Woman kicked out of Sainsbury’s

[Givemeabreak88]

I don’t know if this has been posted already but I posted the other day about how to prove face mask exemptions and basically got told they can’t ask for proof well it seems that is wrong and they can ask you what your disability is and ask for proof.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/uknews/13776780/shopper-kicked-out-sainsburys-face-mask-covid/amp/

@FraggleShingleBellRock

All the people that say I should have to show proof I am exempt from wearing a mask.....

..... I didn't keep any proof that a family friend crept into my childhood bedroom and pushed me face first first against the wall with his big fat hand over my mouth, so he could force my nighty up, tear my knickers down and penetrate me from behind.

What proof of that would you have me give to a customer service agent at Asda entrance? The police report? The printed paragraph from above? The report my psychiatrist gave me after 26 weeks of intensive therapy that saved my life? A diagnosis list that shows that repeated rapes left me dealing with ptsd, bipolar, chronic insomnia, a very real phobia of my face being covered etc? Or should I just show them the self harm scars? Maybe I could engrave "exempt" into my thigh for you all? Could show them puncture marks from the blood tests I've had to have today as despite the therapy, 30 years on, I still drink too much as I'm terrified to sleep.

Or maybe you could all fuck off with your hate.

I'm so sorry to hear of your past experiences and the struggle they're still causing you 💐

I couldn't agree more with what you say in your post. As someone diagnosed with GAD, panic disorder and social phobia, avoidance of any public place (including any open space outside my own home) is the only way I can cope right now - I have a sunflower lanyard and exemption card but it appears that to some individuals, these are just a means of identifying a target to humiliate. A sign round their neck that says "challenge me".

@Arobase

Because of the selfishness of other people there needs to be a system where people can carry a recognised exemption card approved by an HCA. Just stating exempt - identical for someone with neuralgia, migraine, COPD, PTSD, sexual assault survivor or whatever reason means you genuinely cannot wear a mask.

In principle I wouldn't be against that; in essence it's a similar system to the Blue Badge one. But the trouble is that it would require an awful lot of time from NHS staff, and spare NHS time is not a luxury we have, or will have for the foreseeable future. So what's the answer?

There isn't a list of exemptions that make you exempt. Any attempt at such a list would exclude loads of people who are unable to wear a mask and would include loads of people who are able to wear a mask. It would just be completely inaccurate.

It's nothing like the blue badge system. For that, you need to have already undergone a PIP or DLA assessment, or you have to have a face to face assessment through your local authority. Either way you will have had your ability to walk examined in excruciating detail and even then, many people are refused a badge, even though they could really do with one, because the criteria are so harsh.

What's the answer? I would suggest that people try to get a more realistic idea of what difference masks actually make and whether it's proportionate to exclude a bunch of disabled people from all indoor public life and all public transort for the forseeable future because they are unable to wear a mask.

There isn't a list of conditions* that make you exempt

@GirlCrush didn't see anyone else reply so I will. No, it's not the DVLA - it's individual councils who issue them. I'm not sure if it's the same everywhere but my council has a set of criteria which entitle you to a badge automatically and a set of criteria for which you can apply and essentially plead your case. I would think a lot of people who get a blue badge fulfil the automatic criteria, and for that you just need certain evidence like a mobility DLA letter which doesn't mention any specific condition or how it can affect the person as it has already been decided by DWP that this person really struggles with their mobility. The other set of criteria do need an explanation for how your condition affects your mobility, but this is 1) backed up by evidence from medical professionals, you can't just claim a random illness, 2) entirely confidential and 3) considered in depth by someone with medical training as opposed to tryjng to explain to John the security guard at your local Tescos a condition he has never heard of and will probably never understand and therefore minimise. It shouldn't be up to non-medically trained people to decide if a person's reasoning is enough.

@LangClegsInSpace

But the numbers would go up, and would have gone up, significantly higher if not for masks. When mask mandates are put into effect, numbers go down. They don't stop infections entirely, of course. But they're a vital prophylactic.

Is this true? I'd love to see some evidence because I haven't come across any so far.

I'm sure masks help a bit, but not enough to justify the level of nastiness and discrimination towards those who are unable to wear one.

@LangClegsInSpace

Some really interesting surveys have come out in the past few weeks alone.

