My teens are saying they will ignore any new restrictions

[WearyandBleary]

Big argument this evening. My teens are saying they will ignore any new restrictions because they are mixing at school/college anyway, so what’s the point of not mixing outside of school?

They are really furious. I am quite shocked at how angry they are.

Are they being really selfish? I’m so cross with them. How are other people’s teens taking the possibility of more restrictions?

Ugh. You're back on the disgusting 'pay back' narrative? Is your mind like a nest of wasps?

So why can’t we have a conversation about the morality of foisting enormous debt on the young (who can afford it least)?

Do tell.

Also, do you have children in your life @TheClaws ? Do you think those parent who have seen a huge impact on their children from missing 6 months of school and are watching them so happy to be back are all lying? Or is the impact on those children a moral and acceptable thing because, though IMO being children they should come first, the impact is fine as it was done to protect another group in the population so is therefore acceptable? I mean, it's fine if that's what you think, I just want to understand your views.

Young people are disproportionately affected by restrictions, in their social life, work and education, yet are hardly affected at all by CV

They were also called snowflakes and told to "suck up" Brexit by the older generation..... so hardly surprising so many just say FU to a society that has turned its back on them in so many ways

Absolutely this.

I feel for teenagers and young people so much. I remember being that age and going out, having fun, seeing friends, falling in love, going to parties and what not. You may say that's not important but I really do feel for them, they have missed out on essentially a whole year of their youth that they will not get back and it's not over yet either. I can really appreciate and understand their frustration and I think OP would be better off trying to be more understanding of her children too.

As for young people being the ones to cause the spike as a PP said... Well it was young adults with the highest increase actually, not teenagers. And there are multiple reasons why that could be, not just because they said FU to the rules and are selfish. Which age group do you think likely does most care jobs, supermarket jobs, hospitality jobs etc? Who do you think most likely didn't have the financial security to be able to stay home? Who do you think is most likely to have young children and therefore possibly needed more family help or support? Who do you think was likely unable to obtain shopping delivery slots or felt they didn't need them as much as others? Who might live alone or separately to their partners? A lot of young adults I imagine.

It's very different for my grandparents for example, who own their house, don't work, have a nice amount of financial security, able to obtain delivery slots etc... Your average 20-30 year old likely won't be in that position.

Not sure about your DC’s institution but I teach in FE and the classrooms are socially distanced and well ventilated, masks are worn where possible and certainly in corridors unless exempt, lunches/breaks/start and finish times are staggered to reduce “traffic”
and crowds, free periods taken at home or prebooked spaces like the resource centre, lunch tables social distanced and cleaned after each group, no “loitering” or hanging around in big groups, hand sanitiser everywhere...

Is this happening where your teens are hanging out? Are they being that careful socially?

I’m not comfortable with the idea that they have free reign to do whatever they like in their free time because through their personal risk taking they will be putting others at risk and other people’s lives could be irrevocably and irreparably altered as a result. I wouldn’t be encouraging non compliance with the guidelines. From the evidence I’ve seen, I’m pretty convinced that transmission is happening when people are together socially, not distancing and not maintaining distancing. My friend is a teacher in a primary school with a gorgeous son who has Down’s Syndrome and is the light of her life. She’s now been put at risk of COVID as her young colleague has tested positive. Her colleague is not being well thought of at all right now as she was out in pubs not social distancing most nights and having people round drinking in her home and very opposed to the government guidelines. As a result two whole year group bubbles are having to stay off and my friend has made the difficult decision to arrange alternative care for her son for two weeks as a DNR was forced on them in March and he has associated heart problems.

I do wish people would see the bigger picture, but then it is a very narcissistic society in general.

@TheKeatingFive

And yes if this had effected young people, there’s no way the government would have asked the elderly and middle aged to stay at home! It’s laughable

Not to mention shouldering the cost. That’s what gets me. The young will be paying back what it cost to protect rich baby boomers for years if not decades.

And well...yes.

Before Covid I was quite strict about my children coming straight home from school and not hanging around parks but now all their clubs have been cut back and they are limited to class bubbles at school I have let them go to the park afterwards where most of their year groups hang out. I can’t keep saying no to everything when there is no end in sight with the restrictions. The weather is great and they need this for their mental wellbeing and development.

@CoronaIsWatching

Surely there comes a point where it becomes a human rights issue rather than a pandemic management issue

Yes, absolutely. I think your teens have a point OP.

