A thought experiment about children

[Chessie678]

Imagine that pre-covid there is a mother with a 6 year old son.

She becomes very scared of the child getting or spreading “diseases”. For this reason she keeps the child inside most of the time and does not let him play with other children. She tells him to stay away from others in case he infects them and makes him change his clothes and scrub his hands whenever he has been outside. She doesn’t take him on trips and the only time they go out is to walk around their local neighbourhood. He is not allowed to attend any clubs or play sport.

The mother’s behaviour escalates and she begins to keep her son off school for long periods of time, citing the risk of “diseases”. She stops contact with the child’s grandparents and cousins, telling the child that he might murder his grandmother if they see her. If he gets ill she locks him in his room and brings food to the door.

Sometimes she will send him back to school for a period but makes him wear a mask and tells him not to touch anything or get too near another child.

Having worked with vulnerable children in the past, I think this scenario would far exceed the threshold for social services intervention and suggests severe mental health issues in the mother.

Clearly the rationale for how we are treating children at the moment is different in that the threat from covid is much more severe than the threat from the “diseases” which the mother is concerned about but the treatment of the child is essentially the same in either case.

People on here often say that children are resilient and adaptable and I agree that they can be. But the idea that subjecting a child to this sort of treatment could make them stronger is rose tinted at best – more often abuse in childhood leaves scars which carry through into adulthood.

My view is that the end doesn’t justify the means so far as children are concerned i.e. there are some things which you should never do to children however noble the goal is. I am very concerned that we have started to normalise the current restrictions – just today I have seen posters on here claim that it doesn’t matter if children don’t have any social interaction with other children or any education for months at a time.

I’m aware that many mothers on here will have done everything they can to mitigate the impacts of covid on their children so I’m not trying to say that all children are being abused or will be scarred by this but I do think that what we are doing to children as a society is completely unethical and will have serious long-term effects for many.

@Chessie678

Imagine that pre-covid there is a mother with a 6 year old son.

She becomes very scared of the child getting or spreading “diseases”. For this reason she keeps the child inside most of the time and does not let him play with other children. She tells him to stay away from others in case he infects them and makes him change his clothes and scrub his hands whenever he has been outside. She doesn’t take him on trips and the only time they go out is to walk around their local neighbourhood. He is not allowed to attend any clubs or play sport.

The mother’s behaviour escalates and she begins to keep her son off school for long periods of time, citing the risk of “diseases”. She stops contact with the child’s grandparents and cousins, telling the child that he might murder his grandmother if they see her. If he gets ill she locks him in his room and brings food to the door.

Sometimes she will send him back to school for a period but makes him wear a mask and tells him not to touch anything or get too near another child.

Having worked with vulnerable children in the past, I think this scenario would far exceed the threshold for social services intervention and suggests severe mental health issues in the mother.

Clearly the rationale for how we are treating children at the moment is different in that the threat from covid is much more severe than the threat from the “diseases” which the mother is concerned about but the treatment of the child is essentially the same in either case.

People on here often say that children are resilient and adaptable and I agree that they can be. But the idea that subjecting a child to this sort of treatment could make them stronger is rose tinted at best – more often abuse in childhood leaves scars which carry through into adulthood.

My view is that the end doesn’t justify the means so far as children are concerned i.e. there are some things which you should never do to children however noble the goal is. I am very concerned that we have started to normalise the current restrictions – just today I have seen posters on here claim that it doesn’t matter if children don’t have any social interaction with other children or any education for months at a time.

I’m aware that many mothers on here will have done everything they can to mitigate the impacts of covid on their children so I’m not trying to say that all children are being abused or will be scarred by this but I do think that what we are doing to children as a society is completely unethical and will have serious long-term effects for many.

Yes that is all pretty bad stuff.

I don't think many mothers are actually behaving like this with their kids though, are they? It's perfectly possible to be careful and follow guidance without becoming obsessive.

I think any mother who did this would have separate issues that would be a problem covid or no covid.

Just Daily Mail-style sadface hand wringing with no fucking point to it.

Yep.

And this bit

I am also of the view that the specific restrictions on children I have mentioned are not doing a very good job of saving the NHS or saving lives i.e. children are being damaged for little if any benefit to society. But that is a factual question which is really for another thread.

Isn't a factual question which is really for another thread - it's the whole fucking point which renders the original post a pile of bollocks.

So is a change in context or rationale enough to justify what would otherwise be abuse

Yes. Of course it fucking is.

My parents were children/young teens during WW2 and it affected both of them mentally. My mum was very open about what it did to her. I can see lockdown having similar effects on our youngsters.
However, I think it’s up to us as parents to mitigate the negative effects on children / no need to tell them they will ‘kill’ grandma and they are being schooled albeit online.
If one of mine had Covid I would certainly not lock them up, but would provide food in bed if too ill to come downstairs & clean up regularly.

Imagine that pre-covid there is a mother with a 6 year old son.

Unfortunately we are not pre-Covid, and your flight of fancy is wholly redundant.

@quarks

just grow up. Our children are incredibly privileged. Anyone who has lived or worked in poorer areas of the world knows that the children they met there are unlikely ever in their wildest dreams to even hope that they can be half as comfortable, healthy, secure, well entertained, well educated or well nourished as 99% of the UK children are during lock down.

