It doesn’t feel like a good idea does it?

[SomethingM1ss1ng]

I understand the need for families to be together, I really do since I cannot be one of those who can spend the Christmas with our families as they live a 12 hour flight away.
But there is no guarantee people will adhere to the ‘rules’ the chances are that come Jan we will be back to where we were in Sep/Oct. What’s the point of all the hand washing/grocery cleansing if we are going to throw it all away in the middle of winter?
Maybe I’m having a bad day but just feel very irritated with our supposed ‘leaders’

The general understanding and messaging behind the lockdowns and restrictions was always that people will die, but by limiting movement and social interactions we could protect the NHS from becoming overwhelmed and ensure that those who needed a hospital bed would get one.

So if mixing over this period does cause case numbers to rise (which it will), as long as those who do need hospital care continue to get it, we are still meeting the stated goal of lockdown.

We shouldn't be worried about Christmas mixing causing lockdown to continue into January and beyond. Why? Because they will keep us locked down and under restrictions regardless of what happens at Christmas.

Maybe they'll give it a new name, or some new tier numbers, but I find it difficult to believe that the governments have any plans to let us get back to normal any time soon.

Couldn't have put it better than @scottish83

The whole point we keep being told is controlling the spread rather than just doing nothing. "Letting" (god I hate this) people see their family for a limited 5 days at Christmas when lets face it many were doing anyway is doing exactly that.

We were always going to be in restrictions in January, I dont see why people think otherwise.

It's much easier to 'allow' people to do what they would have done illegally anyway. The danger with letting people break the law is that they'll begin to think that they can do it all the time rather than just in a contained period of five days. It's all about management of the risks.

We've been in lockdown since March, despite a let up in the summer there were still A LOT of restrictions (some areas never came out of it). Families HAVE been getting together this year. Whether it's Christmas or not makes no difference.

Your irritation with our 'leaders' is misplaced. If everyone followed the guidelines we wouldn't be in the situation we are now in. They had to do something for Christmas because so many people were bleating about it and many would have totally ignored guidelines anyway. Better to at least try and limit how many people we can mix with than just allow people to do what they want.

Yes, the infection rates will go up as a result, but by less than if the population were left to do their own thing.

No, it feels very much like a plan that’s going to come up in a report about handling pandemics and lessons to be learned for dealing with the next one.

Most people I know won’t be having large Christmas Day celebrations as most feel the same.

If the Mumsnet threads on this subject are anything to go by then most people won’t be mixing anyway. Or they will be isolating before mixing so no chance of any spread there either.
Also, I recall similar threads about protests, VE Day, people on the beaches in the summer etc and none of those caused the disaster everyone is anticipating after Christmas.
Just like after the “magic” 2nd lockdown of November in England and similar across the rest of the uk, there will be further restrictions in January regardless.

As I’ve already set out on another thread, my 7 year old DS currently mixes with 29 other households per day. Over Christmas (and after at least a week’s break seeing nobody else) he will mix with 3 households over the period of Christmas. Not only is this far less mixing but then most of the family have a further 7 days off before heading back to work. Plenty of time for anyone to potentially develop symptoms and isolate if necessary. Within my own family who can’t wait to see each other after 8 months in some cases, we have all taken a grown up decision about who wants to be included and if anyone is ill beforehand then of course we won’t see them, just like last year when my dsis caught flu just before Christmas and so stayed at home so as not to pass it on.

Some would have done it regardless but I think the tier rules should have remained in place. Giving permission to mix will result in more mixing before and after and going past three households as they think it’s fine as was at Christmas so no different. You only have to look at the number who are still hosting play dates and sleepovers as claim children are at school all day together to see the theory some will apply.

At least then, when we inevitability end up back in lockdown in January and cases/deaths are up the government could say it was down to people breaking the rules. Giving permission to mingle means they can’t do that.

Trouble is that "allowing" three households to mix will mean that people will mix in 4 or 5 households as they won't see much difference. But the govt are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

What's more worrying is the potential "parties". By keeping pubs and restaurants closed, people are more likely to party at home and that means more people. At least if pubs and restaurants were open, the management would be able to exercise some kind of control over numbers etc even if it was just refusing bookings over certain numbers and having table maximums. When it comes to peoples houses you could get far more numbers. There's actually quite a row on our local facebook page where we have a bar/restaurant forced to stay closed that's offering takeaway "party packages" for Christmas and New Year with packages for 20/30/40 people - apparently nothing to stop them providing a buffet for 40!

Whatever the government said if people want to see family they were going to anyway.