I think the children of this generation...

[TheDailyCarbuncle]

Will, in future years, legitimately ask us why we let them down so badly. Why we allowed them/their peers to be left at home for months with abusive/neglectful/drug addicted/alcoholic parents, with no outside contact, no adult help, relief or respite whatsoever. Why some of those children disappeared, never to be seen again, or were so badly hurt as to have years and years of horrendous struggle ahead of them.

It's only now beginning to be talked about, months too late: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52876226

When everyone is talking about 'protecting' children, where is their concern for those children for whom home is a dangerous place? For whom school is their only sanctuary?

@Lavenderblues

Is it really the School's job though?

Is what really the school's job? Regardless of whether it's their job or not, children going to school every day means that they get out of the house and they see other people, every weekday during termtime. If they don't turn up, someone rings their house to see where they are. If they persistently don't turn up, someone goes around to check on them. All of those things mean that children are coming in contact with others regularly, others who can provide support, a listening ear or just a chance to get a break. It doesn't matter if it's 'their job' or not, they do it just by being there. The fact that a lot of children are totally cut off from that is dangerous IMO.

@notthatdr

Completely agree with you. All children need to experience normality. The good and the bad bits. But normality includes socialisation.

I am really glad so many people are now aware of how much schools do for vulnerable children and how much they are doing on no budget at all. Perhaps now people are galvinised and rightly indignant that children should fall through the net to such an extent that the schools pick up the pieces, they will lobby their mp to ask for more funding to schools, family workers, social workers, health visitors, child centres, sure start and all the things that used to prevent us being the last safety net. Maybe even vote thinking about that next time. I would hate to think that all this outrage just dissipates once children are back at school.

@Floatyboat

If as a child I could have spent 5 months indoors for an extra 15/20 yrs with my grandparents I would.

That just shows you have not even a basic grasp of the facts. Older people don't have a near certain chance of death if children are allowed to live their normal lives. Peoples chance of dying in the next year roughly doubles if they catch it. Resorting to exaggeration highlights how weak your argument is.

You're of course right, but I wonder if MNHQ will come along and delete your post as they did mine from last night?

The lockdown has possibly extended the lives of the vulnerable/elderly by a month or two. This is what we've traded half a trillion pounds for in the UK, along with a population under lockdown and all that entails.

The composite person 'saved' by lockdown will not go on to live another 15 or 20 years.

I would totally agree with you @phlebasconsidered but sadly I think it's too late. Realistically there will be further brutal cuts to these services. One of the reasons imho we need to get people back to work is we need taxes coming in.

@marginalgain

It would be interesting to calculate the actual gain of lock down in terms of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY). It may well turn out to be more expensive than anything NICE would fund.

NICE recommend funding rather.

My main concern is all the newborn babies the health visutors can't weigh and check on 😪

@Floatyboat I have thought exactly the same regarding NICE. Especially when everyone was shouting about rationing healthcare at the start...

[quote Floatyboat]@marginalgain

It would be interesting to calculate the actual gain of lock down in terms of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY). It may well turn out to be more expensive than anything NICE would fund.[/quote]
There was enormous hysteria surrounding the prospect of 'rationing', followed by a perverse inversion of realities where no amount of money is too much to spend on too little.

We urgently need some political leadership to rescue us from this new normal, but we'll be a long time waiting.

@Floatyboat

No I have a perfectly fine grasp of the facts thankyou very much

Firstly I didnt say it was a garuntee, its not. My post was in reply to 'children will get over the deaths of their grandparents'. By a poster who was continuously exaggerating

The general risk of death is double that of a 'normal' year. This means that if the virus is allowed free rain there will be double the number of deaths i.e. an extra 600000 deaths. Potentially a lot more if people who are hospitalized and normally survive cannot access a hospital bed.

There is still a lot of unkowns about the virus, if we can be vaccinated, if we can get immunity. We dont know whether children can spread it

Of course children need socialisation, no one has said they are fine without but it is a temporary interuption to their life. Which actually happens to lots of children

I agree that more to be done for abused kids and some of them will grow to have questions, but most of the kids that will ask those questions were likely already asking it before lockdown happened. I think there are far enough questions when there are tons of eyes who see shite that do absolutely nothing of use for various reasons.

Kids disappeared even when schools were open, to care for addicted parents, younger siblings, having been forced onto the streets. Enforcing legal parental care for a young teenager is practically impossible in some places before getting into issues for younger children stuck in those positions who fall through the net. In some areas, I know there is far more direct involvement now from social services, charities, and other resources than there were previously, in others it's a mess. There will never be a perfect system and there isn't really a reason to ignore that the kids this is most shite for, it was likely already shite. For many kids, both home and schools suck, just in different ways.

No I have a perfectly fine grasp of the facts thankyou very much

@UncleFoster

I'm glad to hear that. Please explain where the 15/20 year claim from. Because if that's true then I have no grasp on the data at all.

@UncleFoster

What makes you think every one will catch it? I've not seen anything credible suggest that.

“If as a child I could have spent 5 months indoors for an extra 15/20 yrs with my grandparents I would.“

This is exactly what I mean by people not accepting that the elderly die. It’s not saving 20 years. Most people dying are over 90. Not many people live to 110 do they. And the lockdown is actively reducing the amount of time kids get with their grandparents. It’s crazy.

And I’m not sure it’s good for the elderly either. My GGF is 85 he is in poor health. His life expectancy is not more than a year or two at best and I would imagine less. So he’s going to die soon, covid or non covid yet due to lockdown he will likely die without seeing his GGd for months and she being three won’t really remember him if she doesn't see him for months either. There is an awful lot more to life than just not being dead. Who wants to live without what makes us human - touch, companionship etc,

There is an argument of course for shielding the relatively young and healthy who might see their life expectancy reduced by lots if they get covid but to stop all death is impossible. The average life expectancy of someone in a nursing home is under a year, so shielding them from visitors for months means that many will die without family covid or non covid.

I’m not saying that coronavirus is just seasons flu, it’s a novel virus but lockdown should have been about preventing health system overwhelm and so a spike in all cause mortality imo. And we didn’t even manage that, overwhelm was stopped but people were so scared to go to hospital that all cause mortality also rose.

I don’t see how any groups, young or elderly are helped by how things are at the moment and then to add a massive economic depression on top, well we are then truly screwing over the younger generations to buy on average a few lonely month of extra life for the eldest

Saw my 94 year old great aunt today. Ex head mistress of a primary school.
She started crying because she’s so upset that the children are not at school because of risk to her and her peer group. A group that is at risk of so much but accept its part of growing old.
She said two friends (82 and 89) also felt exactly the same.

Oh and I brought my two children with her. 10 and 7.
It would have had a truly horrendous impact on her mental health if I hadn’t.

@Nonotthatdr - I completely agree. This article is fantastic on the risks www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52758024