Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Are we sacrificing the young to save the elderly?

865 replies

RubyandBen · 15/10/2020 08:32

Reading another thread where someone was accusing the OP of wanting to sacrifice the elderly re CV. But the longer this goes on the more education and the economy are screwed is it actually the other way round?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Jrobhatch29 · 15/10/2020 12:46

@aSofaNearYou

What is the point of being kept alive if you're locked in a care home and unable to see your family for the next 2 years

Because not everyone at risk is so close to the end of their natural life that they wouldn't prioritise preserving it. It sucks, but two years is really not that big a sacrifice if you still have 10+ years to live, for example.

The problem is nobody knows how long they have left. My nanna died last week aged 85. Old age. She had no health conditions and we regularly joked she would outlive us. We now wish she hadnt lived such a lonely life over the last 6 months and we feel very guilty. Is 2 years of loneliness worth it?
DameFanny · 15/10/2020 12:50

@022828MAN

Yes. Well really we're sacrificing 99.03% to save 0.07%. Either way it's disproportionate and not rational.
6 in 1,000 is .6%, not .06

And long covid could be running at 2%, which is significant.

BlueJava · 15/10/2020 12:50

Are we sacrificing the young to save the elderly?

To some extent yes, but we're not saving the elderly either. I am shocked at how some close friends and relatives (above 70) have deteriorated since March, including my own parents.

Ecosse · 15/10/2020 12:51

But the vast majority of people on care homes will not live for years. Even in normal times, the average resident will die after 2 years and only 50% survive for 1 year.

CaptainMyCaptain · 15/10/2020 12:52

@Yesyoudoknowme exactly. If people (of all ages) followed the restrictions properly further lock downs probably wouldn't be necessary.

MrsFrisbyMouse · 15/10/2020 12:57

Taking age out of the argument for a moment.

Black people make up 3% of the population but account for 6 out of every 100 deaths.

Indian/Bangladeshi/Pakistani populations have double the death rates of their white neighbours.

Men are more likely to die than women. (57/43)

And then you need to factor in the 3.6million with diabetes, 2.3 million with chronic heart disease.

Yes, the 'young' are adversely affected by protection measures - but without them we are sending a message to lots of different communities that we don't care about them, we only want to preserve things for young, affluent mostly white people.

aSofaNearYou · 15/10/2020 13:03

The problem is nobody knows how long they have left. My nanna died last week aged 85. Old age. She had no health conditions and we regularly joked she would outlive us. We now wish she hadnt lived such a lonely life over the last 6 months and we feel very guilty. Is 2 years of loneliness worth it?

Sorry for your loss. I get that, but people in their 60s and 70s are also vulnerable, not to mention people with underlying conditions. There is an argument that very elderly people might want to choose to be less cautious to better enjoy their last few years, but for a majority of other people (and definitely young people), yes I do think 2 years of loneliness is worth it.

tempnamechange98765 · 15/10/2020 13:04

Yes.

loulouljh · 15/10/2020 13:06

Yes. Definitely

loulouljh · 15/10/2020 13:07

Good point above..we are not really saving the elderly. they are being condemned to loneliness....existing not living.

Autumngoldleaf · 15/10/2020 13:08

can the NHS cope with an increase of covid patients even if the elderly are totally protected?

Because more than covid - I worry each year in winter about falling ill because I know in normal times, the NHS struggles. My df was waiting in an ambulance for 6 hours outside his hospital in march pre covid. My DD was on a ward of dc all whom had a respiratory illness, and they ran out of monitoring equipment.

SO in pure terms of covid maybe its a good argument to keep the young going but...in terms of general access to the nhs in winter...I think we need to do all we can to keep well.

Autumngoldleaf · 15/10/2020 13:08

loulouljh Thu 15-Oct-20 13:07:31

^^ I strongly feel they should make their own choices.

Greyshaggyrug · 15/10/2020 13:10

Yes

Port1aCastis · 15/10/2020 13:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Juststopswimming · 15/10/2020 13:28

This thread is awful, full of ageism and saying the elderly deserve 2 years of lonrliness etc etc how vile can folks get

I dont think a single person has said the elderly deserve 2 years of loneliness?! We have pointed out that with lockdowns, that is what will happen and is that really ok? and is that really what the elderly want?

Also its funny how people start shrieking about ageism, but only when it refers to the elderly. How many people on this thread and others have said things like "well young people have school and uni open, that should be sufficient" "i dont understand why teenagers need to go on the piss anyway" "a bit of disruption to eduation for one year wont kill anyone" etc etc etc

TempsPerdu · 15/10/2020 13:53

Also its funny how people start shrieking about ageism, but only when it refers to the elderly. How many people on this thread and others have said things like "well young people have school and uni open, that should be sufficient" "i dont understand why teenagers need to go on the piss anyway" "a bit of disruption to eduation for one year wont kill anyone" etc etc etc

See also the Liverpool partygoers thread - young people/students are all selfish and stupid yada yada.

larrygrylls · 15/10/2020 13:58

The biggest single sacrifice we are making is keeping schools open to help the young. This includes education, safeguarding and a social life.

