In all honesty. Do you think people will follow Mondays rule.. Honest truth

[DidSheReallySayThat20]

Everyone I have spoken to, or seen on SM have said how stupid it is and they will not be following the rule /law.

My dbs manager who owns the workplace. Was due to have a get together at home next sunday for their teens birthday.
They are now doing it at work. ( a garage.)
Has now said by doing it there and ' booking in the relatives cars for a visual inspection /safety check ' whilst waiting they could get together on forecourt spaced out, Because they would be 'customers' and they would be at work. And it's no different to it being random customers just because it's family.
So there would be 2 cars' booked in' one of. Which is a couple., one a family Of 3. Plus their own household of 4 (the teens work there weekends cleaning etc anyway)

Which made me think how silly the rule is. They can't do that in their garden but can on a forecourt (the garage is not on a main road or anything and out the way so unlikely to be seen)

[Ava2323]

No.

We've been sensible so far and stuck to the rules - only meeting up with one household at a time and mainly in the park rather than inside.

But this rule really prejudices families because it means two households can't meet up anymore. We've been plannning to meet up with our friends who we haven't seen since Feb and will go ahead - it's four adults and three children. We can't just never see them again so I don't know what the option is.

I know Boris and Co have access to endless nannies so can't imagine real life but for normal people with young kids the kids have to come along too - can't exactly leave toddlers at home alone!

[BogRollBOGOF]

As long as I don't meet up with enough people old enough to be held criminally responsible for their actions, I'm fine with that. What I am prepared to do is of lower risk of virus transmission than other legal forms of socialising such as meeting 5 adults from 5 households around a table in a pub.

My friends and I could legally meet up if we say in the interests of fairness left the 7yos at home and alternate for the 9/ 10 yos next time...

All I ask is to meet another standard sized family unit which we would do outdoors and naturally space out in a low-risk way anyway.

I'm not looking for mass gatherings and wild parties.

Bad laws deserve to be challenged and criticised.

[RedskyAtnight]

I don't think it's a case of will people follow the new law precisely (have every sympathy with a family of 4 meeting a family of 3) but will they stop breaking it in the extreme ways that the previous guidelines were ignored (e.g. gatherings of 10+ people, in spaces where it wasn't possible to socially distance). I actually think the bar has been set at a low 6 because the government know that some people will stretch it to 7 or 8.

[bibbitybobbitycats]

I will, because I don't want to end up with a local lockdown (I don't think we will have another national one).

[TheSeedsOfADream]

@Funkypolar

Only on Mumsnet. Most people I have spoken to and on sites other than Mumsnet, say they will do as they wish.

A few people posting on Mumsnet isn’t representative of the UK and Mumsnet seems to be derided by people in real life. No idea why!

Actually, I've seen the opposite. Most MN threads are full of people saying they have no intention of following the legislation.

In real life they seem less inflammatory.

[Umbridge34]

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

I think those that have been affected by the virus, those vulnerable or family members who are and those that care about the wider society will.

There will be many who won’t though as selfish wants come before the big picture and the laws will get tougher and more restrictions in place.

I know several people who shielded who have no intention of sticking rigidly to the rule but will continue to risk assess situations as they see fit.
My grandma is of the opinion now that she'd rather spend time with family and enjoy life than return to the way it was when she was shielding. I dont blame her, I saw her become an utter shell of herself during shielding. She said she'd rather be dead than feel that way again and I'm inclined to agree with her.

[Qasd]

Yes on the whole as lockdown showed (official figures not Mumsnet story) it had a very high compliance rate, estimated at 80 percent this will be similar.

Of course there will be 7000 threads about the remaining twenty percent😂!

[Kaktus]

@Qasd

Yes on the whole as lockdown showed (official figures not Mumsnet story) it had a very high compliance rate, estimated at 80 percent this will be similar.

Of course there will be 7000 threads about the remaining twenty percent😂!

And they will all be saying ‘is it me or am I the only one following the rules?’.

Yes. You are the only one. Pat yourself on the back.

[ParisianLady]

No

I don't think many people I know will follow the law on this.

We are still planning to meet other families, making 9 people. And at Xmas I would have my siblings and parents in our house if they wanted to come, which makes more than 6.

I'm usually law abiding, as are our peers, I followed lockdown properly but I suspect we will all disregard this. What we won't do is have parties, very large gatherings, multiple overnight guests, but I'm done now with this all and taking what I think is a sensible approach.

[FourTeaFallOut]

Yes, most people will but I expect the noisy minority to once again mistake their sheer volume for a common voice.

