For the sake of 8 weeks....

[Greentrees2021]

I'm just pondering how 8 weeks ago, DS and all his classmates were pulled out of school mid lesson due to notification of a positive PCR and had to go into 10 days isolation. They didn't get to say goodbye to their school or teachers or friends, they missed their infant leavers party, the last day at the school, the assembly they had all rehearsed, 2 girls had to cancel birthday parties and several had to delay or cancel summer holidays. There were a lot of tears and disappointments for children, parents and families.
Here we are 8 weeks later and quite a number of them have now caught Covid anyway this term and I'm sure it's only a matter of time for those who haven't.
I don't know, it just suddenly seems so pointless and kind of silly what we all went through to just delay catching covid by a few weeks. At the time I was trying to convince myself it was in the kids best interests but now I see it definitely wasn't. Does anyone else feel like this?

@Invasionofthegutsnatchers

Yeah we lost our summer holiday as his teacher got tested sad I'm still not over it have felt from the start kids haven't been considered in this. Seems it was all a waste of time when the vulnerable were vaccinated in January so nothing has actually changed for months only the rules.

@vickyc90 I sympathise that you lost your holiday but blaming the teacher for testing isn't fair.

Honestly she was well enough to teach on Zoom! if it was me I don't think I would have tested as the impact on the kids being forced to isolate was much greater than them catching the virus and I'm very much kids first no matter what. Would have just gone sick with something else for a week, isolated, declined to test and told the school to email parents to make their own decision.

I know she is having problems as a lot of his year group are refusing to speak to her as they missed out on so much. Told DS to be nice but can't take away the hurt they all feel.

At my school we have to follow guidance and test. Even in the holidays.

@Invasionofthegutsnatchers

At my school we have to follow guidance and test. Even in the holidays.

Mine too.

And yet if the same thing happened now, the positive child's siblings could carry on attending school until they developed symptoms.
Yes, it seems like we've gone from one extreme to the other;

Then: Walk past someone in a supermarket? 10 days isolation.

Now: Live and sleep with an infected person? Carry on as normal.

I'm not complaining though, I'm glad there's no longer a need to isolate, I just look back and am still surprised by how everyone went along with it.

@vickyc90 how old are they?

I cannot believe you are judging a teacher for taking a test (presumably she had symptoms) and then what being positive. Because she had no choice. She cant simply go sick for a week and be paid. The school frankly could not send that kind of email and not be pulled up on it.

Yes they missed out on a lot but to blame the teacher is just silly. Blame the rules if you dont like them but not someone for following them

I would hope that if a teacher at one of our schools had covid they would not lie about why they were off (I should imagine that is a disciplinary offence of uncovered)

[quote Quartz2208]@vickyc90 how old are they?

I cannot believe you are judging a teacher for taking a test (presumably she had symptoms) and then what being positive. Because she had no choice. She cant simply go sick for a week and be paid. The school frankly could not send that kind of email and not be pulled up on it.

Yes they missed out on a lot but to blame the teacher is just silly. Blame the rules if you dont like them but not someone for following them[/quote]
She actually could you get 5 days self certified,
if she wanted she could ring in and say hey I've got cold like symptoms so will be off 5 days was the last week of term so would have seen her to the end of the year. She could have let the school tell us then we could have made the choice all would have been legal. This was all after the 16th of august date was announced.

To be fair I think isolating should have been dropped before shielding. We were good tested regularly but as soon as that date was announced the whole isolation thing lost all credibility in my books.

@SoloISland Thank you for your kind comment.

@Greentrees2021

I'm just pondering how 8 weeks ago, DS and all his classmates were pulled out of school mid lesson due to notification of a positive PCR and had to go into 10 days isolation. They didn't get to say goodbye to their school or teachers or friends, they missed their infant leavers party, the last day at the school, the assembly they had all rehearsed, 2 girls had to cancel birthday parties and several had to delay or cancel summer holidays. There were a lot of tears and disappointments for children, parents and families. Here we are 8 weeks later and quite a number of them have now caught Covid anyway this term and I'm sure it's only a matter of time for those who haven't. I don't know, it just suddenly seems so pointless and kind of silly what we all went through to just delay catching covid by a few weeks. At the time I was trying to convince myself it was in the kids best interests but now I see it definitely wasn't. Does anyone else feel like this?

Yep. Felt like this at the time.

