Personal responsibility

[Jourdain11]

It seems like some people are desperate to be locked down, while others are desperate to be let out. Some people want there to be more rules, others don't care how many rules there are because they will break them all anyway.

The way it seems to me, a mandatory lockdown of any severity just isn't going to work any more. Everyone can always argue that it's not right that you can do one thing but not the other... there's no point while schools are open... or that keeping schools open is the only important thing and everything else should be sacrificed in order to do so. Christmas is a case in point: a load of additional restrictions put in place, but how many people went ahead with their plans anyway?

Those who don't give a damn will continue not to give a damn: if they can't meet up in a pub, they'll meet up in someone's home, and 9/10 times they'll get away with it.

And then there's the crucial point that, in order to bring about another "total lockdown", the government would have to actually get it past parliament. And that is by no means certain.

So isn't it time to simply ask people to be responsible, respectful and adult? Leave in place some restrictions about long distance travel and numbers of people who can meet up, perhaps, but otherwise simply put the responsibility onto each individual in the form of guidance.

If you work or live or come into contact with vulnerable people, it is wise to be more cautious. If you're a student and the people you're most likely to come into close and prolonged contact with are other non-vulnerable students, you can live a bit more freely. If you feel that you are vulnerable or need to protect yourself more, you should be permitted to wear PPE and distance at work, no matter what your profession. If you are clinically vulnerable, you should be certified as such and shielding and/or work from home or furlough should be facilitated.

Treat people like adults, and they might just start to behave like adults too!

If you work or live or come into contact with vulnerable people, it is wise to be more cautious

That covers pretty much everyone being more cautious. Hence the need for the restrictions we have in place.

I live in a village - most people are taking it seriously and behaving as if they might have it. They are distancing, hand washing, mask wearing. There are a couple of people who have it and know they have it but have taken the decision to keep going about their daily business as "normal" because they have only got a mild case. As a result of this cases in the village over the last week have quadrupled. Some of those people are very seriously ill.

The person who gave it to one of the severe cases does not see that they are the reason their friend is now in hospital - despite being the person's only contact for weeks. Apparently the infectors case is mild and therefore in their mind they cannot to be to blame because the hopitalised person has a "bad variant".

If the rules are to be relaxed the messaging must take into account the lowest common denominator thinking. I am not sure British Common Sense is sturdy enough to stop stupid people taking undue risks with other peoples lives.

That's rubbish @Unescorted . I do think there should be pretty harsh fines for anyone who has tested positive and doesn't isolate.

@PuppyMonkey

If you work or live or come into contact with vulnerable people, it is wise to be more cautious

That covers pretty much everyone being more cautious. Hence the need for the restrictions we have in place.

But there's a difference between, for instance, "my wife has blood cancer" and "I might pass someone in the street or in a shop who has cancer".

@FOJN

Are there any other laws you think we should get rid of because some people break them?

Decriminalise cannabis, maybe? Since there doesn't seem to be anything to prevent anyone from selling, dealing, acquiring or using it. At least there would be some transparency.

We as a family have done just that, and if we didnt have school and work, would be safe. With school and work tho, we are exposed to others.

DH is a subcontractor. Back in September when you couldn't get a test, one his workmates, who travelled to work with dh in dhs car got symptoms over the weekend. Phoned site first thing Monday, explained and given the fact they were in a car together for an hour each day, we said dh would self isolate until test results back. Obviously it was impossible to get a test until the Thursday and test results came back (negative) Sunday. Turned up to work Monday to book in the weeks money we were owed and carry on. Told we would only be paid £900 instead of the 3k we were owed as someone else had finished our work off. About £200 worth.

So us taking personal responsibility cost our company 2k. And another 2 weeks off work while we found something else.

So in an ideal world everyone would do the right thing but sometimes it's just not possible.

In principle I agree with you that we should be able to rely on people to give a shit about people other than themselves. But it's become abundantly clear that many many people don't. A case that illustrates this perfectly is the group of people from tier 4 being turned away by the police at the airport in the Isles of Scilly.

