Were you following the rule of six before?

[Nellodee]

I am hoping that the new restrictions are effective. From my perspective, I can’t see them changing much as I have only on one occasion been indoors socially with seven people since this started.
How much of a change will it mean to you? Were you previously meeting in a group of eight? Will you continue to meet in groups that very slightly bend the law?
I’m trying to gauge roughly how much difference this new rule will make.

Yes, no more than 6 people up to now, and all outdoors apart from one cafe meal when it poured down unexpectedly. Kept to the guideline to the point where I have dropped out of gatherings which turned out to include 7 people or more.
I want this virus suppressed. I need to keep myself as risk-free as I can to be able to stay healthy and keep living my life and visiting my parents.

I met up once with my in-laws. We're a family of 5, they're a family of 4. So 9 of us (5 children) on a bike ride in two groups.

I regularly meet up with my parents, so 7 of us. Can't do that from Monday.

If they'd kept the two household rule and made that law, it would be ok.

Sorry, no we weren't - e.g. we went to the pub with 7 other couples last weekend and sat across two tables. We won't be doing that any more, but will still probably meet in groups that break the rules by one or two.

We are a family of 5. During the ‘proper lockdown’ we didn’t meet anyone, except my parents once as they needed some help to do some maintenance on the outside of their property, dad is disabled and dm couldn’t manage it on her own.

As we started to come out of lockdown and schools went back, we started meeting our friends who are also a family of 5. So 2 households, but 10 in total. We have also met other families but less often than the first family and have met my parents, sibling and his family, which would be 10 from 3 households.

But, we won’t be breaking the law to do it, so as of tomorrow, that’s it really. We could afford the first fine of £100, but not any further ones and as I said to the dc, we don’t know who is watching and which neighbours would be willing to dob us in (probably out of their own frustration that they can’t see their family and friends). I’m frustrated I (On my own) can meet 5 others from 5 other households. But not meet 5 others from one household with my household. It’s really daft.

I have to be honest, disgruntled, I personally would just pretend I didn’t know anything about the group of eight kids.

Nope - I happen to inconsiderately have friends with more than 1 child. I'm not going to tie myself up in knots clinging to the number 6 now either - if they want to meet up, we'll meet up considering the kids are at school together anyway.

I think it’s very harsh for families of five and more.

We've met up twice with another household indoors - same household and there were 9 of us. We won't do that now. Although I work in a school and now have a constant stream of people in and out of my office so it seems a bit pointless. There are 5 in our family so we won't even be meeting grandparents for now (one lot shielding and one lot in a local lockdown anyway)

No. We were doing two households - outdoors.

Yes we will.

We are a family of 5 and will see be seeing my sister and BIL, as like us they are working from home and not socialising with other people either.

The trouble is these rules are not going to make any difference to the spread of the virus. Because the people who have the highest rate of the virus, are still going to be going out and about and not SD.

Our family (my mum, dad, sisters, partners and kids) makes 13 with 4 under 12s. It will be very hard to stop meeting up all together in my parents garden but we will see.

I think the government know that people will go over the limit of 6 and that's why the number set is quite low.

The trouble is these rules are not going to make any difference to the spread of the virus. Because the people who have the highest rate of the virus, are still going to be going out and about and not SD

I don't understand this? What people do you mean?

I might I might not. The only people I’ve seen for months is dh family (3 households) I know it wasn’t allowed. However . I consider it safer than meeting every few days groups of 6. For me it’s not only whether I see more than 6 people at once but how often do we change these people. They’re the only people I’ve seen myself so I consider it being safe as I can control my own bubble.

I think alot of people will ignore this and view 2 households mixing to be safer than 5/6 people from 5/6 households. With the average family of 2 or 3 dcs, this puts most one other household mixing over the numbers.

I do wonder if the rule is so adults who are better at social distancing will meet up without their children who aren't? Is it deliberately trying to keep under 18s only socialising with children in their school bubbles, not cousins/mum's friend's kids who go to a different school?

