The outcome of the government's terrible messaging re Xmas mixing.

[dangermouselovespeanutbutter]

I read this article this morning. It's really sad. I was so angry at the government's approach to Xmas. Indoor mixing was always going to be a huge risk. There was no way to make it safe. BoJo flipped and flopped anc just confused people.
Unfortunately there are lots of people out there, like the family in this article, who take the view that if the government say it's safe then it must be safe.
It's hard to understand how a family could go from shielding to mixing with several households in one fell swoop. But I do believe that they thought it would be ok because they'd been told that it would be (and it's interesting that his wife said she missed the updates. Not everyone reads / watches the news each day).
So so sad.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/06/james-mcallister-was-a-much-loved-family-man-did-the-christmas-mixing-confusion-cause-his-death?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

I think if you don’t know or understand the rules then the onus is on you to find out. Particularly if you’ve a shielding person in thr house hold.The rules were everywhere. And I mean everywhere, how not one member of that family didn’t see the news, and had no idea he was supposed to shield and no idea they were in tier three and no idea they were only allowed to mix on Xmas day if not shielding, is beyond me

But what’s even more startling is he already had it by the time they went to their elderly mothers house. Catching it was nothing to do with mixing at Xmas. How he caught it I don’t know, maybe one of the kids brought it back, but he already had it before they even went to the mothers house.

They broke all the rules, so why the guardian picked them as an example of the government at fault I don’t know. Because arguably if they had all complied then he wouldnt have caught it. It’s actually an example of “if you’d found out the rules and complied you’d have been safer”.

What happened was terribly sad, but there was absolutely no way to make the rules any more publisced than they were. Other than sending someone round everyone’s home.

As sad as that is I really do feel we are ultimately responsible for ourselves.. And need to think about for ourselves.
We chose not to invite an older friend who usually joins us based on our ownership personal risk assessment /jobs /exposure etc.

So what would people have preferred?

Early to mid December cases were rising, the new variant had just been detected that was obviously more transmittable. People were starting to ask 'what can we do at Christmas' and the Christmas bubbles plan was announced.

Would they have preferred the government to do what they probably should have done in mid December, which was to go back into full lockdown right then, cancelled everyone's in person Christmas shopping, brought shielding back at that point and told people then it was no household mixing over Christmas?

That's what should have happened, but there would have been uproar and many would not have complied anyway.

Some people don’t have the IQ to weigh up the evidence though. I’m not bashing such people at all. They will genuinely believe it must be safe if the govt said it was ok. The govt have failed such people.

*But what’s even more startling is he already had it by the time they went to their elderly mothers house. Catching it was nothing to do with mixing at Xmas. How he caught it I don’t know, maybe one of the kids brought it back, but he already had it before they even went to the mothers house.

They broke all the rules, so why the guardian picked them as an example of the government at fault I don’t know. Because arguably if they had all complied then he wouldnt have caught it. It’s actually an example of “if you’d found out the rules and complied you’d have been safer”*

This story would have made more sense if it was about the many children forced to go to school under threat of fines, whilst having a cev parent at home.
The govt have made many decisions that didn't make sense. The lack of joined up thinking has been the scary thing.
I don't count not parenting grown adults completely as one of the errors.

@Claymorekick I saw a news report a few weeks ago about the family of a man who had attended the Liverpool v Real Madrid match in March 2020 and who sadly contracted covid shortly after and passed away. Again, the family were blaming the government saying they should have cancelled the match (yes they probably should) but because they didn't, his dad assumed it was safe to attend so he did. Bearing in mind this was just when things were really escalating in the UK, I certainly would have thought twice about going to a packed football stadium regardless but, again, where is the personal responsibility/risk assessment?

Well given that Johnson and his pregnant fiancée were at Twickenham watching rugby with 80,000 other people on 7th March 2020 - while he was in the privileged position of being briefed by WHO , the chief scientific officer and chief medical officer and still saw fit to go - should we really expect the general public who didn’t have this information (who had just been told to wash their hands while singing happy birthday) to act more cautiously than the Prime Minister? Johnson should have led by example from the beginning.

