What should be put in place for shielders if we go down lock vulnerable down and carry on

[Someonetakemebackto91]

We are a shielding family ( DD 7 ) is the vulnerable one.

I see more and more people are moving over to the idea it’s better to protect the vulnerable and allow the others to go back to semi normal and carry on until vaccine or herd immunity or whatever people think the outcome will be.

If this was even an idea there will have to be more support than a box of fruit delivered on a Monday.
If everyone can else can carry on as usual there should be

• job protection ( on the same level as non shielders, so basically can be use against them in the work place )

• full wage coverage

• for parent carers an increase in carers allowance. ( loss of respite as-well as increase in bills ) shielders only.

Seperate hospitals
Open the nightingale hospitals etc and use these got covid patients and have hospitals for the shielders to attend safety for medical treatment including transport.

• education for kids in shielding households needs to match full time education.

Thoughts ? What do you think they should do for shielders if they decide yo go down this route !

@SleeplessGeordie

Even in the first lockdown furlough was 80 ducking percent but what because it’s disabled / sick people they will be fine with some gas and electric !

I'm not disagreeing with your anger, but this is how it's been for sick and disabled people prior to this.

I don’t think it should be 80% indefinitely but for a limited time, say 6 months, to see if a vaccine will be rolled oit. If there won’t be one imminent then yes unfortunately the ECV will need to be treated like all other sick and disabled people unable to work, however at least give it some time to see if there will be a vaccine. 6 months of paying 80% won’t add significantly more as it would just be ECV families if working age where they can’t work from home. There will be plenty that can work from home or are retired and do get a pension anyway.

@Racoonworld so then the shielding group decide that they can not shield I know we wouldn’t be able to. Then the nhs gets overwhelmed and everyone goes back to square one.

• this is the 2 options people are arguing about

• national restrictions or shielding only it wouldn’t be a choice.

@Racoonworld nope not at all, so if shielding is the way they decide to go but it takes longer than expected to get a vaccine I should have to give up my job and go on to benefits ? Which as a parent carer is much less than my career.
I am more than capable of working a long side my EVC who by the way basically someone said up thread we should probablt sacrifice.
😳

Absolutely- the vast majority of shielders are retired people living with retired others.

It is far more cost-effective to fund those in need of protecting to stay at home than shutting down the whole economy.

I’d like to see shielders and family members on full income up to £2500 a month until March. That would get us through the winter alongside existing measures.

About 1/4 of the uk population would need to shield to give this any chance

Cloud cookout land only

Letting the non-vulnerable get on with their lives while the vulnerable are hidden away 'treading water' sounds a cavalier approach to me. Putting to one side for a moment the impact on the vulnerable, we are dealing with an unknown quantity in this virus and don't know the longterm health implications for the ostensibly less vulnerable, even if the virus is less likely to kill them.

There are ongoing studies that seem to indicate the possibly of lingering effects even in the apparently healthy who are not in one of the higher risk groups.

I’d like to see shielders and family members on full income up to £2500 a month until March. That would get us through the winter alongside existing measures.

That’s less than DH earns. We are mortgage free, lots of people earn more than that and would struggle with mortgage payments.

What happens to the work that those sheilders do
Are people to have hospital appointments cancelled as too many staff need to shield?
Unable to buy Christmas gifts because too many couriers need to shield?

@midgebabe

What happens to the work that those sheilders do Are people to have hospital appointments cancelled as too many staff need to shield? Unable to buy Christmas gifts because too many couriers need to shield?

Same as what happened last time with shielding. Companies will hire more staff to cover those shielding, there are many unemployment at the moment who would love a job and are able to do it. The skilled jobs are more difficult to cover but there are around 2million shielders, a lot of which will be retired people so really shouldn’t be too much impact on skilled jobs.

What happens to the work that those sheilders do?*
Are people to have hospital appointments cancelled as too many staff need to shield?
Unable to buy Christmas gifts because too many couriers need to shield?*

Yes, there are so many who've lost their jobs, keen to get work. And if some jobs can't be filled immediately, then that's a small price to pay for keeping the vulnerable safe!

Ecosse the problem with paying shielders who normally work up to £2500 a month is that many will earn more than that and have bills to pay, myself included. I could only afford to shield the last time because my employer was generous and topped up the furlough pay to my full salary. I, like many have a family to support and my bills won't reduce just because my income has

But don't you see how things would be much much worse if we force the vulnerable to shield and try to go back to normal....there would be no normal to go back to!