Yesterday a mass study in the Lancet, reported that mask wearing results in control of transmission. A 10% increase in mask-wearing found a threefold increase in odds of transmission control.

www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30293-4/fulltext#seccestitle160

And a recent UCLA study found the following:

*Face masks were 79% effective in preventing transmission, if they were used by all household members prior to symptoms occurring.
*The use of masks was strongly protective, with a risk reduction of 70% for those that always wore a mask when going out.
*Transmission was 7.5 times higher in countries that did not have a mask mandate.
*The difference between U.S. states with mask mandates and those without found that the daily growth rate was 2 percentage points lower in states with mask mandates, estimating that the mandates had prevented 230,00 to 450,000 COVID-19 cases by last May 22.

www.nbclosangeles.com/news/coronavirus/ucla-study-coronavirus-face-masks-gdp-economy-covid-19-spread-pandemic/2508463/

@LangClegsInSpace

But the numbers would go up, and would have gone up, significantly higher if not for masks. When mask mandates are put into effect, numbers go down. They don't stop infections entirely, of course. But they're a vital prophylactic.

Is this true? I'd love to see some evidence because I haven't come across any so far.

I'm sure masks help a bit, but not enough to justify the level of nastiness and discrimination towards those who are unable to wear one.

www.covidfaq.co/A-Danish-mask-study-shows-masks-don-t-work-e2bb579390ea4fed9802d8b2106ad7cd

“There are other reasons to think masks work. Although randomised controlled trials are the gold standard of evidence, for some interventions it's not realistic to expect that many high-quality ones will be done. There are a number of theoretical reasons to think masks work, as described in a review paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences; there are also studies which use "natural experiments" to show that mask-wearing may have reduced COVID spread.

This is also borne out in cross-country analysis: one study found that “each week of the infection in a country without masks was associated with an increase in per-capita mortality of 50.7%... By contrast, for each week that masks were worn, the per-capita mortality was associated with a lesser increase of 12.6% each week." That is, mask-wearing norms were associated, in the model provided in that study, with less accelerated increases in coronavirus spread.

A meta-analysis commissioned by the Royal Society concludes that “use of cotton masks is associated with a 54% lower relative odds of infection in comparison to the no mask groups... For paper masks, the relative odds of infection were 39% lower than in the no mask” (see the linked paper for full statistical details).”

A photo pass thing**

Bonus points if you can demonstrate how such a system would comply with domestic equality and data protection laws and international human rights law.

Having to wear it round your neck probably wouldn't. Simply owning a photocard wouldn't break any law. In fact it IS the law in other places.

A lot of countries have photo-ID cards as identification. In Spain they're compulsory to have from the age of 14, and compulsory to carry around with you everywhere from the age of 16 (I might be wrong on this one). The police have the right to ask you for ID anywhere.

A few years ago they introduced the e-version which everyone now gets when you're up for renewal. The chip contains my fingerprints, more photos of myself, all my personal data and police records if I have any.

We also have health cards but without a photo. You get one at birth. All your medical history is stored on them. When you ask for a GP appointment they scan your card (or you give the long number out on the phone). Your prescriptions are on the card. When you go to the pharmacy they scan your card again. Similar healthcare system to the NHS so everyone has the same one.

It would be as simple as adding 'EXEMPT' to one of those. It doesn't have to state the reason and no one should ask why. It's working in other places so I don't see why it wouldn't work in the UK.

Good

As this woman refused to say whether she was exempt or not, she doesn't have a leg to stand on. But if the police are being told to demand evidence of exemption routinely, they and/or Sainsbury's will get into trouble very quickly, because the guidance makes it clear that they aren't entitled to do so.

Smh. Strange how the people calling for empathy are showing not one ounce of consideration for shop workers who are basically sitting ducks. And for some reason they can't see the contradiction here.

True. Why do some people's rights to do as they wish, outrank other people's rights to actually live.

Everyone you share public transport with actively puts you in danger and you also actively put them in danger. Masks mitigate the risk by a small amount, that's all.

That simply isn't true. There's a huge body of evidence showing that masks reduce the risk of infection significatly.

Mask-deniers and people abusing and exploiting laws implemented to protect disabled people for their own agenda (laws which WE not they fought for) are dangerous and ableist bigots, plain and simple.

Stop killing disabled people please.