Is anyone not sending their secondary school child back initially?

[lastkisstoo]

I've decided to keep my 15 year old home, probably until the October hols to see what happens.

We are in Scotland. What just happened in the pubs in Aberdeen is exactly what I see happening in schools. Mostly young adults, enclosed space, no social distancing.

My child has asthma, and while not on the list for sheltering I still feel is vulnerable enough that I don't want to see him being used as a guinea pig while the government assess just how big the uptick in cases will be on schools re-opening.

@Clavinova
My daughters school was the first to close in early March as a pupil returning from Italy tested positive. They had passed it to a staff member.

I will be sending my 2 secondary schoolers (15&12) back in September, they are desperate to go back.

@onlyreadingneverposting8 Can ask which one you've enrolled at please? Are they zoom or pre recorded lessons etc

250 person "bubbles" here too. That's not a bubble. It's just calling a year group a bubble. The word is meaningless when it applies to 250 people. Plus the teachers pop in and out of different bubbles throughout their working day. Which is the opposite of what a bubble is.

@CountessFrog

And yet the thread was started by somebody asking for others opinions....should we reply ‘none of your business?’

I took the title of the thread to be about looking for people in the same boat. Ie she’d made her choice and wanted to find others who had made the same choice.

@TheKarenWhoKnocks

250 person "bubbles" here too. That's not a bubble. It's just calling a year group a bubble. The word is meaningless when it applies to 250 people. Plus the teachers pop in and out of different bubbles throughout their working day. Which is the opposite of what a bubble is.

They’ve completely reinvented what they mean by bubble. It was about a single person joining one other household. Ie an extension of one to a family.

They’re misusing a word that was describing something quite low risk.

It feels like they’ve picked that word because we trusted it.

It’s not a bubble I agree, it’s a community.

@1940s

So 0.8% of 55,000 cases in UK hospitals were under the age of 19. This was prior to any measures in place. There are now some Measures (even if not as ideal as we would like to see) such as hand washing, limited activities both in and out of schools, sanitisers, perhaps masks at a guess? Smaller bubbles of children rather than the exact ways schools used to function. So the risk is now smaller than 0.8%. I am trying to keep perspective. Every time we fly, cross the roads, drive, pour a hot drink, we take a risk for our health. I don't think staying at home when this virus seems indefinite is a smart choice unless your immediate household or child has a very serious health condition.

I would completely agree if schools were allowed to do any of the things you suggest. There are no small bubbles in senior school, not enough washing facilities, no budget for hand sanitizer or extra soap or cleaning, masks are not allowed. No SD. I would agree that the risk would be balanced out by the benefit but the govt is ignoring the risks. Schools are the only place where there will be no Hands No Face And No Space.

To be frank I think online learning could be an option for secondary students. However,

1. The unions won't co-operate
2. Many D.C. don't have the space or equipment
3. Many D.C. won't do it, particularly the most disadvantaged

It is therefore vital that all DC return full time in September.

passthemustard
My daughter's school was the first to close in early March as a pupil returning from Italy tested positive.They had passed it to a staff member.

Resulting from a family holiday or a school trip?

Still arguing the point in May;
"Can children transmit the new coronavirus to other people?"
fullfact.org/health/covid-19-in-children/

@SpanishPork

To be frank I think online learning could be an option for secondary students. However,

1. The unions won't co-operate
2. Many D.C. don't have the space or equipment
3. Many D.C. won't do it, particularly the most disadvantaged

It is therefore vital that all DC return full time in September.

Not sure there is evidence the unions wouldn't agree.

The government have never asked! Because they'd have to face up to the inequalities of online etc.

@oldbagface we've chosen My Online Schooling. All live lessons with max of 20 per class. Lessons are recorded for the purposes of revision afterward if required or if one is missed. Attendance is monitored in the same way it is in a school.

It is therefore vital that all DC return full time in September

But if schools cannot stay open safely, is it better to have planned online learning (full or blended, depending on circumstances) or to have ad hoc mish mash?

It has very little to do with the children's safety. One of the only things we DO seem to know is that children have little or no symptoms and few even feel more than mildly unwell.. however in my eyes that is entirely irrelevant.

