How should masks be enforced in public?

[User158340]

Indoors in general (shops, public transport etc).

I don't believe in making it mandatory because there are people who are genuinely exempt but there's so many piss takers.

There should be 'medically exempt' badges dished out by GP's only, on prescription essentially.

This should have been GP led from the get go, not trusting the British public. We see where that gets us.

What other work would you suggest GPs drop to make time for this? Given a lot of routine stuff is already being postponed due to covid pressures / vaccine roll out.
Also there will be massive variation between GPs - most agree that trigeminal neuralgia / facial deformity / significant learning difficulty should be exempt, but who will have our back when irate asthmatics / those on some arbitrary list are complaining that they don’t get a letter (or will they use another appointment to speak with a different doctor).
It’s a bit like seatbelt exemption letters - lots of doctors will avoid doing as it’s actually not safe and we don’t have any reassurance that our actions won’t be scrutinised if the worst happens to that patient.

there's so many piss takers.

2 members of my family for a start. They are full on conspiracy theorist anti vaxxers who on one hand go on about how fucking healthy they are and how they are going about their business as normal as no risk etc etc than on the other hand claim they are medically exempt from wearing a mask

@PinkDaffodil2

What other work would you suggest GPs drop to make time for this? Given a lot of routine stuff is already being postponed due to covid pressures / vaccine roll out. Also there will be massive variation between GPs - most agree that trigeminal neuralgia / facial deformity / significant learning difficulty should be exempt, but who will have our back when irate asthmatics / those on some arbitrary list are complaining that they don’t get a letter (or will they use another appointment to speak with a different doctor). It’s a bit like seatbelt exemption letters - lots of doctors will avoid doing as it’s actually not safe and we don’t have any reassurance that our actions won’t be scrutinised if the worst happens to that patient.

To be fair, my mums GP actually rang and said, please don’t be wearing a mask if you can avoid it, said to just not go to places that require them as the fall out is worse than the mask !

The cost of the resulting MH healthcare would be far, far higher than the tiny chance she catches covid on her once a month walk to the chemist .

As it is now I go into the chemist and she waits on the wall across the street - and we only go once a month .

We do have the option of doing absolutely everything else online though which helps -

Tesco done once a week online, boots stuff bought in bulk every three months, clothes all bought online if needed, etc, Argos all delivered ... just easier and safer just now .

If we have to start wearing them for walks in the countryside though I dunno what we’ll do.

@TheReluctantPhoenix

I am really not sure I can see the difference between not mask wearing right now at the peak and driving while partially sighted because it is the only way you can work/travel etc.

Disability discrimination has never been about allowing people with a disability to endanger others (or even themselves). It is about equal access where practical and possible.

Supermarket shopping in person is just not essential. If you cannot wear a mask, there are plenty of other ways of getting shopping.

Every non mask wearer makes it harder and harder for elderly and vulnerable people to enjoy their lives.

If you can’t see the difference between this and a visually impaired person driving, then you’re obviously a bit dim.

Babies and toddlers are exempt from wearing masks. Nobody has started threads about how this puts everyone else at risk or is the same as driving when blind (wtf). Yet the risk to others is the same as someone who is mask-exempt not wearing one. Why is there tolerance for young kids and their parents visiting shops etc but very little for mask-exempt people who are told to stay home?

The comments on here have been disgusting, especially the one about the travelling community and comments about ‘women of a certain look’. There is also a fuckload of ableism with lots of comments that disabled people need to stay at home and do online shopping and shouldn’t be allowed out if they can’t wear masks. Bet you wouldn’t challenge a mum with a pram containing an unmasked kid (or even feel unsafe around it). There are far far more unmasked children in shops than what there are mask-exempt people yet people don’t have an issue with this even though children can carry and transmit the virus as much as anyone else.

The comments on here have been disgusting

But telling a poster they are “obviously a bit dim” is perfectly acceptable?

And nobody is suggesting that disabled people stay at home.

@reformedcharacters

The comments on here have been disgusting

But telling a poster they are “obviously a bit dim” is perfectly acceptable?

And nobody is suggesting that disabled people stay at home.

People absolutely are, if not on this thread then on others.

@TheReluctantPhoenix

I am really not sure I can see the difference between not mask wearing right now at the peak and driving while partially sighted because it is the only way you can work/travel etc.