People do need to take decisions to protect themselves but:

1. not everyone is educated / savvy enough to follow the situation e.g. understand & interpret local rates into risk factors for themselves
2. Johnson is terrible at communicating things clearly - he completely garbles most messaging - so Whitty may have made analogies about driving on icy roads but many people are more likely to listen to the headline news from the PM. My area was scheduled to go into Tier 4 on Boxing Day - so supposedly we could mix for Christmas Day but not from the following day. Reckless policy making.

People should take personal responsibility AND the Government should have made a better job of policies/ messaging.

They broke all the rules, so why the guardian picked them as an example of the government at fault I don’t know. Because arguably if they had all complied then he wouldnt have caught it. It’s actually an example of “if you’d found out the rules and complied you’d have been safer”

If he caught it before they mixed at Christmas it’s actually a case of even if you follow the rules and guidelines don’t forget it’s a highly contagious and potentially fatal disease and you still might be unlucky enough to catch it.

It’s never been about eliminating personal risk. It’s always been about minimising personal risk and controlling overall case numbers.

The advice published for Christmas was very clear:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-a-christmas-bubble-with-friends-and-family/making-a-christmas-bubble-with-friends-and-family

First paragraph: It is vital that we each take personal responsibility this Christmas to limit the spread of the virus and protect our loved ones particularly if they are vulnerable. One in three people with coronavirus (COVID-19) have no symptoms and will be spreading it without realising it. So the safest way to celebrate Christmas this year is with your household or existing support bubble in your home. The more people you see, the more likely it is that you will catch or spread coronavirus

I really do not know how they could have made it clearer or easier to understand.

@FizzyTarte

Just because Boris said we could do something didn’t mean we should and more people should have realised that. He was being spineless and didn’t want to go down in history as the politician who stole Christmas after always saying everything would be fine by then. Also many people would have just broken the rules anyway had he banned Christmas, making impossible work for the police. People are too quick to trust and don’t think things through before acting. Sad but true.

Agree. Especially when there was an abundance of health care professionals, ITU consultants etc all coming out saying what a bad idea it was. In the run up to Xmas, everyone was saying about the mixing problems

while he was in the privileged position of being briefed by WHO

I really don’t think the WHO should be held up as a beacon of top notch scientific information. Their ineptness was partly to blame for many governments failing to act quickly enough.

So many people chose not to mix over Christmas.

So many people didn't mix and yet still died of covid.

You just can't assume anything.

If we don't like living in a Nanny state then we should start taking responsibility for our own risk. Life is a risk! That's why some people rock climb and others don't. Some people motorcycle and others don't. Some people met together on Christmas Day and others didn't.

Quite simple really.

Way before the debacle over Christmas messaging we knew that being inside your own home mixing households was one of the riskiest thing for potentially catching COVID. This virus wasn’t going on holiday over Christmas so that risk was still there. If you were happy to take that risk when it was permitted to mix (because this Government knew that some people would regardless of the rules so permitted it but tried to limit as much as possible) then if you caught COVID that was the risk you took and you can’t blame the Government.
It’s like all the people who made up spurious support bubbles over Christmas period so they could see family. They all took a risk as support bubbles are not immune from COVID.

It is really sad that someone has lost their life, of course it is, but reading that I am angry not at the government but at the excuses. Ultimately they chose to mix. You couldn't turn the TV on without it stating there was a change in the rules. It was on every single channel, newspaper front page, website etc. And they were shielding. I don't think anywhere it said that shielding people could mix?!
I think people have to take personal responsibility. They knew the risks, chose to mix and it had disastrous consequences.

@BarbaraofSevilleI really do not know how they could have made it clearer or easier to understand

It could have been clearer if Johnson had actually said the statement above rather than some waffle about ‘a Merry little Christmas’

[quote loveheartss]@bookworm1632 This couple made the journey on the 23rd though? So even if you take that into account, they still travelled when the advice was to shield again.

Like you just said yourself, you need to take some responsibility. If you are concerned that someone is particularly susceptible to something you watch the news, you watch the numbers, you keep up to date with what is going on.[/quote]
I think it fair to assume that not everyone was pinned to the news on the 22nd - particularly if you're in the middle of planning - and the letter informing them of shielding recommencing wouldn't yet have arrived.