Children carry the virus asymptotically. That is a fact. Whilst the need for education is real, not being educated for a year is not a death sentence. There are options to extend schooling for a year. GCSES and Alevels at 16 and 18 are a government construct. It can be moved... and literally everyone they may kill by passing this on gets a much better chance at life.

At the current rates of increase we are literally being asked to choose between education for children or increased adult deaths.

There will be those who cry 'how will I work without kids at school. The plain fact is.. the virus cares not one shiny shit about wages, education or boredom. The only way to get on top of this is to lockdown. Properly. With fines and sanctions for those that don't do it . The pathetic half arsed attempt through March April May is why we have one of the highest death rates.

By all means come back in October and make me eat my words. I would be happy to do so. Sadly this won't be the case. Look at the R number and explain how this is NOT going to lead to a second spike right in the middle of flu season - then see if the NHS can cope !

I agree. IF we'd got the numbers down and IF the government had sat with the unions and worked out a blended learning plan and IF we'd all been wearing masks since march and IF there was even a nod - even a tiny fucking hint - towards how schools could be made covid secure, when every other indoor space has to be ... then this might be workable.

But none of that is happening. Schools haven't even got any clear guidance from the government at all, with less than a month to go. And, as you say, the numbers are rising.

I'd love to go back to normal too. I'm truly struggling in all sorts of ways and I want my bloody life back. I want my kids to have their lives back. But pretending things will just magically be ok, that doesn't make it so.

Also I think the carnage of being in a pandemic with the death toll double what it was in the spring- that will be terrible for children. As will seeing loved ones and teachers fall ill. Poor kids.

We need to do what we can to help them through this without being forced to keep going to school in the eye of the cyclone. We can set up as much of their education as we can online and keep it going.

I mean, have any of you seen any footage from schools in other parts of the world? You know where they take temperatures on the way in, sanitise hands on the way in, take off outdoor clothing on the way in, have markers in the classroom, wear masks, limit movement, limit numbers ... There is none of that even being talked about for schools here. The only nod we've got at our school is that the year groups are "staggered" going in and coming out at 5 minute intervals. Which is no more staggered than a group of 250 is a bubble. And they're all on the same bloody buses anyway.

Also I think the carnage of being in a pandemic with the death toll double what it was in the spring- that will be terrible for children. As will seeing loved ones and teachers fall ill. Poor kids.

It would be. No proof that it will happen. Most of the deaths to date were due to infections caused before there were any SD, hygiene, lockdown measures etc. Why would it be twice as bad when there are measures in place?

@SengaStrawberry

Also I think the carnage of being in a pandemic with the death toll double what it was in the spring- that will be terrible for children. As will seeing loved ones and teachers fall ill. Poor kids.

It would be. No proof that it will happen. Most of the deaths to date were due to infections caused before there were any SD, hygiene, lockdown measures etc. Why would it be twice as bad when there are measures in place?

Cases are rising now, in the UK and even in countries with much better public health systems like Germany.

There is never proof that something in the future will happen, so that's a silly remark. We make predictions, if we are clever. If we're fools we just hope it'll be ok.

The reason scientists are concerned it will be twice as bad over winter is because it will be winter.

@SpanishPork are you suggesting that the unions are behind year bubbles, no social distancing, no masks, no blended learning, return of the vulnerable. etc. Not protecting the interests of members would be perverse. OTOH government blaming the unions for their failure is par for the course.

The illogical language is telling - DC will not be 'forced' to wear masks in school. All hail freedom. But, they will be 'forced' to remove them at the school gate having been 'forced' to wear masks on the journey to school? If viral transmission is within households where time is spent with the same people, why not workplaces, why not schools? From the POV of transmission the rules make no sense.

Issues of space and equipment are practical problems easily overcome. Those with no space can be classed as vulnerable and able to attend closed schools or other venues could be used. There is no need for specialist equipment - bog standard equipment and broadband are fine. Those without can receive laptops and internet access. The scorn heaped upon JC pre-COVID about inequality of broadband access doesn't seem so silly and irrelevant now.

