Baby groups - would you expect to wear a face covering?

[MyCatReallyIsAGit]

Would you attend an indoor baby group where face coverings were optional?

I’m not sure whether I’m being unreasonable or OTT here. I went to a baby group yesterday where masks were optional despite it being an indoor activity. It’s the kind of activity where the babies are moving around and therefore so are the parents - in other words, distancing isn’t really an option. And very few people were wearing masks. In fact, after the leader announced masks were optional, the ones who were wearing them removed them, leaving me as the only person wearing one.

I feel really uncomfortable with this, and not sure if I’m overreacting? Although the space is well-ventilated, it just didn’t feel like a good idea to not be wearing one. I’m not sure what the rationale is behind it, but am wondering whether others would feel the same way and whether it is worth raising it with the organisation, not wearing a mask next time, or just not going back. Any thoughts?

(Just for the record, I’m not a member of the mask police or anything and I absolutely respect that lots of people have valid reasons not to wear them, and may choose not to do so when it’s not mandated, just as others may choose to. I’m just interested in the opinions of others.)

@AldiAisleofCrap Nope, she has had it signed off externally.

Ok, some mixed views but I’m glad I’m not the only one who would feel uncomfortable - it feels odd to be in a room with other adults not wearing a mask. I felt under pressure to remove mine as nobody else was wearing one.

Incidentally, baby is quite used to seeing us in masks and thinks trying to pull it off is a great game...

I would mind less if it was the kind of activity where everyone stays in a fixed spot but the lack of ability to effectively distance is what bothers me.

I wouldn't go to baby groups where masks were required, personally. I don't see the point of social or sensory or music activities for very young children if all the adults have their faces covered and I can't talk to my baby normally. Babies have a hugely powerful instinctive interest in facial expressions - newborns will even look longer at a piece of paper with a basic cartoon smiley face on it than a paper with random ink squiggles. I'm not an anti-mask nutcase and I wear one on public transport & in shops, but my baby needs normal human interactions, not to see adults with no faces all the time.

@goodnightsugarpop

I wouldn't go to baby groups where masks were required, personally. I don't see the point of social or sensory or music activities for very young children if all the adults have their faces covered and I can't talk to my baby normally. Babies have a hugely powerful instinctive interest in facial expressions - newborns will even look longer at a piece of paper with a basic cartoon smiley face on it than a paper with random ink squiggles. I'm not an anti-mask nutcase and I wear one on public transport & in shops, but my baby needs normal human interactions, not to see adults with no faces all the time.

This ^^

DS had speech delays so at the point we were at the younger end of baby groups, they weren't apparent. Impeding quality of speech and facial expression will aggravate delays in infants where they have not become apparent yet.
Often you use different vocabulary when out of the home, so it's not as simple as them seeing you uncovered most of the time at home. Plus there's the social exposure to a wider pool of people.

I also wouldn’t go to a baby group which required masks while interacting with your child. I think it defeats the point. It’s not an issue of whether the babies would get used to them - I’m sure they would- but It’s really important for them to see your mouth move and your expression when learning to talk.

Masks aren’t required for staff in schools or nurseries for similar reasons and non verbal communication is even more important for babies than older children.

Can I ask - if you think it’s too risky without a mask would your view change as case numbers change? Let’s say there are twenty cases a week in your area and masks halve the risk of transmission (not sure on the currently accepted figure but have seen that one before). If cases fell to ten would you then be comfortable without masks on the basis that the risk if the same as the higher case rate with masks.

@BogRollBOGOF

No it is really not possible for an hour (or so for a group) to lead to speech delays. yes it limits social contact in that setting, and babies do like to see facial expressions, but that one group in the entire week will not give a child a speech delay/have a detrimental impact on speech. You can recreate the vocab at home if it is so different.

That being said I do think that babies seeing your face in the group is better and is kinda the point of them! I am sad for the groups and babies interactions with others as a whole this year

*By give a speech delay, I meant aggravate one. The group is such a small amount of time out of the week. Generally though, this year is limiting the amount of interaction babies are getting but still their best interactions are with parents when young. If you are the type of parent to make the effort to go to groups then you are probably doing just fine.

It is the babies at home without interaction that make me sad x

I run classes for pre school children and public health advised that adults have to wear face coverings. They said visors were an alternative to masks and have the benefit of the children being able to see facial expressions. We managed to source some visors really cheaply and offered these to customers and a lot of people preferred to wear them than a mask. The only exception to face coverings we were told is when running classes for pre mobile babies where adults can remove face coverings once seated 2m apart from the next adult/baby. Singing at low volume we were told is fine.