Only one member of household required to isolate

[TheLette]

Hi, sorry if this has been asked before...

My daughter's nursery has said she has to isolate for 10 days from last Thursday (we were told today, which isn't ideal as we have been out and about every day since Thursday) due to a member of staff testing positive. My daughter has no symptoms. Fine, we have no problem with this instruction. However the instruction said that other members of the household can carry on their usual activities i.e. go out etc unless our daughter or anyone else in the household starts displaying symptoms.

My daughter is 3 so obviously can't self-isolate away from the rest of the family.

My question is how does it make any sense that the rest of the family doesn't have to self-isolate too? This seems bonkers to me. Surely if she has it, there is a high chance that at least one other family member has it? For the record we are planning to isolate as much as possible too although there are 1 or 2 essential trips out of the house that we need to make, to collect food orders.

It's always seemed crazy to me as well.

It's about level of risk. She may not have it. If she hasn't got it she can't pass it onto her family.

If everyone in a close contact's household has to isolate society would grind to a halt.

It’s crazy, but also correct. The rest of the household can carry on as normal. I find it confusing too!

I assume there's an expectation the contact will isolate from the household. And if that's not possible, as in the case of most children, then the household essentially isolates with them.

@StealthPolarBear

I assume there's an expectation the contact will isolate from the household. And if that's not possible, as in the case of most children, then the household essentially isolates with them.

I don't think that the case, it's clear in the guidance that the rest of the household should carry on as normal unless/until the contact shows symptoms

If it was otherwise there's be so many people off work the country wouldn't be able to run

First of all, she has to catch it. Then, it isn't highly likely others will necessarily catch it. I think its about 40/50% likely, but I don't have the data. There are numerous posts on here where other family members didn't get it (like us) .

My son has had six self isolations since Sep, due to school. If we isolated each time, we would not have left the house for 10 weeks either!

The thing is if we expect contacts of contacts to isolate then there would be huge numbers of healthy people isolating, meaning that many couldn't work and then lose money. This would lead to lower compliance. It's about balancing the risk of spreading covid against consequences of isolating.

We are in a similar position with two primary aged children. DH and I are not strictly self isolating ourselves, we are going for runs and occasionally going to a shop, but other than that we are staying at home. Cancelled my hair appointment, was planning to meet some family members for a walk but cancelled that too.

(Obviously it’s easy for us to do that as we are on annual leave anyway, would be different if we had to go out to work)

I was in very close contact with a positive case and am now isolating. DH is working in a very busy supermarket.
It seems bonkers, doesn't it?

I sort of understand it with older children / adults in the household if they can make a decent attempt at self-isolation within the home (and if the home set up permits that e.g. separate bathroom). But I don't think it makes sense for young children - I can't possibly keep her away from the rest of the family! And especially when we get the isolation instructions on day 4 of a 10 day isolation period! Hopefully none of us have it, would hate to think we have been innocently spreading it about over the last few days.