Reasons why you will not be sending your children back to school in June?

[saylor]

Unless you live with an adult over 65 (2% of UK households with under 16s and over 65s according to ONS), your child has an underlying health condition, or someone in your household has an underlying health condition/is shielding, what are your reasons for not sending your child/re back until September or beyond?

I've read that poorer households are much less likely to send their children back to school than wealthier households (paper copy of Economist magazine last week before anyone asks for a link!) which will widen the achievement gap even further.

For context, I'm SAHM and DH a high earner - we are both in agreement DD will be going back the minute school reopens.

I'm a single parent because my husband died last year.

The risk of death might be low for my age group but the risk of hospitalisation or even just long drawn out illness is much higher. If I'm ill, who looks after my kids? And how traumatising would it be for my 6 year old if I had to go in an ambulance?

Our reasons:

• village school is tiny and cannot do SD
• also, staffing, like most schools, will be problematic
• the teachers deserve a work environment where they feel safe and it is not possible with all the recommended random rules
• I care more about the economy than schooling i guess? But do worry a lot about vulnerable children at the min.

It's not going back to be educated.

It's going back for childcare reasons and social care reasons.

The teachers will be managing behaviour rather than doing much more. No one to one support for special needs kids has an impact on all the kids.

The conditions outlined in the guidance are disruptive and unworkable.

It's not far on the teachers and the teaching assistants.

Lucky enough to be in a position to have a choice.

DS is doing OK at home, and don't see any pressing need either educationally or emotionally to send him back in a rush.

The tracing and tracking capacity of the UK is shocking.

We don't need to leave the house for any other reason but shopping occasionally. Why add to problems if we don't have to.

Other parents aren't socially distancing and will chat at the school gates and are impossible to avoid.

The R is still 0.7 in the NW. The number of cases in circulation by 1st June will still be higher than other countries reactivate lockdown at.

Child has asthma and dad is shielding.

If you'd been told in Feb that your child would be abruptly taken out of school and isolated at home with no sense of return , how would you have assumed that would affect your child?

Erm actually I'd worked out that was exactly what was going to happen by the 1st week of February before the half term when the news started to come out of Italy.

I wasn't confused, upset etc. I just knew that it was inevitable and had to happen.

But there you go.

I am undecided and can't make up my mind. I want to see what happens in the next two weeks.

Thoughts about not sending my child back;

The death rates and number of cases are too high. The R rate is too high.
There's still lots we don't know about the virus, we might be wrong about all of this.
The schools haven't had enough notice and it's being rushed through without proper thought and organisation,
My child is not a guinea pig to try something out on.
I know it's a tiny risk but why take it unnecessarily?
It's not in my child's best interest, her school breaks up on the 3rd July anyway. So 4 weeks if that in school. By the time they settle her in it will be the summer holidays, very disruptive for her to go back for a few weeks and be off again.
It will be upsetting for her, not like normal school at all. It's an unnatural environment. She will find it hard to adjust.
Little actual teaching taking place or learning, I am a qualified teacher, she will learn more with me at home.
If there is social distancing measures, what happens if she's upset or needs a cuddle what will they do?
We will know more, might have a track and trace method, an tracking app, be closer to a vaccination by September.
She's happy at home, learning lots and doesn't seem to be affected by time off school. 6 months out won't effect her learning or mental health.
It will hard sending her to school with ds still at home, will have to take him on the school run.

Thoughts on sending her back;

The risk is very low.
She's becoming increasingly hard to home school.
We can't stay in lockdown forever, we need to start somewhere getting back to some kind of normal.
She's missed so much of school, I feel sad she's missed her reception year and is back to a more serious year 1 with higher expectations rather than learning through play.
She needs social contact with friends and teachers, some sort of normality.
What will he different in September?

Kawasaki disease linked to Covid
A recently discovered Covid linked risk for children that has been fatal to some (14yr old Asian boy otherwise healthy)
Although it's still a very small risk it is real and only recently discovered as this virus is new and we are learning all the time. What more will we find out?

