Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

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

Original poster

So a family of 6 can't have any visitors to their home?

195 replies

covidconfusion · 10/09/2020 11:42

"From Monday 14 September, when meeting friends and family you do not live with you must not meet in a group of more than 6, indoors or outdoors"

Does this mean a family of 6 cannot have any visitors to their home?

Source: www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-meeting-with-others-safely-social-distancing/coronavirus-covid-19-meeting-with-others-safely-social-distancing

On a related note, I really think the government need to improve the clarity of their communication. I don't usually struggle with reading comprehension but I find the guidelines so hard to follow and I know I'm not the only one. Usually I would use my common sense but the guidelines do not follow common sense. If the guidelines are saying what I think they are saying, it means a family of 6 cannot have any visitors but a single person household can have 5 visitors from 5 different households? Really? You have to laugh.

OP posts:
notevenat20 · 10/09/2020 13:58

So you can have 4 visitors on your property if your children are upstairs as long as the visitors don't go upstairs.

You would need a lawyer I think as this seems an optimistic interpretation.

notevenat20 · 10/09/2020 13:59

But would she count as “single” under their definition? As far as I understood it as she lives with her 2DC she is not classed as single. She lives with 2 other people. I might be wrong but they mean ‘single’ as in ‘alone in the property’ rather than ‘Single-romantically unattached’.

Yes that's exactly right.

IHateCoronavirus · 10/09/2020 13:59

My phone is going crazy! That was to lyralalala and her sil.

LolaLollypop · 10/09/2020 14:01

I’m following the rules with a bit of common sense attached at the same time. Me, DH and our two kids (3yrs and 6 months) will still go and visit my parents & brother even though that makes us 7. Like a pp said, it’s ridiculous my toddler can run around soft play and I can go to a pub with 100 other people but we can’t meet up as a family. Besides, the baby only counts as 0.5 of a person anyway surely Grin

nextplateau · 10/09/2020 14:01

So can you have 3 people round at 11am and three different people round at 6pm?

Does the virus know the time? It can count so it must be very clever.

RedRumTheHorse · 10/09/2020 14:03

@nextplateau

So can you have 3 people round at 11am and three different people round at 6pm?

Does the virus know the time? It can count so it must be very clever.

You could but you would be advised not to.
RedRumTheHorse · 10/09/2020 14:03

@LolaLollypop

I’m following the rules with a bit of common sense attached at the same time. Me, DH and our two kids (3yrs and 6 months) will still go and visit my parents & brother even though that makes us 7. Like a pp said, it’s ridiculous my toddler can run around soft play and I can go to a pub with 100 other people but we can’t meet up as a family. Besides, the baby only counts as 0.5 of a person anyway surely Grin
Baby is a full person for Covid regulations.
notevenat20 · 10/09/2020 14:05

This is actually the law, rather than guidance, so come Monday you may be at some legal risk if you play fast and loose.

nextplateau · 10/09/2020 14:06

@RedRumTheHorse but you could.

Makes no sense.

lyralalala · 10/09/2020 14:07

@IHateCoronavirus

But would she count as “single” under their definition? As far as I understood it as she lives with her 2DC she is not classed as single. She lives with 2 other people. I might be wrong but they mean ‘single’ as in ‘alone in the property’ rather than ‘Single-romantically unattached’.
The definition of single for a support bubble is a single adult household. So either a single adult living alone or a single parent with children under 18.
RedRumTheHorse · 10/09/2020 14:07

@notevenat20

So you can have 4 visitors on your property if your children are upstairs as long as the visitors don't go upstairs.

You would need a lawyer I think as this seems an optimistic interpretation.

No one would care unless you had a party which disturbs the neighbours.

Also if cases keep rising they will just ban all inside gatherings of any kind.

IceCreamAndCandyfloss · 10/09/2020 14:07

@notevenat20

So you can have 4 visitors on your property if your children are upstairs as long as the visitors don't go upstairs.

You would need a lawyer I think as this seems an optimistic interpretation.

