Two households only indoors - do people even know about this?

[JeanBodel]

We recently had to cancel a holiday planned for three families in a cottage, because of the two-household rule. I am surprised to find that hardly any (none?) of DH's family have even heard of this rule, and are holidaying and partying with multiple households at a time.

I thought everyone knew about the max-two-households indoors rule. Possibly people are assuming the restrictions have eased by now?

(Whether the rule is right or wrong is a whole other debate. It is hard to understand the government's relative assessments of risk. But in my profession I am supposed to obey government guidelines. Like MPs [hollow laugh] )

@Bol87

Two households of any size can meet in a garden (well unless there are more than 30). So the family you mention can have one other family over, even if that exceeds 6. It's only if you are mixing more than 2 households that the 6 limit applies.

I'm not very sociable and don't have an extended family, so I haven't needed to know this, but I have found it difficult to keep track of what we are supposed to do. I don't think the rules are well-publicised except on public transport where there are lots of posters and announcements.

Of course some people couldn't care less about the rules (my neighbour who continued having big parties through lockdown and beyond), but others are probably just unaware and weary of keeping up with what they're meant to be doing.

It doesn't help that a lot of it seems so random e.g. it's okay for 31 households to mix in a classroom without wearing masks, but not to have more than 2 households in a private home; sometimes I need to be 2 metres (or is it one?) apart from others, but I can sit 2 inches from a stranger on a crowded tube train, even though buses are limited to 30 (I think?).

I appreciate that evidence is limited, and sometimes compromises have to be made because the benefits outweigh the risks (I think this is the case for schools reopening). But it feels like we have a lot of different rules for things that are basically the same problem i.e. how we behave with other people indoors in a way that reduces the spread of Covid. I think it's no wonder people are confused or choose to ignore the rules when they are so unclear.

Guidelines can't be enforced. I'm aware of it, but I know many aren't. Most people I knwo are sticking to the guidelines. We are, but then DD teaches so it's all a bit of a nonsense really!

I’ve found both the rules and guidelines convoluted and exasperating. Currently following common sense instead.

Most people I know aren't sticking to it but trying to be sensible where they can

@Badbadbunny

For example 'If I can mix with family A indoors and family B indoors, on the same day, what difference does it make if we're all together?'

A massive difference. If family A have it and are infectious, you may get it when you meet them in the morning, but due to the incubation period, you won't pass it to family B in the afternoon. If you are together with family A and B at the same time, A will pass it to both you and family B. See the difference?

Well yes I see the difference, but I don't think everybody does, because it isn't often clearly explained. My point in any case with that was if families A and B are frequently mixing indoors with each other (permitted), and with 'family 0' (he person having made the assumption), then there is I would imagine a level of acceptance that if anyone in family A or B have it, then all 3 families are likely to be at risk of contracting, irrespective of being in the same house at the same time.

Yes I did. 2 households indoors (including around a table in a restaurant/pub), 6 people from multiple house holds allowed outside. You can have up to 30 people outside if they are exclusively from 2 households (would love to see the size of those houses!)

I'm not sure if people don't know or are deliberately ignoring the guidance. My Facebook feed is full of leaving dos (socially distanced tables people are at pain to say but large groups of single people from different households 🤔) and people asking what halls they can book kids parties at, people advertising stuff for sleepover parties. Thought I was the one going mad, maybe I am!

I genuinely think a lot of people don't know.
I am in a friendship group of 3, so 2 of us would never meet up without the other. We've met for tea twice together now and are booked to do so again later this week.
Until about a week and a half ago I genuinely didn't realise this was against the rules (and we've been really good at following them).
Now I'm not sure what to do but I must admit it does seem nonsensical that we can't meet for tea but we can sit in the office together (along with more people!). I just don't understand the logic in that - there's no magical forcefield around our workplace.

www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-54056771
A useful graphic in this BBC news article today summarising each of the UK nation's rules.

@MaryShelley1818

I genuinely think a lot of people don't know. I am in a friendship group of 3, so 2 of us would never meet up without the other. We've met for tea twice together now and are booked to do so again later this week. Until about a week and a half ago I genuinely didn't realise this was against the rules (and we've been really good at following them). Now I'm not sure what to do but I must admit it does seem nonsensical that we can't meet for tea but we can sit in the office together (along with more people!). I just don't understand the logic in that - there's no magical forcefield around our workplace.

You should be socially distanced or have other precautions in your workplace.

Also, workplaces are essential, i.e. to raise taxes to pay for public services etc., and to provide people with services/goods they need. That's very different from socialising which isn't essential.

I think people bend the rules to fit their situation.
We have a family member whose partner is sort-of shielding (?!) so she is adamant that we can't sit inside when I visit with my son or daughter, we sit outside in the wettest or windiest weather.

However, same family member went on a cottage holiday joining both their own adult sons plus girlfriends (ie. multiple households, all from different parts of the country) for 10 days, apparently that was OK.

Apparently her own family is "family" but the fact that I'm family too doesn't count !!!