But don't you see how things would be much much worse if we force the vulnerable to shield and try to go back to normal....there would be no normal to go back to!

If we continue with all these restrictions and lockdowns, we won't have much of an economy left. By letting the great majority of the population back to work, we can keep some of the 'normality'.

@Sunflowers247 yes I see that point ( not that I agree with causing a 2 Teir society ) however that’s the problem if it’s what people want then they must realise that those who have to shield will need a fair playing field financially etc
According to this thread they want us all to shield but take the hit to 🤣

Yes, good point, op.

@Ecosse

This is absolutely the route we should be taking imo while leaving general restrictions at their current level.

I’d like to see shielders and their family members offered the opportunity to shield from Monday on full pay up to £2500 per month each.

Food deliveries should be provided and it should be made clear that shielders cannot be made redundant in a discriminatory way.

Imo this is how we will get through the winter without a lockdown that would be catastrophic for the economy.

There would though need to be a degree of compulsion though for those accepting furlough payments- I think figures show fewer than 50% of shielders complied fully last time. You would possibly need to implement fines and eventual withdrawal of funding from shielders repeatedly seen outside.

Fuck off!

In fact all of you on this thread advocating shutting up functional members of society because they’re older than you or have a perfectly manageable condition which just happens to make them more vulnerable to this particular virus can all fuck off. You are arseholes of the highest order.

Yes, if we continue as we are going, we are truly fucked economically

Because we are too busy hand wringing and refusing to do anything until everything gets obviously out of control

Harder, sharper action would have minimised the long term economic impact but too many people are in denial , and too many people are living too close to the edge to want to contemplate it ( and I can't blame them )

I can't believe how many people are quite happy to just shut away members of society, simply because they have a medical condition or because they are older.

Do we know the threshold to this? Is it the people who got the letter from their GP.

They should be entitled to full pay, if they are being forced to stay at home to enable society to carry on regardless, they should not be penalised for that.

This just feels like such a massive step backwards, that we thinks it's ok to hide away the venerable.

It is beyond unfeasible to lock away vulnerable members of society plus everyone that lives with them (which is what would need to happen). This is literally millions of people! Also what happens when medical care is inevitably needed at some point? Where do they go? A hospital where COVID is rife? Come on.

So what are my husband and I supposed to do? Both vulnerable, although not extremely vulnerable, in a support bubble with our single parent daughter and supplying help to her in the form of child care and school pick ups. If her life goes back to normal, along with everyone like her, then she puts us at risk. We are balancing the risk to our health at the moment, but if things like social distancing and mask wearing end (which it seems that many would prefer) then we are stuffed.

Vulnerable people don't/can't live in a vacuum.

I should add that society relies on us so called vulnerable people to keep things chugging along. We are active and working members of the community. Like it or not, you need us.

@SmilingAloe

This is the most depressing thing that I have read since the start of the pandemic. The lack of humanity and empathy from some posters is horrifying.

This

Well obviously shielding must be optional entirely; people could choose to risk a short excursion or holiday even if otherwise staying in.

But for those who were acknowledged esp vulnerable, I think it would be at the least fair to ensure online shopping slots, and deliveries via some other method for people not online, plus laws protecting the jobs of those caring for them, and yes, some short-term increase in carers allowance/DLA/PIP/attendance allowance.

You do realise at the moment the country has moved the flu vaccine earlier to cover children with SN (this year it's already started, all previous years it's come in mid to late November) yet their TEACHERS aren't given any priority for the vaccine? As the mum of a SN child I actually came online to call on you all to lobby for free vaccines for the teachers --

1. they are being put at risk by our children, who have trouble in many cases with masks and social distancing
2. they in turn may expose our children
3. in summary, teachers of SN children should count as carers for vaccine priority.

Fucking hell there are some nasty bastards on this thread. Force families to live apart, refused care if they won't go for ridiculously draconian measures, refuse pensions if people don't comply?

@knittingaddict

So what are my husband and I supposed to do? Both vulnerable, although not extremely vulnerable, in a support bubble with our single parent daughter and supplying help to her in the form of child care and school pick ups. If her life goes back to normal, along with everyone like her, then she puts us at risk. We are balancing the risk to our health at the moment, but if things like social distancing and mask wearing end (which it seems that many would prefer) then we are stuffed.

Vulnerable people don't/can't live in a vacuum.

If your not in the extremely vulnerable category your not included in the shielding and won’t get any extra protection. Have you actually looked at your individual risk? I’m on the vulnerable group too but my risk is a lot lower than the ECV group. I’m more than happy taking my chances going back to normal.