I have been trying to be patient with this kind of thing, but my patience is running out.

How can you make major decisions about your child's future based on a completely skewed understanding of risk? We would automatically assume that a parent who refused to let their child leave the house in case they were hit by a car was a BAD parent, because their anxiety about a 'real' but very low-probability event was preventing their child from living a full normal life. But a child is much more likely to be hit by a car than die of fucking Kawasaki disease!

I hope parents with no good reason for keeping children off school (being a single parent with other children is a very good one, as is someone shielding) will be fined and eventually have their place removed, if in an oversubscribed school.

Education isn't like shopping or going to the pub. There's an enormous cost for an individual child in missing six months of school. And parents who lack the most basic mathematical literacy or have severe anxiety disorders should not be home schooling.

I would happily send Y6 DD back on 1st June...

But, she's at school in London and we have an hour's commute in by train. Normal train schedule is down and so she'd have to switch trains and with social distancing in place, there's the potential that she could be waiting a long time to be able to do that. Then the tube stations she needs are closed and it would be a 20 minute walk in London.

I think that is too complicated and too many potential issues for a 10 year old on their own - and not worth it if they end up with half days or are just doing the same work that they could do from home.

School have sent a questionnaire round, and are pretty proactive in general so I'll wait and see what they say - and what the train people are saying before I decide.

I don't think 6 months off is going to have a huge detrimental affect on most children's future in reception or year 1. They probably won't even remember it in a few years time. It will be that time they had ages off school. I don't think they will fall stupidly behind, allowances will be made in the following year, I don't think it's going to have some huge effect on the rest of their lives.

My DC's aren't in the years that are due back on the 1st so it's not something I immediately need to consider.
But, when their years do open up, my decision will be influenced more by how their school experience will be, rather than the risk of contracting CV.

Socially distanced schooling would remove any joy out of education for my DC's. I'm not convinced that they would deal with it psychologically, and that they would really learn very much because of the conditions that they would be learning within.

I don't know what the answer is. I'm just so so sad about the whole situation.

@ teattergey

Yes I did asked them. They’d prefer to be at home together. They understand in the most simple non scary way that mum needs to avoid catching this

@RedToothBrush Same here. I was expecting it to happen sooner if anything. Our kids were prepared and we left a few days early with school permission for health reasons

Just a realisation that popped into my head. My daughter missed six months of pre school for health reasons. She’s now well ahead in year one.

As a child I missed most of my first year for health reasons. My education didn’t suffer.

Just realised this when someone above said six months isn’t long. I suddenly thought - you’re right, because I’ve been there!

My son is going to pre school as soon as he is allowed

Let's wait to see what happens from (not on) June 1st.
It may be that plans change, especially if the R increases.
Phased openings, shorter hours etc won't suit all families.

Some schools may not decide to open for all but the vulnerable, those most in need and the key worker children..

Some may only offer odd days for year 6s, for example.

Mine aren't in those year groups. There's still so much going on. Schools are making plans, but the landscape is constantly changing.

My DS will be going back in reception. He's already been going 2 days a week while I work and I think we had cv just at the start of lockdown so I'm not really worried about him catching it, bringing it home or passing it round too much. He's not doing brilliantly at home, he doesn't really enjoy the home ed bit and gets pretty worked up and emotional most days about the smallest thing. I think being in the structure of a school day which he enjoys will suit him, even if it is different or even p/t. It will give his sister (y4) a break from him and allow her to do more structured education at home. I'm a single parent so they don't get much of a break from each other currently and they're both very demanding.

I'm pleased schools are starting to reopen and as a country we are learning to live with the virus.

I believe the current projection is we hit 100 deaths a day on June 14th and the first day without a death is expected to be around 31st July.

But that's only if the R stays where it is now.

If it goes up slightly or we tip over R1 it will be longer.