As I said, I agree that what happened in the OP was their fault as it had been news for some time that cases were on the rise and regardless off the shielding status, it was obvious that risk had increased once again.

But it does need noting that the government stopped shielding in August and then waited until the PEAK of the 2nd wave before reinitiating it, which was scandalous!

@Kimye4eva

while he was in the privileged position of being briefed by WHO

I really don’t think the WHO should be held up as a beacon of top notch scientific information. Their ineptness was partly to blame for many governments failing to act quickly enough.

Their ineptness was partly to blame for many governments failing to act quickly enough.

You mean all the high priority warnings they announced in the middle of January that were flatly ignored by the West?

Or their demand to test, track, trace which began early February and was ignored by the UK until nearly the end of March?

@BarbaraofSeville

So what would people have preferred?

Early to mid December cases were rising, the new variant had just been detected that was obviously more transmittable. People were starting to ask 'what can we do at Christmas' and the Christmas bubbles plan was announced.

Would they have preferred the government to do what they probably should have done in mid December, which was to go back into full lockdown right then, cancelled everyone's in person Christmas shopping, brought shielding back at that point and told people then it was no household mixing over Christmas?

That's what should have happened, but there would have been uproar and many would not have complied anyway.

I'm pretty sure that the 3 household/5 day Xmas mixing was announced early October, before the Kent variant caused chaos, as that's when my family made plans to meet. We cancelled them by mid December when it was obvious that mixing wasn't going to be a risk worth taking.

Christmas was total confusion. Personally I think governments took the view that people would mix anyway and perhaps tried to offset that. I was really upset at that time, as we had just been out of Lockdown for 2 weeks and then were plunged back in it. Im sorry to say due to the figures for my area, this was due to people not following the guidance. (Im not talking anywhere else). My own area has been awful throughout and Im sick of paying the price for people who prefer to 'do their own thing'. I'm so very sorry for the family here. What I will add is that when things open up again, we all have to be careful. The risk is obviously when we begin to mix again. I do blame the UK Govt for false hope, mixed messages and empty promises. That is my personal view only.

[quote VaVaGloom]**@BarbaraofSevilleI really do not know how they could have made it clearer or easier to understand

It could have been clearer if Johnson had actually said the statement above rather than some waffle about ‘a Merry little Christmas’[/quote]
Oh come on, surely no-one takes the waffle that falls out of BJs gob as the actual rules and relies on that alone as their sole source of information?

Even if the Prime Minister said everything correctly, which he rarely does, there's just too much information for the average person to digest and recall accurately.

Most people will need to read the rules in their time and think about how it applies to their own situation.

I can't believe anyone would hear Boris Johnson shout 'Have a merry little Christmas' and take that as a green light to have a normal multihousehold family Christmas.

The Guardian criticises a Conservative government.

In other news, the sky is blue and the Pope's a Catholic.

Anger can be a usual emotion, after bereavement. But personal responsibility has to form part of decision making, in my opinion.

@Kimye4eva while he was in the privileged position of being briefed by WHO

I really don’t think the WHO should be held up as a beacon of top notch scientific information. Their ineptness was partly to blame for many governments failing to act quickly enough

And whose ineptness is to blame for the UK government repeatedly failing to act quickly enough?

Seems to be a lot of selective belief around. Government says we can mix but need to think hard about if we should - off we go to breathe over lots of different people. Government says vaccine is ok and gives stats of very small numbers who have died or been ill after - oh no, not having that, it's dangerous.

@BarbaraofSeville Oh come on, surely no-one takes the waffle that falls out of BJs gob as the actual rules and relies on that alone as their sole source of information?

Well you or I wouldn’t but in a population of 68 million many would! Either verbatim or through the headlines of a newspaper.

@CovidCorvid

Some people don’t have the IQ to weigh up the evidence though. I’m not bashing such people at all. They will genuinely believe it must be safe if the govt said it was ok. The govt have failed such people.

I agree with you that some people don't have the IQ to weigh up risk - this whole pandemic has been an exercise in assessing risk and many clearly cannot do that - but the government's messaging was clear from the start. We were never urged to mix at Christmas, we were told it was allowed, but not advisable and that people should think carefully about whether it was safe to do so. Many millions of us decided it was not.