We had been meeting in groups of 7 mostly due to the fact that mil who has dementia & fil who is her career but was recently hospitalised and has been severely depressed, kept turning up unannounced when we already has ds’s girlfriend over.

Dd is now back in halls of residence though so it shouldn’t be an issue now.

I have met up once outside as a group of five (2 adults, 3 kids) and once outside with three other adults from three different households. I have also visited my parents in their garden with my dd, and our hairdresser came to our house with PPE. I think all other meet-ups have been 1:1, except for work, but I'm still working from home for all but a morning each week.

Consequently, the rule of 6 won't make any difference to me at all.

I understand the need to socialise but I really don't get the need for people to meet up in these massive groups.

Our household are already six.

We have only had one other household in our home and met with them in theirs. We’ll continue to do that as it’s within the rules here, children under 12 not counting as part of the six.

Alexashutup it isn’t massive groups for a larger household. It’s having a grandparent round for tea or kids playing with cousins.

In England our family wouldn’t be able to do those things.

No, but we're unsocial buggers anyway. Never go anywhere, nor go out much etc. So rule of none here, and we're sticking to it.

The guidelines up to now have been 2 households of any size, indoors or outside OR up to 6 people from multiple hoseholds outdoors only.

We are a family of 4 and have met up with another family of 4 a few times, indoors and out, following the guidelines.
We tend to only meet up with one other household at a time anyway.
We won't be able to do that now, won't all be able to visit together.

We will follow the law - some of us will have to stay behind, or if we meet up outside, we'll split into two groups. DC aren't old enough to leave alone, so DH or I will have to bow out.
It's a pain, and a rule that I think particularly affects families with younger children, without particularly reducing risk.

As regards me personally meeting up with people, I have not met up in a group of more than six since before lockdown. However, as a mother of two children in their late teens, I am relieved that the government is introducing a specific legal limit, as DS has met in groups of more than six (with almost everyone from a different household) and DD has faced social pressure to do so (eg invited to close friend's indoor party). We live in an area that has been officially flagged as high risk. Its infection rate is running at more than three times the rate that would be necessary to get it put on the quarantine list if it was a foreign country and the infection rate is approximately doubling each week. So although I am no fan of the government, I do fully support the rule of six. Unfortunately, a large section of the population have shown themselves unwilling to voluntarily moderate their behaviour in a sensible way to limit the spread of Covid, so a very simple rule with criminal sanctions for breaking it is what is needed.

We had stuck with 2 households at a time and have only met inside once. We have stuck with the same immediate family each time not met with any friends at all.

Family of 5. Followed the first lockdown until rules relaxed. Since then,

*met DH's parents in garden for day
*met my parents once overnight travel allowed, but camped outside.
*met inside with other family of 5 on a few occasions.
*met 2x set friends in park/their garden, keeping distance.

From Monday we will meet with parents/family if necessary, even if it takes us over 6. Unlikely to break the rule for friends as we can see them without the kids if we want, but we live away from both sets of our parents (2 hours/4 hours drive) and can't leave the kids, not would it be desirable for our parents.

We booked a couple of weeks ago to go camping with another family of 4 (we are a 4 too) for the weekend in a fortnight. We would only be meeting outside. Our 2 older children are in a school bubble together at secondary and the two younger ones in the same class at primary. They have been playing at each other's houses as a group (6 inside from 2 families but they're generally playing football in the garden anyway) and play in the same sports teams every Saturday and Sunday.

Despite the fact we will be using our own camper vans for accommodation and only mixing outside whilst camping, we now need to cancel our booking as it would be breaking the rules and we will lose the money, as we booked separately, so no reason on the site's behalf for a refund or go - rock up next to each other and not appear to socialise at all.

Pretty much, but more by chance than design. We certainly won't be having 20 over for a party anytime soon but neither will I fret if there are times when we go a few over the 6. We will likely have our usual group of 10 at Christmas (my family & Dsis family) if the rules are still in place then.

As someone said upthread, the number is deliberately set low as they know full well people will stretch it.