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 !

And if the shielded 2.5 million all decide against it, where does that leave NHS capacity once they’ve fallen ill quickly and severely and are taking up hundreds even thousands of beds?

And if the shielded 2.5 million all decide against it, where does that leave NHS capacity once they’ve fallen ill quickly and severely and are taking up hundreds even thousands of beds?

That will depend on how much nhs capacity there is, whether the nightingale hospitals are used and whether cancer and other routine surgery patients are considered?

Can I just say the nightingale hospitals actually have no extra services and need to be staffed by current nhs staff currently run ragged in actual hospitals. We cannot magic staff from nowhere

I'm a anti-second lockdown but some of the comments on this thread are just...... wow. Just disgusting.

Free broadband, phone & TV licence, priority for online orders, maybe give them a code that can be used when ordering, a grant towards utility bills over the winter.

Some people think ECV people are all old and retired. DH has a job which effects how many others do their job, is almost impossible to do at home and is a very essential service.
You can’t stick all these people at home so you can all have a normal Christmas.

I just read that obese people in their 50s might be asked to shield and not necessarily previous categories of shielder (given that more is known now about whom the virus affects the worst).

Would people advocate paying the obese (or providing free this, that and the other) to stay at home? This is on every level ridiculous: a fair few might regard it as a win and no incentive to lose a pound or two to get off the list, and also staying at home is not likely to enable someone to live a healthier life.

Shielding is a reallymtough thing to ask of people.

It's not lockdown rules, it's full isolation.

It'll only be the exceptionally vulnerable who are asked to do this - those who may catch it readily and get it worse, and fill the hospital beds for weeks.

It's a measure to protect the NHS, with the side effect of protecting the individual. Not the other way round.

@MoggyP

Shielding is a reallymtough thing to ask of people.

It's not lockdown rules, it's full isolation.

It'll only be the exceptionally vulnerable who are asked to do this - those who may catch it readily and get it worse, and fill the hospital beds for weeks.

It's a measure to protect the NHS, with the side effect of protecting the individual. Not the other way round.

Thank you.

Shielders are people from every section of society healthcare workers, police officers, plumbers, teachers etc. The first time round, due to this shit show of a government lots of people didn't get shielding letters until quite late on, so some of these people were still working. When they got their letters they just continued working as more information was around about minimising risks plus most people have bills to pay.

Whilst there are some very unpleasant posts on this thread, I think drawing parallels with the current situation and the Holocaust are ludicrous, and quite frankly very offensive. Obviously I can't speak for all Jews but as someone whose entire maternal family, including children, bar one was murdered in concentration camps I think it's offensive and wish people would stop.

If you don't agree, perhaps start a separate thread asking if it's BU to compare the current situation and the Holocaust or people's reactions to the situation and Nazis and see what others think. Personally I find it glib and uninformed. I'm not saying it should never be a topic of conversation. There are times when it's appropriate and analogies can be drawn in discussion, discussing the Charlottesville rally for example. I just don't think it's appropriate here. Whilst there are examples of othering (for want of a different word) ECV people with ill thought, ignorant or just a bit fucking stupid, posts and opinions it's hardly the same and I find it minimising and offensive.

Obviously this is a bit inarticulate and probably explained very badly. I might start a separate thread, perhaps for a general discussion of Godwin's Law. I don't want to derail this thread but wanted to say it as it's been upsetting me for quite some time.

To return to the topic, I genuinely don't think there is a practical way to solve the problem of ECV and resuming "normal" life. I would like to see a proper (not like the crap exam "consultation") government consultation with this group as a starting point. There will never be a balance that suits everyone. I don't believe ECV should be a blanket category eg people over a certain age, but it should based on specific extremely vulnerability and again, it's hard if not impossible to find a balanced solution that is acceptable to everyone. We are all in such different situations (or different boats facing the same storm which I read on here!)

