Isn't it glaringly obvious that the biggest risk with reopening schools is to the parents?

[ScammedOrWhat]

I'm astounded and angry that the government's messaging around schools reopening has been deliberately spun to avoid mentioning that the biggest risk is surely that kids are going to spread it to their parents.

Chris Whitty's statement avoided saying this, but if you read between the lines it is clear. He DID NOT say reopening schools was "safe" as reported by the media. He said that the risk to children's health from catching Coronavirus at school was outweighed by the bigger risks to their wellbeing in not going to school.

The further reports today that children are at low risk from dying or becoming seriously ill also support that. But what they're NOT saying is that there is absolutely nothing to say children won't carry the virus home.

Children's parents and grandparents are at considerably increased risk once schools reopen.

I'm furious with the government for not being upfront about this. The messaging should be: - yes children need to go back to school, but parents need to be aware that they are more likely to be exposed and dial back their social mixing accordingly.

Children should be taught vigilance and good social distancing and hygiene principles. They should be taught what symptoms to look out for in themselves and their friends, and to report them immediately for rapid testing.

They could have spent the summer pushing these messages out while investing in santization equipment- extra sinks outside, hand santitizer stations, free mask provision etc for schools. So the message should be - your child is probably safe from getting ill but you the parents are not.

I think people forget that if the NHS gets overwhelmed, then our children are at risk. Not from Coronavirus, but from delayed treatment for the other things children need to go to hospital for. My son gets viral asthma and I'm not too worried about him getting Coronavirus per se, but I am worried about there not being an ambulance available if he needs it. So, although he and all children desperately need to go back to school, the potential spread from schools back to the community is concerning.

We are living with my 81 year old DM, I am over 50 & while not in the clinically vulnerable group, I am suffering from a neurological condition as well as several autoimmune conditions. I am worried sick that DS will bring Covid home from school.

Yes, but they seem to be hoping that if they repeat “the risk to children is tiny” often enough and loudly enough we’ll all forget that parents and teachers exist. Of course siblings and buses to school don’t exist either, so we can pretend that bubbles are actually a thing.

@Nat6999

We are living with my 81 year old DM, I am over 50 & while not in the clinically vulnerable group, I am suffering from a neurological condition as well as several autoimmune conditions. I am worried sick that DS will bring Covid home from school.

Could you speak to the head to voice your concerns and request a temporary home school extension?

For those talking about wider society has to do its part as well.

There are plenty of parents not doing their part either.

It needs to be everyone.

Completely agree op.

Too many people think that it is all over and social distancing is a thing of the past because the numbers are so "low", schools are "safe" and its "safe" to go back to work.

Oh and its telling that the lady in charge of getting the public back to work, is herself only going back to the office for two days from September and admits that the majority of her staff won't be back in until at least Xmas. If everywhere is so safe why is that?

And obviously schools are a different kettle of fish entirely to a socially distanced office.

Society today is so intricately woven that it doesn't matter what measures the government implements to try to mitigate the risk, there will always be something, somewhere that is negatively impacted by those measures. Sadly, there is no overarching solution other than for everyone to be wary of their own actions.

Oh and its telling that the lady in charge of getting the public back to work, is herself only going back to the office for two days from September and admits that the majority of her staff won't be back in until at least Xmas. If everywhere is so safe why is that

Have you considered that maybe this is being done to actually help the return to schools. By keeping people working at home they are limiting the mixing those adults will be doing with others which in turn will result in it being less likely that children will be bringing the virus into schools from their families (caught in the workplace) in the first place and spreading it to other children to then take home to their families.

Maybe the only reason those measures are being taken is to mitigate the fear that has been instilled in the public (which is apparent from your post) rather than because they genuinely believe it is too dangerous to be in the workplace. The government are between a rock and a hard place - send everyone back in the office and the public kicks off about potentially spreading the virus and hampering school return OR keep people working from home to prevent the supposed wider spread thus enabling children to return and the public kicks off that this demonstrates its far too dangerous to be back at school!

@YouSetTheTone

Yes it’s glaringly obvious! You’d have to be a bit dim not to make that connection after six months of daily reporting and information dissemination on a global pandemic. The government’s job is to make it happen. Our job is to weigh up what we know and proceed as we wish.

But it’s a risk I’m prepared to take. What’s the alternative? Continued mass disruption to our children’s social and educational development? Continued mass disruption to the economy? The economy and lives go together- there have been many discussions about this fact. On an individual level if you are unhappy with that risk then you should make your own decisions. But on a society level the current return to school has to be majority plan.

I totally appreciate that for many people the situation is complicated for various reasons but the country cannot cater for everyone (ie close down schools so there’s no possible transmission to parents/ grandparents/ teachers). It just can’t. If it does it shuts down parts of the economy, compromises the future for our children and their education and where does that leave us all? Vulnerable people need a flourishing economy/ society so there are provisions to support them.