@Ginogineli

Mush

Approx 450 people under 45 who had no (known) underlying conditions have died with covid

I say with because no death has been shown to be from covid- wording explicitly says ‘deaths after testing positive’

Out of 67 million

Hardly loads really is it

I am so totally done with hearing this ableist load of crap. You do realise that those 'underlying conditions' include autism, mild asthma, LDs and things like psoriasis? These people are hardly at death's door and yet posts like yours are making them out to be people who don't actually matter, only people without underlying conditions should be counted as in any way important at all, everyone else is oh so fine to just die. Listen to yourself.

I'm thankful my teens have compassion and although they can't stand Boris and the Tories they care about society as a whole and so don't have the attitude of 'lets pay back the Boomers.' I've tried to raise them to not generalise about groups of people, and, although they do make comments about boomers, always qualify it with 'not all from that generation.' ageism can go both ways - some are slamming the young, some slamming the old, FFS can't we be kind to one another in the midst of a pandemic which is not a political scheme to oppress any group at all but a virus that doesn't care? My kids get a bit sarky about some of the dafter rules but still stick to them because they are decent humans.

And yes, I am angry today. I am done with being discounted for being ECV. I am actually feeling hopelessly sad about the selfishness I see on so many of these threads right now.

OK TheClaws Amoral then. Why is it amoral one way and not the other? Protecting the elderly and the vulnerable comes at great cost to the (many magnitudes larger) group of everyone else who is not. Why is that moral? Why is it moral to protect one group at the expense of another? I want to live by principles of consent, of being able to regard the whole situation and weigh up what is best for everyone, not just one group. I don't think that's amoral.

Linaya, when you weigh up the choice between death/serious side effects of disease for one group versus, for example, a year of interrupted education for another. (You'll note I didn't state 'no education.') Death is a far greater cost than anything you list. COVID can affect anyone. It is risky for teenagers to ignore guidelines and potentially spread the virus as it could affect an asthmatic friend; his immune-compromised mother; her father who had a silent heart attack a week ago; or you who opened the shop door after them. And so on. To do that knowingly is amoral.

Can I point out that there are not 67 million people under 45 in the UK?

@Linaya

Also, do you have children in your life *@TheClaws* ? Do you think those parent who have seen a huge impact on their children from missing 6 months of school and are watching them so happy to be back are all lying? Or is the impact on those children a moral and acceptable thing because, though IMO being children they should come first, the impact is fine as it was done to protect another group in the population so is therefore acceptable? I mean, it's fine if that's what you think, I just want to understand your views.

Yes, I do, thanks. They're mature enough to recognise that this won't last forever and I've made certain to reinforce this in my own actions and reactions to the pandemic. They have had to miss out on certain things - but things are just weird at the moment. I don't over-dramatise things and neither do my kids.

@TheKeatingFive

Ugh. You're back on the disgusting 'pay back' narrative? Is your mind like a nest of wasps?

So why can’t we have a conversation about the morality of foisting enormous debt on the young (who can afford it least)?

Do tell.

Because it's gross?

Linaya this is shit for the kids, of course it is.

But if the measures that the govt are going to put in place do not work then they will need to take further measures.

We cannot let this virus go through the population uncontrolled - its too dangerous.

So what happens next - schools close? Surely if the kids are putting the staff in too much danger then it needs to happen.

What impact would that have?

They have got something now. They can see their friends, they have their clubs, and they can still socialise even though it is limited.

Why go from this, to nothing again?

I can't understand why any parent is encouraging their children to behave in a way that could lead to lockdown.

Its baffling. And parents, the buck stops with you. Its not the fault of the children, it is the parents who are enabling it.

Young people are disproportionately affected by the restrictions.

BUT - they are being very hard of hearing (I have had this with my own ds) if they cannot grasp the concept of risk versus benefit.

There is a risk attached to going to school/college, but education is important.

There is a risk attached to having a big party, but big parties are not important and you can see up to 5 friends at any one time.

I had an argument with my own son about this and was getting quite frustrated with his wilful reluctance to see the point.

They were also called snowflakes and told to "suck up" Brexit by the older generation

Yes there was a meme going round Facebook about the older generation doing anything to protect their kids if the virus went after the young first. Yeah right. If they cared about their children and grandchildren they wouldn't have voted for Brexit. I do understand why youngsters are angry. But pensioners vote Tory, on the whole, so they're far more important.

But while the restrictions are annoying, I really don't think it's that much of an imposition to ask young people to stick to the groups of six rule.

For anyone who thinks "lockdown didn't work"

The problem I guess is we are saying “weigh up risks vs benefits” while telling them it’s “safe” (yes Johnson uses this repeatedly about schools) to mix with 250 kids a day but not safe to visit your boyfriend overnight once a week.

It’s just gaslighting frankly.