RedToothBrush

I wasn't confused, upset etc. I just knew that it was inevitable and had to happen. “

Indeed. I couldn’t understand why so many other people apparently couldn’t see what was coming.

Our setting had a trip returning from Italy in March, when half of the country was already in lockdown and it had reached the city they were staying in. Ours has asthma and I spent a week pleading with the Principal to ask the group returning to self isolate for a week to protect the many hundreds of other students. Their hands were tied, they had to comply with PHE advice and in the end I had to withdraw early. We weren’t the only family to do so but still the vast majority of people were asking me what we were worried about.
Two weeks later, all settings were shut down with two day’s notice and some people were still surprised.
This is why I’m concerned about irresponsible headlines, talking of London being virus free. So many people still don’t seem to grasp how potentially serious this is and how fine the balance. Headlines like that will make the unconcerned abandon all caution and the infection will rise again. People with vulnerabilities will find themselves behind closed doors again, possibly for months.
Could I also just ask people not to just write off the “vulnerable” as insignificant, which many seem to do. My husband is in several vulnerable categories. He has been working in his home office throughout, using his niche expertise to contribute to the economy in a pretty significant way. He has physical frailties but an incredible mind, which he employs to the benefit of vast numbers of people.

Well, that turned into a ramble 😁

Completely apart from risks to other people and kids passing it around and Kawasaki and etc etc etc.

If they're doing 15 kids a class, there's going to be Limited places.
Those that can WFH should keep their kids home. Those that are unemployed should keep their kids home. Etc
So as I lost my job when covid broke or, in unemployed, so I'll keep my child home and let the limited places go to the people that can't work without their kids going to school.

Those that can WFH should keep their kids home.

Totally disagree, as single parent I can't work from home and look after my 5 years old at the same time. Those are 2 different jobs.

I would send my year 5 or year 7 (luckily not in scope), but my year 10 is in scope and it looks like they will be some school time arranged for her

I feel I have been left with little choice or a difficult choice as the school said they will stop all online learning when this happens, so given gcses are next year that would leave my child without any schooling for 6 weeks plus potentially at such a crucial stage.

Monkey- I strongly disagree. Those who are unemployed need to send their children back if they are actively looking for a job. Plus, those are the children who could be the most vulnerable in terms of poverty and lack of means, knowledge or finances at home to home school. These are the children who should go back FIRST if it's safe to do so. Quite a thoughtless post thinking only of yourself.

1981m

How's that going to work in actual real life?
15 places.per.class. so someone with a job can't go do thst job because someone is applying for a job the don't have yet? Whut?
Sorry miss employed person, you can't to earn your rent cause you must stay home whilst miss unemployed person has got your kids place so she can stay home.. whut?

That makes fuck all sense to me. But whatevs.

If it helps A vulnerable and needy child who is living in poverty or facing abuse it makes perfect sense. To my mind that trumps any other persons place at school. I am assuming that most employed people are currently working and home schooling, it's probably very hard but doable.

Solutions? Either there will be a part time rota for pupils and vulnerable children on social service lists go back fill time. So working parents get to work whilst their child is at school part of the week and the other part they do the best they can whilst working and home schooling, as they currently are now.

Or- if only reception, year 1 and year 6 are going back they divide classrooms up or use other classrooms and have them all in full time and everyone has a place.

I imagine lots of parents won't send them back so I don't think there will be a fight over places anyway.

Your logic doesn't work in my mind, but my mind is possibly faulty.

If a child is vulnerable, needy, in poverty, being abused etc. You're not really talking about generally unemployed peoples children, unless you're labelling all unemployed peoples kids as needy and vulnerable?
It sounds like you're referring to the 'Scrounger' stereo type, sending kids of 'scroungers' to school won't encourage them to find gainful employment.

Not all unemployed people and their kids are needy, vulnerable, poverty stricken, you know that right?
UC isn't much but it's enough for a relative standard of life.