Government denial over schools issues will cause deaths this Christmas

[noblegiraffe]

I just can't get my head around how utterly crazy the government Christmas policy is.

Secondary school kids are the most infected subset of the population with it now estimated that more than 1 in 50 of them are positive. As they are children, most of them will never be tested as they either are asymptomatic, or will display different symptoms to the main three that are required to trigger a test (councils are overruling this in some parts of England and asking parents to use a more sensible list of symptoms).

Schools mostly break up on 18th December, 5 days before the Christmas relaxation period begins and people start taking advantage of this to mix with other households indoors, in poorly ventilated small rooms, which as scientists warn, is a terrible idea. twitter.com/devisridhar/status/1331931594400149506?s=21

Closing schools a week earlier (or moving online) would give 2 weeks out of school before Christmas day, which would reduce the infection rate in school children significantly (we saw a dip in the infection rate just in one week over half term) and make it safer for them to mix with other households, particularly if people took advantage of those two weeks to significantly reduce their contacts and other risks.

Some schools took it upon themselves to protect their own communities by changing the term dates to close a week earlier. The DfE has overruled this and forced them to stay open.
schoolsweek.co.uk/overruled-dfes-sweeping-coronavirus-powers-force-trust-into-early-christmas-holiday-u-turn/

Because of the tier system, if families don't get together at Christmas during the relaxation period, when their children pose a much higher risk, they will not be able to see their families properly for Christmas at all. Essentially Christmas is being funnelled into a time period which is insanely risky due to it coming shortly after children mixing freely in unsafe schools with significant numbers of undiscovered infections.

I know the DfE have been reading this board. I understand why you want schools open, but lying to people about the risks as you have is dangerous and immoral. Transparency is needed so that people can make their own informed risk assessments, not propaganda about 'safe schools' and 'saving Christmas'.

christina you are being a bit obtuse tbh.

If a mum says on here ‘my baby keeps crying and I can’t cope’ we know what she means. We don’t niggle her. She means she is finding it very, very difficult.

Someone’s workplace ‘can’t cope’ means the same thing. I have no desire to make things very, very difficult for my colleagues or my students BUT my own child is more important, of course he is. That shouldn’t come as a shock to anybody. If my child was admitted to hospital, or was very unwell, I’d take time off to be with him, and if that meant my workplace was on its knees that would have to be the case.

However that is different to him being perfectly healthy and happy to attend school, and my workplace not coping because I had to take needless time off to look after him.

Everyone is understanding of the fact emergencies happen. As I’ve said, the aim is to minimise inconvenience, not remove it completely.

christinarossetti19 What are you talking about now? And what argument have I “lost”?

I apologise for using an emoji that I felt would convey my tone.

Welcometonowhere Perfectly put. I would use a “clapping” emoji but apparently I only use them when I’m losing an argument.

Please do tell me how saying that every family should decide for themselves is patronising christina

I actually think you can’t argue against anything at all I said so decided I took a patronising tone because what I said was quite right and you know it.

Individual family decides their child is exhausted and struggling and allows him to break up for the holidays a week early - no problem.

A blanket decision to close all schools a week early because some children are exhausted and struggling - not a good idea because some children will have more MH challenges away from school, childcare problems will increase stress levels for some families and exam classes will fall further behind which has proven links with underachievement and MH problems later in life.

Do tell me what was patronising about any of that. I really am very interested in your reply.

So no evidence whatsoever then.

Welcometonowhere the impact on your workplace is the same whatever the reason that you are not in it. Your own illness, your child's illness, school closures, transport problems etc. It's the same impact, which can sometimes be mitigated if there is notice.

The main point of this thread is that lots and lots of children are in school perfectly healthy in themselves and asymptomatically carrying and spreading the virus. Secondary schools in particular are, at the moment, the main vehicle of community transmission.

The secondary point being that if the govt were taking this into account in their covid managment strategies, schools would have had many more mitigating measures in the first place and they wouldn't be planning on permitting people to spread the virus even more over Xmas just a few days after schools break up.

I think if emojis are indicative of losing an argument then swearing and insulting posters certainly is.

And before anyone starts I’ve no issue with ‘this situation is shit for everybody’ / ‘I’m so fucking tired’ / ‘I’m fucked off with this latest decision’. I’m talking about it actually being aimed at people.

Seriously christina so if I call tomorrow and say I won’t be in because I am going Christmas shopping, that’s OK, because my child could be ill, so the impact is the same. The reason apparently doesn’t matter?

Welcometonowhere your paragraph about what doesn't help a child's mental health was patronising in the extreme. Maybe you always communicate as if the person you're addressing is either five years old or knows nothing about the subject - I don't know?