Your assertion that secondary aged DC somehow can't work from home in the context of online supported learning is just an assertion. They really can. They can even be more productive. Just like slightly older people can work from home and be more productive. Who knew?

I'm not saying the case is the same if you have younger DC. Being in two places at once is a 'problem' not effected by COVID.

Often with older DC, it is just an issue of parental confidence thinking that there is some magic involved in teaching and that you can't possibly do it even when you have the time or don't need to actively teach or supervise all the time and the resources are easily found. I do have to personally supervise and support and couldn't do it if it weren't for the vast amount of resources that are freely available online. This is just sharing best practice and school teachers do it too. Personally I find maths the hardest because I hit my limit long before DS2 (14) who already has a GCSE and is moving on to A level. Internet/home schooled BTW.

Lack of parental confidence is a real fear that is exacerbated by the threat of fines or being told that you have to deregister and take full responsibility with no support. DS2 is SEND - I have faced this.

It doesn't have to be black/white, either/or. In exceptional circumstances or exceptional times it is possible to find a way of supporting DC and their families and communities.

I really hope that force of numbers will mean that the concerns of a large minority will have greater effect than the concerns of a smaller minority. I also hope that the large minority will not have to become the majority for their concerns to be seriously addressed as it doesn't seem their is currently a plan B.

But disorganisedsecretsquirrel

Even if they passed on a virus, shall we just be clear that the virus kills people, not children.

Children are not killing people, or threatening to kill people. They should not be given the impression that their desire to live their lives and return to school amounts to murder.

@CountessFrog

But disorganisedsecretsquirrel

Even if they passed on a virus, shall we just be clear that the virus kills people, not children.

Children are not killing people, or threatening to kill people. They should not be given the impression that their desire to live their lives and return to school amounts to murder.

No, but I believe children are actually not going to be all that grateful to have been put through a very unpleasant winter with high death rates.

I think people need to stop trading off school for deaths. We should be able to manage this.

My kids most certainly would rather work in their bedroom and see a lower national death rate, and lower levels of covid generally.

But the modelling was based on the R rate getting to a certain number. There was also modelling showing a much lower number of deaths if the R number could be kept lower. As people keep saying on here “the virus is going to do what it’s going to do” and sadly that is “kill some people” no matter what we do. We can’t keep society shut down forever to stop it or there will be no society to come back to when everything opens.

@CountessFrog

But disorganisedsecretsquirrel

Even if they passed on a virus, shall we just be clear that the virus kills people, not children.

Children are not killing people, or threatening to kill people. They should not be given the impression that their desire to live their lives and return to school amounts to murder.

Exactly. The virus is here to stay. We can take sensible measures to keep levels low and accept we have to live with it but that people will still die or can somehow pretend that we can stop every single person getting it or dying. Nice as the latter would be, it’s just not realistic.

Yes the modelling was based on doing x, or y,
or z, because we have choices.

I do not accept 'the virus is going to do what it is going to do' - that is scientifically illiterate.

Opening schools without social distancing will result in more deaths than opening schools with social distancing. I am not ok with that choice and my children don't want that either.

Am I really to send my kids in and when they say 'won't covid spread?' should I say 'yes, but only some old people will die so you just focus on yourself'????

Even if they passed on a virus, shall we just be clear that the virus kills people, not children.

^ This is just nonsense. ANYONE who passes on the virus to someone who subsequently dies 'kills' them. At no point have I suggested 'intent' . The persons action killed the recipient. Most of the time they will do it unknowingly and unwittingly. Especially in the case of children.

It doesn't make the susceptible person any less dead !

Adults are more negligent because everyone now knows what they need to do to stop it - but many don't bother ' because they are bored of it'

We can stop everyone dying.

However we can get at least some of the clinically vulnerable out of the scrum of the going back to school infections and

a)prevent some unnecessary deaths

b) allow better social distancing

c) give the exhausted NHS more of a breathing space before the autumn surge

d) prevent a rerun of the care home type scenario when the vulnerable are needlessly exposed to a high risk situation and then after the fact everyone thinks ¨oh how obvious and terrible,we shouldn´t have done that.¨

But the people who are dead of course remain dead no matter how many inquiries the politicians may or may not hold.