Our kids, even in lock down, are among the richest and best off in the world

99%?

Somehow I think you're well off the mark there.

You've forgotten about a little thing called poverty, which is getting more and more common.

It’s a complex ethical question and I don’t expect everyone to agree with me.

It’s really not a complex ethical question. You’ve just spent your time in lockdown binge-watching The Good Place.

Your thought experiment is fundamentally flawed and it is unclear what question you are posing.

If your question is “are the restrictions posted on children justifiable to save tens of thousands of deaths” then just state it as such. It’s an argument which has been done to death but at least you won’t be muddying the waters and scaremongering.

My post doesn’t contain any information so it is not misinformation.
That’s a very interesting and subtle statement. I’m not sure whether it’s driven by naivety or considerable skill.

Here's a thought experiment:

Bring children up in a bubble where they never meet a child with severe disabilities, where they think that their wants are much more important than the needs of others. Keep people hidden away if they are old or ill. Adults with their own health problems should be blamed if they can't go to work or their children have less opportunities (shouldn't have had them if you couldn't look after them).

We don't really need to do that though, do we, we have a whole raft of Eton politicians showing us the results of that "experiment."

It's our individualistic attitude that has led us into this dragging on. It's this attitude that will lead to children thinking this problem is all about them and their lack of playdates. There is nothing wrong with bringing children up to be more understanding and outward looking, they can feel empowered knowing that there are things they can control and things that they can't control.

One thing we can control is how we approach this, do we tell them they will kill granny? Of course not. One thing we can control is not seeing granny, to help keep her safe, but we can send cards and pictures and get better at talking on the phone.

OP your scenario is about a mother having irrational concerns in a so called 'healthy environment'. The current situation is a 'world wide pandemic'.

I do however agree that more needs to be done to look after everyone's mental health. Schools, employers, friends , family need to be phoning to ensure families, loved ones, employees, pupils are coping. Support and advice need to be offered.

I agree with you OP. The way that children have been treated throughout this pandemic is really distressing. I'm furious and desperate about it.

@Mizzler

I agree with you OP. The way that children have been treated throughout this pandemic is really distressing. I'm furious and desperate about it.

If you’ve been treating your kid the way described in the OP then that is concerning.

However it doesn’t seem to apply to the vast majority of parents.

Of course I haven't.

But children should be able to socialise with their peers and have a right to an education.

This virus barely affects children, yet they have suffered a great deal as a result of the restrictions placed upon them.

Schools should never have been closed.

I find it hard to believe that many children are unaffected. Children missed school and only children were completely isolated at the start. That obviously has an effect. As for the granny killing, no I didn't tell my child that because I'm not a moron, but that was a GOVERNMENT LINE. Don't kill granny. That wasn't irresponsible parenting.
Of course the perfect parents amongst us will say their children are completely unaffected but we will see the true results in a few years and I'm sure many people wont be feeling so smug then.

And the point someone made up thread is a good one. Children over 5 who aren't yet old enough to go out alone are not able to see their peers at all because they are included in the one person rule.

How is this ok?

Of course I haven't.

Then how is the OP making a good point if it is hyperbolic nonsense?

@noblegiraffe

Of course I haven't.

Then how is the OP making a good point if it is hyperbolic nonsense?

Not all of what she said is hyperbolic, no most sane people are not locking children up (some are) but they have undoubtedly been treated like shit throughout, whether we've meant to do it or not.

Of course the perfect parents amongst us will say their children are completely unaffected

Don’t be daft. Of course kids are affected. We’re all sodding affected. Because it’s a bloody pandemic and an awful situation. But handwringing about child abuse when everyone is muddling through as best they can, including parents who are generally not behaving like the OP suggests is just bullshit.

they have undoubtedly been treated like shit throughout

‘Treated like shit’ is an interesting turn of phrase isn’t it. Have adults been ‘treated like shit’ when they haven’t been allowed to see their friends? Or is it being subject to restrictions in place to slow the spread of a virus?

I know that the anti-lockdowners think it is ‘treated like shit’. But generally their view is pretty selfish.

You've forgotten about a little thing called poverty, which is getting more and more common.

Its all relative.

99% of children in the uk have clothing, food, bed, education, access to medical attention. (unless a carer is deliberately withholding, or neglecting to provide, these things - which is nothing to do with poverty)

UK children are among the most privileged in the world.

It won't do families any harm to remember that. Its generally only people who have travelled/read little and who are very narrow minded who don't already understand that.

Save your concern for the small number in the UK who are homeless/sleeping rough/ kept as slaves.

stop creating pointless artificial angst over the majority who are very well provided for, if a bit temporarily inconvenienced by the pandemic.

The misogyny implied in the OPs initial scenario is pretty disgusting.

@Chessie678

I totally get where you are coming from but I fear for some people no line is too far at the moment

@SinisterBumFacedCat

The misogyny implied in the OPs initial scenario is pretty disgusting.

I’m sorry but that is just manufactured outrage. There is nothing misogynistic in the OP

Yeah, I know a family who haven't left their property since March! No school, no interaction with other children. There are no vulnerabilities, no one was shielding at any point. They have told the children that it is too dangerous to go out of their garden/house. No one has had eyes on those children for 10 months. They aren't allowed to use devices, so no virtual interaction either.

There is nothing misogynistic in the OP

Where's the dad in it? I can't find him.