My dcs secondary school has classrooms without open windows and no masks in very packed corridors. If we cared about risks we would sort these things out. I’ve been writing to our headteacher and governors about this. Those a far, far greater risks than continuing to meet up with a small number of friends, surely?

@Beebeeboo2

For anyone who thinks "lockdown didn't work"

I don't think lockdown didn't work. But I do think it's unsustainable for long periods of time and in reality, serves to do nothing but contain the problem for a while, it doesn't make it go away. I appreciate why that is, not overwhelming health services etc... And I supported the first but I wouldn't support another one, the consequences elsewhere would be far too high.

@cologne4711

Young people are disproportionately affected by the restrictions.

BUT - they are being very hard of hearing (I have had this with my own ds) if they cannot grasp the concept of risk versus benefit.

There is a risk attached to going to school/college, but education is important.

There is a risk attached to having a big party, but big parties are not important and you can see up to 5 friends at any one time.

I had an argument with my own son about this and was getting quite frustrated with his wilful reluctance to see the point.

They were also called snowflakes and told to "suck up" Brexit by the older generation

Yes there was a meme going round Facebook about the older generation doing anything to protect their kids if the virus went after the young first. Yeah right. If they cared about their children and grandchildren they wouldn't have voted for Brexit. I do understand why youngsters are angry. But pensioners vote Tory, on the whole, so they're far more important.

But while the restrictions are annoying, I really don't think it's that much of an imposition to ask young people to stick to the groups of six rule.

But you’re talking about the current restrictions and I agree, there isn’t too much imposition currently and people can manageably live their lives however we are talking about if there is another lockdown style scenario in a few days

My dcs secondary school has classrooms without open windows and no masks in very packed corridors. If we cared about risks we would sort these things out. I’ve been writing to our headteacher and governors about this.

Thank you. It’s not always easy for school staff to raise these issues.

@MillyMollyFarmer

I'm sorry but this is the point where I want to scream. All any normal person (+scientists) is asking of anyone is to wear a fucking mask, stay 2 meters apart and wash your hands!!!!

This is where I want to scream because you seem to have missed the last few days!! They’re going to bring in more restrictions you fool! That’s what the thread is about! Geez. Do you want to cripple the hospitality industry? Social distancing is massively burdening businesses right now, it costs them. You seemingly aren’t thinking about any of that at all

You don't seem to understand.

1. I'm saying that if EVERYONE WORE A MASK, KEPT DISTANCE, WASHED HANDS we would be in a better place. Social settings (eg schools) would be safer, so forth. We would literally be cutting the transmission paths off.

1. if everyone complied by their own accord, we wouldn't need restrictions because the transmission rates would be sooo much lower

I have not missed the last few days/months. I suspected that this is/will be airborne from the beginning and acted as such.

The problem I guess is we are saying “weigh up risks vs benefits” while telling them it’s “safe” (yes Johnson uses this repeatedly about schools) to mix with 250 kids a day but not safe to visit your boyfriend overnight once a week. It’s just gaslighting frankly. My dcs secondary school has classrooms without open windows and no masks in very packed corridors. If we cared about risks we would sort these things out.

This. My DD is in upper primary. In the summer they were back social distanced, small class sizes.

Now, almost triple the class size, in the same classroom.

They can see the government doesn't care about them and their families, so why should they give anything up to benefit the government?

Whilst I know it's also about other people - children see unfairness very clearly.

Because it's gross?

Very grown up and insightful comment

I'm saying that if EVERYONE WORE A MASK, KEPT DISTANCE, WASHED HANDS we would be in a better place

Most people are. In fact British people have been more compliant than almost any other country. The fact is, once they started lifting restrictions it was always going to increase. They even said that themselves. Pity they didn’t plan better for it.

I also have been writing to headteachers and my MP (who is a useless waste of space and paid about 3x as much as the teachers).

The Head from DD1s school has showed what he could do with money - it was excellent. Not a single child sick over 4 weeks. Now loads are off with colds (or possibly coronavirus we won't know for weeks given the testing fiasco).

He's just said there isn't the money to do more - and this is the message being sent to kids: 'eat out to help out' but no money for schools. They are being sent the clear message they don't matter.

This way of school returning is far more likely to result in disrupted education than a safer return (as in summer for us). It already has done - isolating while waiting for DD2 to get a test for a week.

We need to show them that they might be able to shut up the media and schools talking about this shit show and the bubbles closing, but us parents aren't.

Email your MP's.
Talk about it on here and use your SM to talk openly about what's happening in your children's schools.

As parents we are supposed to be their advocates, their voice. We need to stand up and say this is not working. Our children aren't getting the education that they rightfully deserve. They've given up so much as it is.

The gov, ed department and exam boards have let them down badly.