Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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

The infection rate for pupils last week was 2,509 out of 100,000!!

383 replies

SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 00:39

The Times today had reported that the infection rate for secondary pupils last week was 2,509 out of 100,000!! With the rate for primary school pupils close behind.

That’s absolutely shocking.

Rates of 300+ per 100,000 in the South East led to the emergency Tier 4 announcement at the weekend.

Rates among secondary school children are approx nine times this and primaries not far behind.

There can no longer be any conversation about schools remaining open. They need to close to all but key workers and the vulnerable and not reopen until the government has provided the money and means to make them truly ‘Covid secure’ or until enough people have been vaccinated.

How many deaths will we have in a months time when those infections have transferred to the elderly and vulnerable? How many more mutations will we have if the virus is allowed to carry on running through children? I for one do not want to find out that they vaccine no longer works.

It’s time to do what needs to be done. It’s tough and awful for everyone but it has to be done. The schools need to close.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
Shitfuckoh · 23/12/2020 00:46

My DC love being back in school. They've settled well. I say settled well, we've had 1 lot of isolation per DC, a school closure and extended class closure due to staff being very ill. My DC1s teacher was back in school but still suffering 6 weeks+ after having the virus. Seeing that and Looking at infection rates, I can't say I'm comfortable with any of them being in school. Not the same for all parents though I know.

ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 00:50

Calm down. My children's school has had 0 cases, 0 periods of isolation. Are you suggesting that they close too? Why does it have to be a blanket response?

I'd suggest the school rates are high because the overall rate is high, which is because we're in the middle of winter and the virus is doing what viruses do.

Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 00:54

So because your school has been lucky so far you are happy to let thousands more die?

And trust me, your luck will run out soon with these numbers

The infection rate for pupils last week was 2,509 out of 100,000!!
OP posts:
RuleWithAWoodenFoot · 23/12/2020 00:55

Unpossible. Schools are covid-secure Confused

Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 00:56

And the school numbers are not following the general population numbers so that’s your ‘theory’ out of the window. The rates in children are nearly 9 times higher than the rates needed to plunge an area into emergency Tier 4 restrictions.

OP posts:
ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 00:57

I'm just saying we don't need blanket school closures. Bring in testing, yes. But don't just close every school in the country for an indefinite period.

Theotherrudolph · 23/12/2020 01:00

My kids school has been barely affected so far, but I suspect the writing is on the wall. I’d accept school closures for a month or two, but I would expect a serious rethink of vaccination strategy and priorities for testing (proper testing not lateral flow) at the same time. They might need to tighten up keyworker though, I think over half the school would be in under one criteria or another!

And it’s way past time to cancel exams.

Achristmaspudsskidu · 23/12/2020 01:00

Wow-those numbers are frightening!

What are the government going to do to make schools safer?!

RuleWithAWoodenFoot · 23/12/2020 01:01

My school went from no cases, to a third of pupils off, within 3 days. It's covid-lucky or covid-unlucky.

What would your cut off be for a school closing? Who decides?

Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 01:02

We are at the point where blanket school closures are needed. Lateral testing in schools as promised for January is going to be an impossible task. And that’s even if they worked. They showed to have less than an 10% success rate at picking up Covid infections at University. How the hell will that work?!

And primary are supposed to be going back as normal in January with no testing and infection rates of nearly 2000 in 100000.

OP posts:
Freddiefox · 23/12/2020 01:02

@ElizabethG81

Calm down. My children's school has had 0 cases, 0 periods of isolation. Are you suggesting that they close too? Why does it have to be a blanket response?

I'd suggest the school rates are high because the overall rate is high, which is because we're in the middle of winter and the virus is doing what viruses do.

Are you really so sure this is the case?

We had a case in our school, parent was asked not to put it on social media or what apps groups. Due to the symptom starting on a Monday morning the head teacher and public health decide that the rest of the class didn’t need to isolate and they weren’t going to tell the parents as the child hadn’t been in school for 48 hours beforehand. So I wouldn’t be too sure that’s the case. There may have been case but you just don’t know.

ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 01:03

@RuleWithAWoodenFoot

My school went from no cases, to a third of pupils off, within 3 days. It's covid-lucky or covid-unlucky.

What would your cut off be for a school closing? Who decides?

Cut off would be when there are not enough staff in to teach the children. The headteacher should take responsibility for that decision, rather than "so scared" randoms on Mumsnet.
Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 01:05

@ElizabethG81

I'm just saying we don't need blanket school closures. Bring in testing, yes. But don't just close every school in the country for an indefinite period.
Do you spend 6 hours a day with 30 other people with no PPE? Would you? I’m betting you wouldn’t be so keen.

And not just any 30 people, 30 people with an infection rate of over 2000 in 100000.

OP posts:
Shitfuckoh · 23/12/2020 01:06

I think they should know more in regards the sudden surge in that graph before they reopen. 2-4 weeks or whatever of home learning whilst they fully investigate IMO. Hopefully the 2 weeks Christmas break is being put to some use other than head in sand approach.

Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 01:07

Cut off would be when there are not enough staff in to teach the children. The headteacher should take responsibility for that decision, rather than "so scared" randoms on Mumsnet.

So you’re saying it’s acceptable for teachers to keep dropping like flies until there’s none left to teach?? It seems selfishness knows no bounds.

OP posts:
ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 01:08

Yes, Freddie, I'm sure that's the case. It's a very small school and no children have been off. I appreciate it's lucky, but my argument still stands - why should they close if there are no cases in children or staff?

Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 01:09

@ElizabethG81

Yes, Freddie, I'm sure that's the case. It's a very small school and no children have been off. I appreciate it's lucky, but my argument still stands - why should they close if there are no cases in children or staff?
Because this Tier approach with schools running with no mitigations has led us to this disaster, months before the light at the end of the vaccine tunnel.
OP posts:
Theotherrudolph · 23/12/2020 01:10

The trouble Elizabeth is I suspect many school staff will just refuse to come in with rates like that. It’s not just if they’re sick or not, in our small primary if you include all staff types there’s a couple of shielders/living with shielded family member, several over 50/60, a couple very visibly overweight and several BAME. That’s before you get into those vulnerable for health conditions I obviously wouldn’t be party to. If even a few of those decide they’re too at risk to work (and the shielders will almost certainly be told that by govt), school is shut.

amaryllisu · 23/12/2020 01:10

I’m not denying this report but do you have a link to the article? You’d think it’d be front page news?

ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 01:11

@SoscaredforJan

Cut off would be when there are not enough staff in to teach the children. The headteacher should take responsibility for that decision, rather than "so scared" randoms on Mumsnet.

So you’re saying it’s acceptable for teachers to keep dropping like flies until there’s none left to teach?? It seems selfishness knows no bounds.

I'm saying it's unacceptable to close all schools in the country for an unspecified amount of time, with no realistic plans in place to educate our children, and after they already had to put up with a 5-6 month closure this year. It's not right and would be failing our children, yet at again.
Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 01:11

There has been no Covid in my children’s school either. However I am not selfish enough to think that their education is more important than someone’s life.

OP posts:
Em777 · 23/12/2020 01:13

So much for it not spreading in kids. 🙄

Original poster
SoscaredforJan · 23/12/2020 01:14

The government had 6 months to come up with money and a plan to open schools safely in September. They spent hardly a penny. Schools that had been promised 100s of laptops got 1.

The answer isn’t to pursue keeping schools open at the expense of people’s health, it’s to force the government to provide the money and means for ALL schools to provide effective online education until it is safe to reopen schools in a more Covid secure way.

OP posts:
ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 01:14

Christ. We're back to wanting children to be educated and vulnerable children to be kept safe being selfish. And don't try to say the vulnerable children will still be going to school, because they won't.

ElizabethG81 · 23/12/2020 01:16

IMO, there's no such thing as "effective online education" for primary school children.

I'm not going to keep arguing it as you have your opinion and I have mine.