We had to do this to get the vaccine roll out done. Personally I'd have lifted more once over 40,s done Harsh as it seems and some rules seem pointless I agree it was for a reason.

This all feels the wrong way round.
It's now that isn't right. Like everyone, I want everything back to normal and for children not to miss school. But if we want that, then we have to bring back masks, put in proper ventilation, do things to minimise children getting it, especially now the 12+ jabs are rolling out, and the 5-11 are ready to be approved by external bodies.

Long covid affects a large minority of children. Covid itself affects even more and can have long-term consequences that scientists are still studying. A child under 9 died today, which brings the current total to 84 in the UK. None of this is inevitable. Other countries aren't doing this. They have other things in place to try to stop cases. We don't have to let it rip through schools like this. It's an active choice to let it.

@duffeldaisy

This all feels the wrong way round. It's now that isn't right. Like everyone, I want everything back to normal and for children not to miss school. But if we want that, then we have to bring back masks, put in proper ventilation, do things to minimise children getting it, especially now the 12+ jabs are rolling out, and the 5-11 are ready to be approved by external bodies.

Long covid affects a large minority of children. Covid itself affects even more and can have long-term consequences that scientists are still studying. A child under 9 died today, which brings the current total to 84 in the UK. None of this is inevitable. Other countries aren't doing this. They have other things in place to try to stop cases. We don't have to let it rip through schools like this. It's an active choice to let it.

I fundamentally disagree...

The way I see it. we either accept that Covid will become endemic and the vast majority will catch it eventually, or we try to suppress it to zero - which would involve the most extreme measures in place permanently.

Any measures that aren't extreme enough to achieve zero Covid (and they would be truly extreme) merely delay the point at which we reach endemic Covid, maybe by a couple of months, maybe a few years if particularly harsh, but the thought that we can ultimately stop our children from being exposed to Covid by measures like better ventilation, classroom masks and bubbles, is unfortunately deluded.... a lot of effort,
but for no real gain, like Canute trying to hold back the tide.

@duffeldaisy

It does seem like the long-Covid risk has been overplayed somewhat...

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/17/long-covid-in-children-and-adolescents-is-less-common-than-previously-feared

I find it ludicrous that households don't need to isolate even if only for a few days if there's a case. Fleeting contact or the like I get not making people isolate but to allow someone from an infected house to possibly spread it just feels wrong

@Warhertisuff

The article doesn't have the actual figures - just says that 'the majority' recover within 12 weeks. But still, it's extremely disruptive and worrying even for those who do recover in that time. And what about the ones who don't? Or the ones who get ill enough to die?
When there are measures, when there are vaccines so close on the horizon, then why risk any children's lives or studies - and those of loved ones around them when there are cheap and straightforward mitigations available?

If we stop them getting it then we can give those who want them vaccines, to stop them getting more serious symptoms. Why wouldn't we do that? This is children. I'd think any parent would prefer their child not to get an illness than to risk even up to 12 weeks being very ill.

@duffeldaisy

If we stop them getting it then we can give those who want them vaccines, to stop them getting more serious symptoms. Why wouldn't we do that? This is children. I'd think any parent would prefer their child not to get an illness than to risk even up to 12 weeks being very ill.

The risk of Covid is children is extremely low... but there's extremely low risk with the vaccine too. JCVI took so a long time to consider the benefits and risks, abs determined that the net benefit was so small that, based on child health alone, there wasn't a sufficient case for a child vaccination programme.

Some of these inconsistencies are why I decided to really disengage with it all. Just came on here for the first time in ages and there is someone saying their friend forces their 6 year old to socially distance and someone else who wants to keep kids out of school to 'keep her safe'.

@Wizzbangfizz

Totally agree *@Chillychangchoo* - and it chills me to read on here how people want ludicrous restrictions and rule reinstated to "feel safe" which is a folly in itself and is totally unobtainable. Time to follow the Danes and move to endemic status.

You can’t move to endemic status. A disease is endemic or it is not. It is still a pandemic right now. It doesn’t mean milder it refers to the geographic spread being in just certain countries. A pandemic is in many countries.

"JCVI took so a long time to consider the benefits and risks, abs determined that the net benefit was so small that, based on child health alone, there wasn't a sufficient case for a child vaccination programme."