Disability discrimination has never been about allowing people with a disability to endanger others (or even themselves). It is about equal access where practical and possible.

Supermarket shopping in person is just not essential. If you cannot wear a mask, there are plenty of other ways of getting shopping.

Every non mask wearer makes it harder and harder for elderly and vulnerable people to enjoy their lives.

People on MN are regularly and routinely telling those who are exempt that they should stay at home. Do not go to work, use public transport, care for family, do essential shopping, access medical care. Somebody even said that we have no need to be 'out and about'. As if bills and blood tests will sort themselves out.

If you can't see that that is discriminatory then I really don't know what to say to you.

The police are happy enough to enforce a rule that doesn't even exist about travelling for exercise (which actually is specifically stated as being allowed in the Guidance), but have stated today that they are not going to police mask wearing (which is specifically mandated as obligatory in the 'rules).

The police need to redirect their activities and ensure compliance with the rules that actually exist: wearing a mask! (not travelling for exercise, which is specifically allowed).

Ok the so let’s say we all accept people can’t wear masks and accept the liars jumping on the bandwagon, can someone please suggest what disabled/vulnerable retail staff are supposed to do? Or do they matter/also have rights?

I personally know someone vulnerable who caught it at work in retail. They hadn’t been anywhere other than work and no colleagues at that time had it so almost certainly caught it due to customers.

OP you say: I don't believe in making it mandatory

It is already mandatory and it is actually already the law:

The current Guidance states:
You must wear a face covering in many indoor settings, such as shops or places of worship where these remain open, and on public transport, unless you are exempt. This is the law

@lazeeboy

The police are happy enough to enforce a rule that doesn't even exist about travelling for exercise (which actually is specifically stated as being allowed in the Guidance), but have stated today that they are not going to police mask wearing (which is specifically mandated as obligatory in the 'rules).

The police need to redirect their activities and ensure compliance with the rules that actually exist: wearing a mask! (not travelling for exercise, which is specifically allowed).

How do propose they do that, when there is no proof of exemption?

@lazeeboy

OP you say: I don't believe in making it mandatory

It is already mandatory and it is actually already the law:

The current Guidance states:
You must wear a face covering in many indoor settings, such as shops or places of worship where these remain open, and on public transport, unless you are exempt. This is the law

I have no idea why the police, whose job it is to enforce the law, have today said that they are not going to enforce this law.

Obviously it is hard to police this law, but policing a law that doesn't exist (travelling for exercise) while refusing to police a law that does exist (face coverings) is bizarre, contradictory and a dereliction of duty.

It is the law, it is not my job to tell the police how to do their job. Their job is to enforce the law.

(they are perfectly happy to police 'rules' that don't even exist, re. exercise outside)

@reformedcharacters

Ok the so let’s say we all accept people can’t wear masks and accept the liars jumping on the bandwagon, can someone please suggest what disabled/vulnerable retail staff are supposed to do? Or do they matter/also have rights?

I personally know someone vulnerable who caught it at work in retail. They hadn’t been anywhere other than work and no colleagues at that time had it so almost certainly caught it due to customers.

You have no way of knowing whether they caught it from customers or colleagues or someone they passed in the street or even a delivery, much less an exempt maskless person.

Retail staff need to campaign to ensure their employers are providing adequate ppe, screens, cleaning schedules and monitoring how full shops get. There's no foolproof way of ensuring staff don't catch Covid, but neither is it a given that if they do, it's from an exempt person.

@lazeeboy

It is the law, it is not my job to tell the police how to do their job. Their job is to enforce the law.

(they are perfectly happy to police 'rules' that don't even exist, re. exercise outside)

But they can't enforce it. The only way they can is to ask maskless people for proof of exemption and none exists. Don't blame the police.

Retail employers are providing adequate PPE. Screens aren’t always possible if staff are on the shop floor, it’s the shoppers not wearing PPE so yes the staff could campaign for making it safer which would involve enforcement of masks in shops oh but wait.....you don’t agree.

@reformedcharacters

Retail employers are providing adequate PPE. Screens aren’t always possible if staff are on the shop floor, it’s the shoppers not wearing PPE so yes the staff could campaign for making it safer which would involve enforcement of masks in shops oh but wait.....you don’t agree.