Here's a specific example of why we need restrictions - I'm clinically extremely vulnerable. I'm 36 and look healthy. I work full time. I have a 4 yr old. Therefore for me to work from home, I need childcare.
If all the other kids at the nursery and their families do whatever they like because they're not vulnerable then it vastly increases the chance that DD will bring the virus home. What do you propose we do? I give up work, lose the house and end up homeless? Not send DD to nursery at all being detrimental to her education and her and my mental health? I've already got mental health problems, I was a danger to myself and her during the first lockdown. If she was school age I wouldn't be allowed to just not send her. Not that I can work with her here anyway, so we're back to losing the house.
Set up special schools and nurseries for the children of extremely clinically vulnerable households? I'm in a rural area, there's simply not enough existing nurseries to do this where I live, never mind the upheaval involved. And what about the staff there? They'd have to 'shield' as would their families. So their DPs wouldn't be able to go to work. Their kids would have to go to the 'special' schools too.

Or everyone could just be careful, social distance, wear a mask, not gather in groups.

That's a very privileged view. What if you want to do everything possible to avoid getting the virus but you're a single parent and a factory worker or a bus driver and still need to go to work and send your kids to school?

The whole point of the restrictions and rules is to protect other people but the majority of people seem too selfish to even understand that concept let alone be willing to give up anything to protect others they don't know.

The law prevents people possessing and distributing cannabis but some people think it's a victimless crime and therefore decide they're above the law. I'm not buying transparency as a virtue when it comes to criminal activity.

The first paragraph of TolstoyAteMyHamster at 08.55 outlines very well the consequences of individuals doing their own risk assessments and exercising personal responsibility.

Or everyone could just be careful, social distance, wear a mask, not gather in groups.

Very true, but this could be encouraged as guidance without being made into law.

People need clear rules about what they should be doing to minimise the risk to themselves and others. Even if some people choose to break the rules, most people will follow them most of the time.

I can't remember where I read it, but I'm sure there was something when the first lockdown came in that it only actually needed about 60% of people to stick to it for it to be effective. Apparently, we followed it better than the government anticipated. Which then made it impossible to actually pick things back up again in the summer.

The government know people don't follow lockdowns/rules. They're not idiots. Which is why they didn't fully cancel Christmas. They also know another full lockdown will not be supported which is why they are not introducing one.

I will happily put up with whatever nonsense they will have us do. As long as schools stay open. Ours is already closed until 18th January (wales) which I can just about cope with. But not any longer.

Very true, but this could be encouraged as guidance without being made into law.

Umm. It has been, since April. 'just guidance' is clearly not fucking working, is it?!

@WeeDangerousSpike

Very true, but this could be encouraged as guidance without being made into law.

Umm. It has been, since April. 'just guidance' is clearly not fucking working, is it?!

Okay, lovely - you just go ahead and swear at me as much as you like. It's just wonderful how this situation makes people act towards each other

There are still posters on MN denying that many hospitals in London, wales etc are overwhelmed, that it’s normal for the NHS in winter, nothing new. Claiming that hospitals in danger of running out of piped oxygen is an regular occurrence.
There’s so much unqualified rubbish being spouted that no one knows what to believe and are more likely to ignore advice. We are quiet at the moment ( crit care NW) - only a couple of covid patients - but we’ve been in tier three since July which explains why we’ve managed to keep a lid on numbers.

Basically No.

The British population (as well as many others across the world) are too thick to make a proper risk assessment & too selfish not to put their own needs above those of others.

I don't necessarily support lockdowns, although this new variant has got me more worried than before.

But I get fed up with doing the right thing and making hard choices to try and keep my family and those around me safe, when everyone else just does what they want.

Its not going to be the multiple lockdowns that make me say 'fuck it, I'm done with this shit'. Its going to be people & their selfishness.