The JCVI had an extremely narrow remit. This is from the Government's own website

"The assessment by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is that the health benefits from vaccination are marginally greater than the potential known harms. However, the margin of benefit is considered too small to support universal vaccination of healthy 12 to 15 year olds at this time.

It is not within the JCVI’s remit to consider the wider societal impacts of vaccination, including educational benefits. The government may wish to seek further views on the wider societal and educational impacts from the Chief Medical Officers of the UK 4 nations."

So even not taking in any wider considerations, they still found them fractionally better than not doing them.

@duffeldaisy

"JCVI took so a long time to consider the benefits and risks, abs determined that the net benefit was so small that, based on child health alone, there wasn't a sufficient case for a child vaccination programme."

The JCVI had an extremely narrow remit. This is from the Government's own website

"The assessment by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is that the health benefits from vaccination are marginally greater than the potential known harms. However, the margin of benefit is considered too small to support universal vaccination of healthy 12 to 15 year olds at this time.

It is not within the JCVI’s remit to consider the wider societal impacts of vaccination, including educational benefits. The government may wish to seek further views on the wider societal and educational impacts from the Chief Medical Officers of the UK 4 nations."

So even not taking in any wider considerations, they still found them fractionally better than not doing them.

Right. They found that the health benefits to children were so marginal that it didn’t even justify doing it. So how does that square with your idea that , in the best interests of children, we need to further disrupt their education / lives etc., for the next however many months in order to roll it all out?

@duffeldaisy

The JCVI had an extremely narrow remit. This is from the Government's own website

Yes, it did... It's remit was limited to the efficacy of the vaccine in relation to child health, which was of more relevance to your point than the wider benefits.

Your argument appears to be that Covid restrictions should be put in place that disrupt (isolation for contacts) and adversely impact on (masks in classrooms) education as this was necessary price to pay to protect children's health whilst the vaccine was being rolled out to those between 12-15.

My counter argument was that the disruption and adverse impact on education you advocate aren't justified as the JCVI aren't convinced that the vaccines protect children's health sufficiently to warrant a vaccine programme.

So even not taking in any wider considerations, they still found them fractionally better than not doing them.

Surely it's madness to significantly disrupt children's education for marginal benefit?

Increasing restrictions and virus suppression measures in schools seems, in most cases, nothing to do with what's in the best interests of children... But rather it's mainly based on soothing the excessive anxiety of certain adults who are struggling to move beyond 2020.

Marginal benefit before then looking at long covid and its impact on children's health and education. As the vaccine reduces chances of long covid once you get covid, and also reduces chances of catching it in the first place, then that's all extra benefit on top which should have also been taken into consideration.

Letting it just spread through schools, letting children be ill, or letting them then pass it on to adults around them, making them ill, possibly killing some of them - also has a huge impact not just on children's physical health, but on their mental health too. There are plenty of parents with children who are suffering anxiety about bringing it to a young or clinically vulnerable sibling or family member. That was not taken into account.

Vaccination isn't perfect, but it reduces those worries considerably. Combined with other measures, like other countries, we could manage to avoid many more cases and avoid some of the 200 deaths a day.

I agree that vaccines are, on balance, probably beneficial to 12-15 year olds, and am happy for my 13 yo to be vaccinated.

In terms of the impact of removing most mitigations, I appreciate there will be those who will have struggled with this but, firstly, this has to be compared to the impact of disruption caused by continuing with stricter mitigations, and secondly, that there will be those for whom there will never be a time when they will be comfortable with moving away from mitigations.

@duffeldaisy

Marginal benefit before then looking at long covid and its impact on children's health and education. As the vaccine reduces chances of long covid once you get covid, and also reduces chances of catching it in the first place, then that's all extra benefit on top which should have also been taken into consideration.

Letting it just spread through schools, letting children be ill, or letting them then pass it on to adults around them, making them ill, possibly killing some of them - also has a huge impact not just on children's physical health, but on their mental health too. There are plenty of parents with children who are suffering anxiety about bringing it to a young or clinically vulnerable sibling or family member. That was not taken into account.

Vaccination isn't perfect, but it reduces those worries considerably. Combined with other measures, like other countries, we could manage to avoid many more cases and avoid some of the 200 deaths a day.

I think you are making a lot of very unscientific assumptions there. The vaccine has nothing to do with education and mental health. If there was any meaningful evidence on long covid, and the vaccine’s ability to protect against that, the committee would have considered it.