This is prioritising the young. It is also prioritising parents of children under 18, allowing them to continue to work and have some child free time.

It is right to prioritise the young in this way, even increasing deaths somewhat. However, the compromise is intermittent lock downs for the rest of society until we get a vaccine.

larrygrylls · 15/10/2020 13:59

No one has answers the simple question:

What is the solution to keep society functioning (and the economy) if the hospitals are overwhelmed?

(And, no, ‘shielding the elderly’ won’t get nearly far enough to prevent this happening, unless by ‘elderly’ you mean over 50).

GnomeDePlume · 15/10/2020 14:01

No:

Covid makes some people very, very ill. When they are very, very ill they need hospital treatment. There is a limited supply of critical care beds in any hospital. When they are full there is no spare, no magic cupboard, no special team of extra staff.

The next person who needs critical care may have to be sent to a different hospital miles away (if they have space) or treated in less suitable conditions. It doesnt matter if that next person is as a result of Covid or a Road Traffic Accident.

The economy cant afford to have a disease which makes some people very, very ill for months and others off sick for a couple of weeks run through the entire workforce.

The workforce are the people who pay taxes, buy stuff and do the work which generates profits for their employers who also pay taxes.

When people are off sick for any length of time their income drops which means they pay less tax. Their employer pays less tax (Employers NI at 13.8%).

Not doing anything and letting this run through the workforce will also damage the economy.

Madhairday · 15/10/2020 14:06

It seems to me that there is a lot of dramatising here from parents about how it is ruining their children's future. I asked my 20 year old DD what she and her friends thought and what the general thinking is. She said that they just see it as pulling together with everyone in order to stop the health services (and so every other sector of society) from being overrun by covid and thus stopping functioning which will cause more death and misery. All her friends think this too. They do not blame elderly and vulnerable people for taking their life chances away as many on this thread and MN in general seem to. They see that this is a virus, a pandemic, a distaster that we all just have to get on with keeping suppressed as far as is possible through the measures scientists advise. They see their peers who do complain about 'sacrificing for those who will die soon anyway' as pretty damn cold and lacking in compassion. For my DD and her friends, this all sucks but it does for everyone and there is nothing to be gained by this polarising of positions that ends in blaming one group or the other - why can't we just be kind, my DD says, and I concur. Why can't we just admit that this virus doesn't care about our rights and our freedoms and our mental health and so we simply have to get on with flattening the curve where we can, in order that all those rights and freedoms and mental health issues don't become even more at risk due to the whole system collapsing under greater exponential growth.

I'm so glad my DD and many of her generation see things more generously and compassionately than many on here, despite the fact that they know their future looks bleak (and already did thanks to austerity, Brexit and climate change.)

DameFanny · 15/10/2020 14:07

@larrygrylls

No one has answers the simple question:

What is the solution to keep society functioning (and the economy) if the hospitals are overwhelmed?

(And, no, ‘shielding the elderly’ won’t get nearly far enough to prevent this happening, unless by ‘elderly’ you mean over 50).

Agree with this. All the threads and posters saying 'we should just go back to normal' and no one ever addresses what would happen even if we did say 'ok let's let the old people and diabetics die'.

If the hospitals are overwhelmed with covid you still won't get your manky libertarian heart palpitations prioritised because there won't be the capacity, and we'll have killed more doctors and nurses (especially BAME) in the process.

But 'oh we should just be braver and live our lives' seems to be the fuckwitted magical-thinking response of choice right now.

Jrobhatch29 · 15/10/2020 14:12

manky libertarian heart palpitations

Confused
Cornettoninja · 15/10/2020 14:16

oh we should just be braver and live our lives' seems to be the fuckwitted magical-thinking response of choice right now

Verbal homeopathy? It’s gone airborne!

loobyloo1234 · 15/10/2020 14:19

Yes we are

The problem is nobody knows how long they have left. My nanna died last week aged 85. Old age. She had no health conditions and we regularly joked she would outlive us. We now wish she hadnt lived such a lonely life over the last 6 months and we feel very guilty. Is 2 years of loneliness worth it?

And this just makes me realise some old people may actually be happy to take their risks with it than go through months, possibly years of loneliness - just to keep less than 1% of the population safe

SecretSpAD · 15/10/2020 14:21

@Madhairday my 17 and 14 year old think the same....as do their friends and cousins. It's nice to know that the actual young people are taking this seriously and care for society, even though their parents seem to be lacking in compassion.

The thing about ageing is that it gets to us all in the end. You reap what you sow.