I agree 100% that those who can wear masks should but that exemptions exist for a reason. Perhaps campaigning for a proper exemption scheme with proof might be the way to go (I'm sure retail staff who are exempt would agree, rather than be told they can't go to work as some are advocating).

@reformedcharacters

Retail employers are providing adequate PPE. Screens aren’t always possible if staff are on the shop floor, it’s the shoppers not wearing PPE so yes the staff could campaign for making it safer which would involve enforcement of masks in shops oh but wait.....you don’t agree.

Screens aren't effective if covid is airborne as it could be circulating over/under and around the screens. Screens only stop direct transmission, ie in direct line of a sneeze or cough or a spit or whatever. So, basically, screens are only providing minimal protection for someone spending hours behind one serving dozens/hundreds of people. Staff behind screens should be wearing masks as much as possible.

On the shop floor, staff need to be wearing masks too, not just shoppers. If they can't wear masks, then perhaps they're in the wrong job.

@PinkDaffodil2

What other work would you suggest GPs drop to make time for this? Given a lot of routine stuff is already being postponed due to covid pressures / vaccine roll out. Also there will be massive variation between GPs - most agree that trigeminal neuralgia / facial deformity / significant learning difficulty should be exempt, but who will have our back when irate asthmatics / those on some arbitrary list are complaining that they don’t get a letter (or will they use another appointment to speak with a different doctor). It’s a bit like seatbelt exemption letters - lots of doctors will avoid doing as it’s actually not safe and we don’t have any reassurance that our actions won’t be scrutinised if the worst happens to that patient.

Well, an improvement to the current situation would be something really quick and simple like being able to pick up an exemption lanyard/certificate from the GP receptionist on a kind of "honesty" basis, with minimum checking/verification. I.e. something like the receptionist simply checking the person is a registered patient on their system, with no "policing" of their illness/reasons at all. Obviously not ideal, and some would still abuse it, but it would put some people off claiming they were exempt, simply because it would be easier to put the damn mask on rather than waste time going to the GP surgery if they never go there normally.

Yes agree that employers need to seriously assess workers who are exempt and find a solution as it works both ways.

It's easy to spot the people lying about being medically exempt as a supermarket worker. They are the rude ones who try and 'sneak' around the store and have excuses ready, usually asthma.

Genuine people speak to staff before shopping and explain why they can't wear one, and usually take extra caution in distancing where possible.

But I do think that for medical reasons, having a lanyard or badge which can only be given out by GPs would be the way forward. I say medical reasons because there are genuine other reasons for not wearing a mask, but I don't know how to prove that without intruding unfairly.

@XenoBitch

Some people that have been victims of domestic violence or assault can not wear masks... and what happened to them might not be known to their GP.

It's not a medical condition then. Same way you can't get a disabled badge and use the parking space if you have an undiagnosed condition.

@MolyHolyGuacamole are you suggesting that PTSD isn't a medical condition?

@MerciSeat DIAGNOSED, yes. But a panic attack does not PTSD make. The OP I quoted said their GP isn't aware, hence why I used the example of not being able to get a disabled badge and use a disabled parking bay if you aren't diagnosed with a particular disability. I don't see how what I said isn't clear.

It's all the self-diagnosis that makes the exemptions controversial.

I have actually not seen many of these mythical mask-dodgers. I think the vast majority who can comply do so. If people forget their mask, stores should have spare disposable ones on hand and I think most would comply. So I don’t think the issue is as widespread as some say it is.

The threads always pick on those (adults) who can’t wear them. Nobody would expect a baby to be forced to wear a mask but on another thread, someone with an extremely painful neurological condition where a mask could trigger seizures was told she was selfish for not barricading herself in her house. So tolerance is obviously selective. There are people on this thread saying those not able to wear masks shouldn’t be out and about. There are countless similar comments on other threads. There have been horrible judgmental and racist (toward the travelling community) remarks about the types of people who don’t wear masks.

And just to remind people: nobody needs to wear masks outside. The jury is out over how effective they are inside but certainly outside the risk of transmission is very low unless you get very close to someone. Thinking mask-wearing is the be all and end all and focusing on that is like using a plaster to fix a hole in a boat. Most of the transmission takes place though completely ‘legal’ means and not because the odd person doesn’t have a mask on.