I’m not sure why you think the government needs to have pushed a message that it’s ok for kids but the risk is to parents. What does that serve? As you say it’s obvious so why do they need to?

It's fine if you want to take that risk, but for many parents (especially the vulnerable ones) it's not so simple, as you've stated.

The government at the moment refuses to address us, so how do you expect schools will address us? We've been threatened with fines and off rolling, but it'd be great if they openly supported more flexibility for families like mine.

I actually have no problem with your kids going to school, there are many parents who don't need to be so worried about COVID. But I neef to know how I'm supposed to handle my own 4 year old starting school (and being deathly afraid of every lurgie he catches), while I juggle my 8 month old and an extremely vulnerable husband (who is wfh full time and scared for his life).

Flexibility. That's all I am asking for, and DS' school is not openly willing to give it.

Jaydot, I’d have no hesitation in home schooling in those circumstances. Not worth the worry or risk.

[quote latticechaos]It’s not so simple as saying “ Economy first Stuff us and our health” because the long term effect of a poor economy on our health is immeasurable.

Worth noting the All Party Parliamentary Group concluded it is not economy or health, but economy and health - and tackling covid properly is the best way to get the economy up and running again.

appgcoronavirus.marchforchange.uk/appg_details

inews.co.uk/news/uk/coronavirus-uk-zero-covid-strategy-explained-569802[/quote]
Absolutely, it is a pandemic with exponential growth in the right circumstances. We need to have virus numbers down in order for the economy to function, and better working from home than not at all.

not an office worker working from home

@pennylane83

Oh and its telling that the lady in charge of getting the public back to work, is herself only going back to the office for two days from September and admits that the majority of her staff won't be back in until at least Xmas. If everywhere is so safe why is that

Have you considered that maybe this is being done to actually help the return to schools. By keeping people working at home they are limiting the mixing those adults will be doing with others which in turn will result in it being less likely that children will be bringing the virus into schools from their families (caught in the workplace) in the first place and spreading it to other children to then take home to their families.

Maybe the only reason those measures are being taken is to mitigate the fear that has been instilled in the public (which is apparent from your post) rather than because they genuinely believe it is too dangerous to be in the workplace. The government are between a rock and a hard place - send everyone back in the office and the public kicks off about potentially spreading the virus and hampering school return OR keep people working from home to prevent the supposed wider spread thus enabling children to return and the public kicks off that this demonstrates its far too dangerous to be back at school!

Oh I agree that it's sensible to work from home. If we are going to keep schools open then we do have to be sensible everywhere else BUT her role is to actually promote the getting back to work message which is a direct contradiction to what she and her staff are doing. Hypocrisy.

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss it's looking that way. My husband is growing more anxious by the day. Made worse by people around us making us feel as if we are overreacting and fretting over nothing.

School were trying to be understanding, but we're also very wishy washy. We'll get an answer next week when school opens. Can I blame them for not really knowing how to handle DS when vulnerable parents have only been mentioned in one paragraph of the guidance?

[quote JayDot500]@IceCreamAndCandyfloss it's looking that way. My husband is growing more anxious by the day. Made worse by people around us making us feel as if we are overreacting and fretting over nothing.

School were trying to be understanding, but we're also very wishy washy. We'll get an answer next week when school opens. Can I blame them for not really knowing how to handle DS when vulnerable parents have only been mentioned in one paragraph of the guidance?[/quote]
Ah I haven't found that yet, what does it say please?

OP what do you suggest? Children don't go to school??

@Remmy123

OP what do you suggest? Children don't go to school??

No, the op hasn't suggested that, in the op that said The messaging should be: - yes children need to go back to school, but parents need to be aware that they are more likely to be exposed and dial back their social mixing accordingly.

This is such a lazy response, intended to shut down any discussion.

@Remmy123

OP what do you suggest? Children don't go to school??

I suggest you read my actual posts.

@herecomesthsun

Basically, reassure the parents but offer feck all else

But isn't that obvious??

@latticechaos

@Remmy123

But isn't that obvious??

Isn't what obvious? Your post are a bit combative, what do you want me to say?

No one said schools shouldn't be open.

@Remmy123

But isn't that obvious??

Isn't what obvious?

You asked me what I suggest, and asked whether I'm suggesting that children don't go back to school.

I've made lots of suggestions. None of which were that children don't go back to school.

The only obvious thing here is that you've read the title of my OP and none of what I actually wrote.

@JayDot500

Funny how much that fails to reassure

@Mintjulia

Parents of school age children are rarely over 65 so not, as a group, at much increased risk. I know a few will be - my ds's df is mid 60s - but a low percentage.

They generally drop dcs off outside so little increased risk of parent to parent contact.

The biggest risk seems to be to staff with health conditions, and to the few older parents, and any elderly relatives doing school run.

328,000 households have CEV people living with children aged under 16 years.

That's a significant number that need due consideration.