I agree I theory, if Boris had come on at the start said I'm not closing anything, but each and every one of us has to keep their distance, wash their hands and cut contact in homes, this will save the economy and your jobs. How many people do you think would have done it.

I think this approach would have worked better in other countries, here in the UK, a certain percentage simply don't care.

It's just wonderful how this situation makes people act towards each other.

Quite. Imagine being told you'll almost certainly die if you catch it, and people saying that it doesn't matter, and they should be able to do what they like because they'll probably be ok.

You've got to be kidding.

If this pandemic has shown us anything it's that a substantial proportion of the population don't know how to behave responsibly or like adults.

Personal responsibility seems to mean do as I like without the authorities telling me what to do. From my side of the fence it all looks incredibly immature.

@Jourdain11

Or everyone could just be careful, social distance, wear a mask, not gather in groups.

Very true, but this could be encouraged as guidance without being made into law.

If it is guidance only then you have to rely on people to behave in a way to protect you not just themselves. As demonstrated by the person in my village, the skiers in Switzerland, the pub owner down the road that does lock ins, the people all travelling to see families, my local MP who travelled from London hours before it was put into T4 and went about glad handing in local towns the day after he got back and all the other "exceptions" many people are unable to make decisions beyond their own selfish horizons. It is not possible to distinguish if the person reaching across you in the bread aisle is stupid on just that occasion because they are distracted in the moment or it is continuing a pattern of selfish self entitled behaviour and is happily spreading virus all over everyone & hasn't been limiting contact, keeping distance or washing their hands. If you have reason to be cautious you have to avoid those people, and because they look teh same as everyone else you have to avoid everyone.

To fine the woman who is not self isolating even though she has COVID there needs to be a law not guidance. If there is merely guidance people can do what they like putting others at risk. Imagine if speed limits were for guidance only and someone speeds into a pedestrian on a crossing - the driver could not be prosecuted for dangerous driving, the pedestrian / family would not get compensation because there is nothing the driver had done wrong.

@WeeDangerousSpike

It's just wonderful how this situation makes people act towards each other.

Quite. Imagine being told you'll almost certainly die if you catch it, and people saying that it doesn't matter, and they should be able to do what they like because they'll probably be ok.

That's pretty much what I have been told, as a matter of fact. But I have to manage that risk. It's not everyone else's job to do it for me.

Does that mean I can ring my husband and tell him to come home from work. We have been careful, it's been our choice to follow the rules. He is now at work in the hospital on his third round of cancelled holiday since March.

I really do understand the frustration with restrictions but I'd have loved to have been able to shut my family away and keep us safe. Why should key workers pay an even higher price for others being able to choose not to give a fuck with no consequences.

@Jourdain11

Or everyone could just be careful, social distance, wear a mask, not gather in groups.

Very true, but this could be encouraged as guidance without being made into law.

Except even when law there's twats organising huge gatherings.

If people do it knowing it's a 10k fine - I magazine then arnage if it's just a nice request.

But I have to manage that risk. It's not everyone else's job to do it for me.

And that's what it boils down to isn't it. As I said at the beginning, I'd be inclined to agree with you, but for the fact that it's become abundantly clear that people won't follow guidance.

The trouble is that if the wider population don't follow the guidance then the risk to the very vulnerable becomes unmanageable. You simply can't keep yourself safe on your own when you have to go to work / school / interact in some way with people outside your household.

But I have to manage that risk. It's not everyone else's job to do it for me.

But you managing that risk might not be really managing it because your risk assessment it way off!

So you get Covid and it makes you seriously ill before it kills you.

What do you do?

1/ seek medical help

2/ suffer alone and then die at home

I am guessing I know the answer.

Or the person who has risk assessed that they are fine but meet up with their friends and give then a hug to say hello. They then go and visit their 90 year old grandma (who has risk assessed that their grandchild is behaving and well its family so is perfectly safe to visit) and so it goes on.

The one thing I have agreed with Boris Johnson on. When he said you can't just protect the vulnerable. Because the virus will be passed on to them if we are letting everyone else catch it.