Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Flip

1 2 ··· 9 10 11 ··· 24 25

Original poster

Would you be willing to be put under house arrest in order to save lives?

624 replies

Treesofwood · 19/08/2020 23:50

Just that really. Would you be willing to go to prison to save lives? Would you be willing to give up your children's right to an education to save lives? This whole situation brings up many philosophical questions for me, and my theoretical response is not actually the sane as my response when faced with the reality.

OP posts:

tobee · 20/08/2020 19:32

No I don't want louder sympathy. But maybe it would be nice if people could hold back the blame?

chickenyhead · 20/08/2020 19:32

well as far as I can see, nobody WANTS a lockdown, nobody WANTS schools closed. Nobody WANTS a pandemic.

What vulnerable people want, is to know that if they do start dying off in droves again, people might eventually be willing to accept REASONABLE adjustments, like masks (where not exempt) in enclosed spaces, to protect their children etc as much as possible.

Parents of vulnerable children want the world to carry on in the safest reasonable way. Not for people to be locked down.

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 19:37

@tobee I am sympathetic to the shielded and was happy to spend a limited amount of time putting my life on hold to protect them. I am still sympathetic to you but I won't do this anymore. We can't all carry on putting our lives on hold - you now need to take responsibility for your own health and continue to do what you need to do. The rest of us need to get on with life financially and mentally. I understand this may seem unfair but that's the way it is and the well being of my family is the most important thing

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 19:42

We are all wearing masks in crowded places and I will do anything that allows my to live my life without disrupting it - but my kids are going back to school, I am going back to work and we are all going to see our friends. So yes, I will take precautions where need be but I am not putting my life on hold anymore - you can carry on shielding to protect yourself but that doesn't mean the whole of the U.K. can't go back to living our lives in the fullest way possible

AlexisCarringtonColbyDexter · 20/08/2020 19:43

Those of you that feel this way, what do you actually want to hear people say? Do you want everyone still to be on lockdown, do you just want louder sympathy, what is it

Its ironic isnt it? Apparently, those who want to go back to work to, you know, keep their houses above their heads and feed their children are "selfish". Yet, some people shielding want us ALL to lock down for possibly years so they dont feel quite so isolated and alone. I'd say that was the height of selfishness personally.....

askmehowiknow · 20/08/2020 19:47

The only way to protect the (previously) shielded group is for them to stay home. Sad but true.

All other measures are designed not to protect individuals. But to suppress community transmission and protect the NHS.

Hearhoovesthinkzebras · 20/08/2020 19:49

[quote whereorwhere]@tobee I am sympathetic to the shielded and was happy to spend a limited amount of time putting my life on hold to protect them. I am still sympathetic to you but I won't do this anymore. We can't all carry on putting our lives on hold - you now need to take responsibility for your own health and continue to do what you need to do. The rest of us need to get on with life financially and mentally. I understand this may seem unfair but that's the way it is and the well being of my family is the most important thing[/quote]
Sorry, no one put their lives on hold to protect the shielded. The shielded protected themselves (,well, in truth we shut ourselves away to ensure that hospital beds were kept free for everyone else). You put your life on hold to prevent the NHS from being overwhelmed so that if you needed it the hospital had capacity. Nothing that you did protected anyone shielding.

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 19:50

I agree with this @Alexis - it's almost as though they are saying we have to shield so you have to be locked down too or it's not fair. There is nothing to stop the shielded from carrying in shielding and the rest of us aren't going to put our lives on hold just to make others feel like they are not being left out

Hearhoovesthinkzebras · 20/08/2020 19:51

Gosh, the cup of human kindness runneth over on this thread

chickenyhead · 20/08/2020 19:52

Children are no longer allowed to shield.

It doesn't matter, clearly. But this thread has been useful for vulnerable people who need to know their position in society.

So thank you all.

WouldBeGood · 20/08/2020 19:52

So, @Hearhoovesthinkzebras I may as well just get on with things then!

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 19:52

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras sorry that's bollocks. If the NHS has been overwhelmed the shielded category would have been the ones without beds because decisions would have been made to care for the most likely to survive. We stayed in so that the vulnerable could get the medical help they needed. This was fine. The fact is now we know that most of us won't get it and if we do we will be fine. The NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed so it's no longer an issue to get back to normal

DarkHelmet · 20/08/2020 19:53

No. As far as I'm concerned I've done my part in 'helping' the nation and now I need to start concentrating on me and mine again.

BikeTyson · 20/08/2020 19:54

Nothing that you did protected anyone shielding.

In that case it will make no difference to anyone shielding what we do now then

chickenyhead · 20/08/2020 19:59

there were 2 categories, highly vulnerable, who shielded and vulnerable, who didn't shield and made up most of the dead.

Just a fact that I thought people knew.

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 20:01

If you are worried about the fact you are vulnerable you can make a personal decision to shield.

chickenyhead · 20/08/2020 20:02

Again vulnerable children cannot.

I am not equipped to home school.

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 20:03

Neither am I - but are you implying I should just because you have to? I don't know what you are expecting us to do?

chickenyhead · 20/08/2020 20:04

No i have answered above very clearly

Hearhoovesthinkzebras · 20/08/2020 20:04

[quote whereorwhere]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras sorry that's bollocks. If the NHS has been overwhelmed the shielded category would have been the ones without beds because decisions would have been made to care for the most likely to survive. We stayed in so that the vulnerable could get the medical help they needed. This was fine. The fact is now we know that most of us won't get it and if we do we will be fine. The NHS isn't going to be overwhelmed so it's no longer an issue to get back to normal [/quote]
The vulnerable aren't the shielded so if anyone is talking bollocks it's the person who doesn't understand the difference between the shielded and the vulnerable.

Who says the shielded wouldn't get a hospital or ITU bed? When was that announced?

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 20:05

It was clear at the time, as in Italy, that should the NHS be overwhelmed hard decisions would have to be made. That would mean choosing whose life was most likely to be saved. You know this

whereorwhere · 20/08/2020 20:07

@chicken I don't think you did. You said people should wear masks in enclosed spaces. We are. What more do you want?

Hearhoovesthinkzebras · 20/08/2020 20:07

@whereorwhere

It was clear at the time, as in Italy, that should the NHS be overwhelmed hard decisions would have to be made. That would mean choosing whose life was most likely to be saved. You know this

Italy refused ventilation for the over 60s. Do you have proof that they refused any hospital care to the people who were shielded in the UK? Do you have proof that the NHS would have done the same?

chickenyhead · 20/08/2020 20:07

schools aren't

RaspberryRuff · 20/08/2020 20:07

Nothing that you did protected anyone shielding.

Except it did, because the virus being suppressed to low levels has meant that shielding has been paused.

PMSL at the notion the shielded stayed at home for 4 months to ensure there were beds for everyone else. Like anyone’s that altruistic.

Flip

1 2 ··· 9 10 11 ··· 24 25