[Jessuk86]

No because as a family of 4 with 2 young children and a lot of friends with similar age children we will still have those friends over for bbqs etc like others have said in my opinion that’s safer than meeting 5 from different household in a pub. Everyone’s situation is so different I’m lucky enough to have all my family within a 5 minute walk/drive and therefore I could esaiky have my parents round for breakfast, then sister 1 and her partner for a coffee then sister 2 And her son for lunch and sister 3 for dinner.....but couldn’t have them all round together even though sister 2 could then go to my parents for dinner after the coffee at mine etc so makes no sense but whatever this will be temporary and hopefully this time next year we won’t be having these debates Anymore x

[Anniemabel]

Your boss does sound like a prat as a PP said.

Finding “loopholes” in these sorts of laws just makes you a smart arse and no one likes a smart arse!

I will obey the law, so will lots of others. Some people won’t. It’s the same for all laws. The difference now is that because it is so clear and there is no scope for misunderstanding there will be more social pressure to abide by the law so I think we’ll find more people following it than currently do.

[AnyFucker]

No

[chocolatesaltyballs22]

I hope so because they're not exactly that onerous and much better than a full lockdown. Suck it up, people.

As for the whole mental health thing - there are lots of things you are still allowed to do so pulling that card really doesn't wash in my opinion.

[EDSGFC]

I presume 'caring about the wider society' doesn't include caring about people who have committed suicide due to lockdown, or who have ended up stuck in house for months on end with abusive family members? It also doesn't include caring about the effect of job losses, poverty, lack of education and lack of money for public services? Or the people who have had diagnoses and treatment for other illnesses stopped or delayed?

So causing a second wave by not following the new law improves any of that how?

[IceCreamAndCandyfloss]

At least being simplified to six and being law it makes it easier to report and for fines to be issued. No checks needed, police just count how many people at the property.

[ginsparkles]

I think there is always a vocal outcry, there has been every step of the way, but ultimately the majority of people adhere to the law.

[Kaktus]

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

At least being simplified to six and being law it makes it easier to report and for fines to be issued. No checks needed, police just count how many people at the property.

Well they still have to check that it’s not a case of more than 6 people living at the property, or that the gathering is over 6 due to a support bubble (we’re a 6 person household and have an additional single family member as part of our support bubble).

[DidSheReallySayThat20]

Not my boss.. My dbs boss as in OP.

Yes i agree, however I also see the point of if 2 customers had cars booked in and waited outside for the hour or whatever it would take. Its no different to people they know?.. That's where the rule is daft I guess. But where does the line get drawn.

[bigbluebus]

I know many won't stick to it as theyve already proved that they don't think the rules apply to them by their actions over the last 6 months.
I just wish the 'groups of 6' would remember to stick to social distancing. I am sick of seeing group photos on Facebook from people of different households and I have witnessed 2 lots of people in the gym in the last week greeting each other with a kiss!

[Kaiserin]

Most people will mostly quietly follow the new law, with the odd minor law breaking incident (e.g. meeting with relatives or close friends, adding up to less than 10 people including babies, maybe once or twice a month)

A minority of people will make a lot of noise about doing whatever the hell they want, whenever they want, with whoever they want.

[Tfoot75]

I've seen a lot of examples of large meet ups in restaurants etc recently on social media, so now that sort of thing will be automatically not allowed by the location. And yes I do think the majority will now think twice before having large numbers of people in their home.

Of course not everyone will comply, but as long as theres a majority it will count hopefully. I don't think there's much hope for Christmas, either we control the numbers until then (and then everyone ignores it and it all falls apart) or it falls apart before then and there's a lockdown, which has almost no chance of mass compliance the second time around. Or perhaps moonshot will come off!

[sparklefarts]

I don't think they will.

I've already been invited to drinks with four other households. In one house. Now I'm going to have to be the one who looks like a boring arse by saying no.

[TheDailyCarbuncle]

@EDSGFC

I presume 'caring about the wider society' doesn't include caring about people who have committed suicide due to lockdown, or who have ended up stuck in house for months on end with abusive family members? It also doesn't include caring about the effect of job losses, poverty, lack of education and lack of money for public services? Or the people who have had diagnoses and treatment for other illnesses stopped or delayed?

So causing a second wave by not following the new law improves any of that how?

There is absolutely no evidence that there would ever be a 'second wave.' Cases have gone up all over the world, but no 'second wave' has happened. In the meantime, in order to avoid this fictional second wave, people have to suffer and die. Where's the logic in that? That's a genuine question by the way, especially as many of the people 'saved' from infection by these measures will just get infected at a later stage anyway.

[chocolatesaltyballs22]

There is absolutely no evidence that there would ever be a 'second wave.' Cases have gone up all over the world, but no 'second wave' has happened. In the meantime, in order to avoid this fictional second wave, people have to suffer and die. Where's the logic in that? That's a genuine question by the way, especially as many of the people 'saved' from infection by these measures will just get infected at a later stage anyway.

Erm, Spain?? Their infection rate is now higher than it was prior to the original lockdown. I'd call that a second wave, dunno about you.