@emmathedilemma

www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-54056771 A useful graphic in this BBC news article today summarising each of the UK nation's rules.

They’re wrong about NI. We moved back from 10 people from 4 households indoors to 6 people from 2 households a couple of weeks ago. According to NI direct website this is still the guidelines.

I understand the difference between work which is essential (I'm a Keyworker) and socialising which isn't, however my point is that the virus doesn't know the difference.

I'm in a Children's Safeguarding team and we are still working in people's homes, with no PPE. (I am currently exempt for HV due to pregnancy but do still work in schools and my colleagues are in and out of homes all day).
The rules make no sense in many circumstances which I expect is why they're only guidelines. It's expected people will use their own common sense.
I understand though there is clearly going to be a fine line and where the general public are left to make their own choice this often leads to further problems.

I’m not sure that many people are following these strictly but it’s a poor show if the BBC news can’t get it right.

In Ireland, it is a max of 6 people indoors from no more than 3 households for social reasons.

Or 6 participants in a class/gym session etc but no specific limit on how many households that can cover.

So all as clear as mud....

We're just not socialising at all. I'm sure we will see people again soon, within guidelines.

Yes I did. It's also 2 households indoors WITH social distancing (support bubble count as one household) which is the bit which seems to get forgotten.

@halcyondays

I’m not sure that many people are following these strictly but it’s a poor show if the BBC news can’t get it right.

BBC news have been getting it wrong right from the start. They appear completely incapable of reading the Gov.uk website for the actual rules, laws, guidance, etc. They got the "essential workers only" wrong causing huge numbers of workplaces to close unnecessarily. Likewise they also got it wrong with "essential workers only" workers only on public transport which causes buses and trains to run virtually empty for the first few weeks. They completely failed to check what the law/guidance actually said and seemed to make up their own interpretation which they then presented as "fact" to the general public.

@MaryShelley1818

I understand the difference between work which is essential (I'm a Keyworker) and socialising which isn't, however my point is that the virus doesn't know the difference. I'm in a Children's Safeguarding team and we are still working in people's homes, with no PPE. (I am currently exempt for HV due to pregnancy but do still work in schools and my colleagues are in and out of homes all day). The rules make no sense in many circumstances which I expect is why they're only guidelines. It's expected people will use their own common sense. I understand though there is clearly going to be a fine line and where the general public are left to make their own choice this often leads to further problems.

Risks need to be taken when it comes to what is essential. Nothing is 100% covid safe. But the risks of not doing essential work has to be weighed against the risks of catching covid.

Having a party for the fun of it is completely different.

I agree, never had a party, wouldn't attend one and don't plan on it.
Have been to no indoor activities/events and have stuck to guidance rigidly until I unknowingly didn't in this circumstance. I don't believe I'm wrong though to think through things logically and assess my risk (to myself and others) and I still don't believe there is any difference whatsoever in eating lunch together at work to eating tea together after work with the exact same 2 people.
If it was actually against the law then I wouldn't contemplate it though.

It's seems confusing now that community centre activities have started up again.

A music group I play in is beginning to plan its return for 30-40 members and the church we rehearse in had 78 people at its Sunday service yesterday .

6 people meeting from 3 households looks 'safer' in comparison (but it may not be if it's in a poorly ventilated, crowded lounge and nobody social distances.)

@Baaaahhhhh

It's not complicated, you can look it up really easily, and yes, everyone I know is sticking to the rules, including my teens and twenties DD's.

I bet you my savings, your teens and 20s are not complying 100%. Unless you have the most perfect kids of course

@MaryShelley1818

I agree, never had a party, wouldn't attend one and don't plan on it. Have been to no indoor activities/events and have stuck to guidance rigidly until I unknowingly didn't in this circumstance. I don't believe I'm wrong though to think through things logically and assess my risk (to myself and others) and I still don't believe there is any difference whatsoever in eating lunch together at work to eating tea together after work with the exact same 2 people. If it was actually against the law then I wouldn't contemplate it though.

I think this is actually a really important point. People have begun to realise that the 'rules' are not about safe vs not safe. They're about a range of equally safe/unsafe activities, some of which are deemed to be approved based on their value to society (the economy) and some not. It's no surprise that people are beginning to choose to make their own decisions about that, based on either their own risk assessment, the reason they think they have for breaking the rule, or in some cases simply preference.

My teen has actually kept in touch with people via SM and facetimes, class chats etc when school was remote (they had a lot of remote lessons via GoogleMeets and often the teachers might be late but set up the session so the girls would have a chance to just chat themselves).

She has gone to sports training (organised), and walked to the local shops to do messages for us (mask in hand), but has not looked to go out and meet friends in person on a more social level. Because they were going back to school, she'd been meeting various groups through various sports, and she didn't want to go to the local major shopping centre which she had seen for herself was uncomfortably crowded (when getting back to school stuff).

But she's gone bounding back into school and meeting the school friends there really happily.

I bet you my savings, your teens and 20s are not complying 100%. Unless you have the most perfect kids of course

I need to get in on this

Do all 3 of my children have to be complying 100% or can i win if just one is??