again. Hopefully now the preparation work has been done with contact tracing, clinics, PPE etc we'll be able to manage the small outbreaks quickly once lockdown ends.

Australia is going into winter bug season. I suspect restrictions could do the same here then too if infections spike in November. luckily we are going into summer, so less bug season.

@CallItLoneliness I think it just looks much more formal than it actually is in the U.K. they start school at age 4 there but it’s very much a mixture of play and lessons until they go into prep (7 or 8). Even so, they’re simply not going to learn much at school. Their peers aren’t exactly a font of knowledge and teachers are more focused on teaching basic skills and also managing the social interactions as you’ve noted. In all fairness of the people I know, I would say the ones who’ve been through the British system receive a education at school but obviously that isn’t a reflection on current educational standards. Regardless, schools teach only so much. The vast majority of learning happens outside of formal education settings, especially in early years where schools are preoccupied with teaching children how to read/be nice to each other etc. Even the majority of social skills are learned outside of school. The school social environment is very artificial. This is good in some ways (for example teaching children how to stand up to bullying, how to share etc) but it doesn’t really teach the kind of social skills that children need in the real world where they need to be able to get on well with people of all ages and all backgrounds. A term less of schooling really isn’t going do any harm to children who aren’t completing assessments.

@HappydaysArehere you must be misinformed. Residents and citizens (plus a few exceptional categories) are allowed in, they just have to undergo quarantine when they arrive.

Literally no need for you to be so rude and arrogant, HoppingPavlova - it was more of a question than a statement of fact, and in no way suggested that the information was wrong.

But that's ok - you sit on your high horse if it makes you feel better.

@timeisnotaline I manage staff, so am aware of the MH stuff, and clinical anxietyif staff descend into thatdoes need to be addressed. Subclinical anxiety, though, even at scale needs to be managed with science and time, not time off. Ultimately if Jane suddenly said "oh, I can't be around children anymore, I don't like them, but I still want to be paid as a teacher" (as opposed to "I have developed medically diagnosed clinical anxiety") the answer would have to be "but it's your job".

@Reginabambina a term less of school won't harm some kids. For kids with not-ideal home environments, for highly social kids (that's my kid, and his parents are both introverts) it IS harmful, and we can't predict the long term effects because we've never done this before. Even when there were pandemics in the past, kids were generally part of large families due to limited birth control...so they would have had similar-age siblings much more often than they do now.