It's also patronising to suggest that families can just take their child out of school and hence time off work if they judge that s/he needs time out. Nicknacky can detail the childcare issues involved in this for you if you like, as she has at length earlier in the thread.

Nicknacky you've said umpteen times that you can't possible take time off work before Xmas and now you say that you could if necessary.

christinarossetti19 I cannot get annual leave, correct.

Family emergency or illness then obviously I’m off work.

Can you not see the difference?

Me? I haven't sworn or insulted you Welcometonowhere.

I can't take any time off.

I can take time off if my child needs me.

Can you see the difference?

It wasn’t patronising in the slightest.

Families know what is best and what works for them. They can take their child out of school if they feel it is best: if they don’t, they don’t.

Treating adults like adults capable of making rational decisions is not patronising, it’s the opposite. I notice you haven’t said which part you disagree with either.

Christina what is your preferred approach in terms of closures etc

Or other

christinarossetti19 It’s you that can’t see the difference and it’s coming across as if you think you have caught me out here.

Did I really need to be so specific and say “I can’t get time off unless my child is in a terrible car crash or takes seriously unwell”? I think it’s a given for all working parents that they take time off in an emergency.

@christinarossetti19

I can't take any time off.

I can take time off if my child needs me.

Can you see the difference?

I can’t take any time off without there being an emergency because to do so would cause huge amounts of inconvenience to my colleagues, have a severe and ongoing impact to my finances and cause other problems which we can apply to individual workplaces

We really don’t need to explain why on the whole it’s a good thing for people to go to work, do we? Or do we?

A CEV friend has spent a worrying 3 weeks waiting to see if they catch Covid. Their partner works in a school and as they havent been anywhere else and shopping is delivered hard to see how else they got it. So dont tell me schools are not spreading covid.

The government know schools are spreading covid but refuse to conduct any testing there, even in tier 3 areas. So the government must want to keep the spread going in schools. This is very disruptive to children's education as well as forcing business closures. So you kill people, leave others with long term health problems and trash the economy at the same time. This government could not be any more incompetent.

Already this is where a more flexible approach would be beneficial. Your friend should have been allowed to WFH given her situation.

However, to close all schools on this basis is not right.

"I notice you haven’t said which part you disagree with either."

Yes, I have. The part where you say that families can just take their child out of school if they judge that they're exhausted, anxious etc. See childcare discussions upthread for why it's not as simple as that.

It's not a given for working parents that they can take time off with with a sick child without losing their job or having no income. Far from it.

Marsha I think any discussions and strategies about school closures need to be based on what we know about the virus and current rates of infections in schools and now in the context of the Xmas mixing plans.

I don't think we have enough transparency about current rates, nor is there any political will to, to make good evidence based decisions at the moment.

From what we know, the current plans will herald an increase in infections in more parts of the country come the New Year. I think from a public health pov it would be best to avoid that.

Not everyone can WFH as NickNacky has pointed out repeatedly.

I don’t think the government want to keep the spread going. I don’t think anyone’s aim is to cause as much death and misery as possible (it’s not unheard of but rare.)

When an action is taken that seems to cause death and misery and suffering, it’s generally because not to take this action would lead to more - directly or indirectly. Any major decision made by any government will be open to this sort of criticism. And rightly so: people should feel able to voice arguments for and against without harassment.

@alreadytaken

A CEV friend has spent a worrying 3 weeks waiting to see if they catch Covid. Their partner works in a school and as they havent been anywhere else and shopping is delivered hard to see how else they got it. So dont tell me schools are not spreading covid.

The government know schools are spreading covid but refuse to conduct any testing there, even in tier 3 areas. So the government must want to keep the spread going in schools. This is very disruptive to children's education as well as forcing business closures. So you kill people, leave others with long term health problems and trash the economy at the same time. This government could not be any more incompetent.

Of course people can catch covid in a school, just like they can literally anywhere. I don't think one single person on here has said otherwise?

The point of this thread is about whether closing schools down again, at short notice, is a proportionate response, given that we know this virus is going to spread regardless.

I’m lost christina

So Family A can’t just take time off because of childcare implications - so they don’t take their child out of school

Welcometonowhere I don't understand your last post.

I don’t really understand what you don’t understand.

If a school closes, anything between 100 and 2000 students can’t go.

If my son is unwell, he might have a few days off school. I have the right as a parent to decide when he is well enough to attend and when he is not.

If Mrs X is James Mum and decides James is exhausted, anxious, overwrought and has had enough, James can have a week off. No problem.

But we don’t close the whole school for that reason!