It says six indoors or out and that you can’t share a holiday cottage etc with more than six so quite clearly it’s not six per room Hmm
TinySleepThief · 10/09/2020 14:07

Baby is a full person for Covid regulations.

The poster was obviously being lighthearted. However, it is madness that a baby, even a newborn, counts in the ratio exactly the same as a adult and therefore means they cannot meet up as including the baby in the numbers makes it a gathering of 7.

KateBarker · 10/09/2020 14:08
Sign and share. There are lots of unhappy people affected by this madness. It is early days but we can give it momentum. Fight back (peacefully lol)
KateBarker · 10/09/2020 14:10

Wrong link lol!!! I was talking to a friend about staying soberish tonight.

Petition here: chng.it/CqTkJmCfPq

Nat6999 · 10/09/2020 14:11

It sounds crazy that you can only have 6 in your home, but your child can be at school all day in a room with 30 other children, a teacher & a TA.

StatisticalSense · 10/09/2020 14:13

People are taking the piss. One of the major reasons why young people without children have given up following the rules is the level of entitlement shown by parents who think that reproducing makes them exempt. If parents want schools to remain open they need to accept that this will come with additional risk which means less other activities can happen and because they benefit from schools being open in a way that the childless do not that it is entirely fair that the restrictions are more onerous on those with children.

yawnsvillex · 10/09/2020 14:13

@RedRumTheHorse who would advise you not to? I've not seen this guideline.

yawnsvillex · 10/09/2020 14:14

Signed @KateBarker

ShellsAndSunrises · 10/09/2020 14:14

If your kids are asleep upstairs and you and dh have two friends round, you’ll be meeting in a group of 4, which is fine.

That’s not true. Everyone in the residence “counts”. There’s nothing written into the law, as it’s currently drafted; to exclude people in other rooms.

Pubs and things have a different exemption.

This is a bit different to the previous “interpret it anyway you like” guidance, because they seem keen to enforce it and fine people to show that they’re doing something.

Madcats · 10/09/2020 14:15

The thing is, even if they were to have said "10 can meet" somebody would be along to complain that their family of 6 can't nip round to Granny and Grandad at the same time as her sister with her 3 kids.

With the average number of kids in a family being below 3 these days, 6 seems a sensible number.

Yes it is going to be tougher to be sociable when it gets cold, dark and wet outside but I am thankful we didn't go through the lockdowns that many cities around the world imposed. I want DC to be able to go to school and people back at work (and if it means somebody living alone is still able to go for coffee or a pint and a bit of company, I don't mind a few more comparatively anti-social months).

KateBarker · 10/09/2020 14:15

@StatisticalSense

People are taking the piss. One of the major reasons why young people without children have given up following the rules is the level of entitlement shown by parents who think that reproducing makes them exempt. If parents want schools to remain open they need to accept that this will come with additional risk which means less other activities can happen and because they benefit from schools being open in a way that the childless do not that it is entirely fair that the restrictions are more onerous on those with children.
Wow. So depriving us of all social contact is "fair".

I will never, ever understand humans. Never.

NewAutumnName · 10/09/2020 14:16

It's all really confusing to me!

I am surprised that the restrictions don't just apply to the areas with the most infections though.

lyralalala · 10/09/2020 14:19

With the average number of kids in a family being below 3 these days, 6 seems a sensible number.

The average number of kids per family in England is Wales is 1.9. So it would have made much more sense to either be 8 people or two households.

I actually think Scotland's two households rule is much clearer. You can have up to 6 people from two households indoors, outdoors, in the pub or wherever. Under 12s don't count so two families with younger children can still meet together rather than in dribs and drabs.

lyralalala · 10/09/2020 14:21

Wow. So depriving us of all social contact is "fair".

It doesn't deprive of all social contact. Families can meet separately. Single parent families can still bubble.

It's harder for families simply because, through choice, there is more people in a family than in a child-free household. It's simple maths.

Swipe left for the next trending thread