I am ECV whichever way you cut the cake, I know I wouldn't be ventilated (just from NICE guidelines not any moral position and this is the same whether it's CV or anything) and I've made my peace with it. I want to live my life minimising but not trying to eradicate risk at the expense of my quality of life - but my DC are grown up/almost grown up and I know I would feel differently if they weren't. (Also agree with PPs that most people didn't give a fuck about us before, PIP reforms scandal etc so I also find it quite that people are so earnestly discussing it now and washing their hands to protect us when they weren't arsed before!)

Would people advocate paying the obese (or providing free this, that and the other) to stay at home?

In the first metaanalysis of its kind, published on 26 August in Obesity Reviews, an international team of researchers pooled data from scores of peer-reviewed papers capturing 399,000 patients. They found that people with obesity who contracted SARS-CoV-2 were 113% more likely than people of healthy weight to land in the hospital, 74% more likely to be admitted to an ICU, and 48% more likely to die.

Reading some of the views expressed on this thread has made me feel physically sick at the inhumanity of some people.

@IrmaFayLear

I just read that obese people in their 50s might be asked to shield and not necessarily previous categories of shielder
Where did you read it and who is purported to have said this might happen? If it is in a newspaper it may be pure speculation.

@rorosemary

I need to go to the hospital quite frequently at the moment. I need the health care professionals to also be kept safe from Covid so I can be kept safe. My DH's granny needs her carers and cleaners to be kept safe from covid. My colleague needs public transport to ve kept safe from covid while she is going through yet another chemo.

Society is connected. You can't effectively keep one group safe without having an impact on the whole. Everyone needs to do tgeir bit.

I think this is why the Barrington Declaration would never work. Everyone is connected.

They are fringe scientists who are getting a lot of attention. Most scientists do not agree with them and they haven't backed up their ideas with any projections on their effects or how it would work in practice.

Really, if you want things to go more back to normal (with social distancing measures, using masks, banning gatherings of large groups), you need a functioning contact tracing system and we don't have that because our politicians cannot organise a piss up in a brewery and insist on awarding all their contracts to friends who are similarly useless. Honestly, you would think they could have got it right by now, they have had the whole summer.

The contact tracing needs to use backward tracing too, so instead of just tracing the people who an infected individual has been in contact with and could have infected (forward tracing), they need to trace the person they got it from and their contacts to find any clusters. This is because covid-19 acts like SARS and MERS, where 20% of individuals cause 80% of cases. Countries that dealt with SARS have realised this and done much better. African countries that have dealt with Ebola and have the experience of this have also done much better than us.

This explains it much better than I can: www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/

What disgraceful views on this thread.
Let's lock away the vulnerable or the obese and let the ubermensch "healthy" live their lives?

@Murfle with the absolutely utmost respect to your family, you must acknowledge that genocide of disabled children and adults by the Nazi regime was a precursor to the death camps.

@TheLastStarfighter

Reading some of the views expressed on this thread has made me feel physically sick at the inhumanity of some people.

I've been thinking that since Chris Whitty said close to 1% of the country would die unless we take action and the sociopaths shrugged and said "Let it rip"

I do @iskwobel but do you really think any of the posters here are seriously, genuinely advocating genocide/total extermination of disabled adults and children?

I don't believe they do - they might be ignorant or stupid or callous or narrow minded or thoughtless and all sorts of other things - and so I think you (not you in a specific sense of course) are devaluing the concept of genocide as well as (this bit is very inarticulate sorry) running the risk of people dismissing your views as over reacting.

People who make disablist statements etc should absolutely be challenged but personally I feel it's not appropriate here to conflate their views to genocide by the Nazi regime. Statements made by white supremacists elsewhere for example though would probably fall into that category - so conflating the comments here is also minimising white supremacists'^^ abhorrent views as though they are the same as people here that are unpleasant, sure but I really don't think they actively desire the extermination of all disabled adults and children.

Sorry, very inarticulate and I don't want to derail the thread. I could start another dedicated thread when I'm a bit more with it perhaps as I feel it's an interesting discussion.

@Murfle that's a good idea ... I think you are being too nice about the posters on here! These thoughtless othering comments translate really quickly into callous reality and we have seen it time and time again in societies across the world.