Worried about DD going back to school

[fragminhelp]

Long story short; DH tested positive Friday, me and DD (12) Saturday . DH and I were strongly positive, DD faintly.

DH and I were both very ill for the first couple of days. DD had a temperature, didn't feel great and stayed in bed, but not the agonising headache we had.

DD went back to normal by Tuesday really. Tested her yesterday, the faint line took ages to come up.

I spoke to her school, who said she could return three days after her positive test, as long as she had no symptoms. They also said they've got a lot of it there at the moment.

DD told her classmates and I don't think they're happy, and I totally get why - it's close to Christmas and they don't want to get it...I'd feel the same.

I guess I could have kept her off till New Year, but she was eager to fulfil giving the gifts she was tasked to get and also she felt fine. The school said as it was fine as she was OK and it was over the required three days.

I'm also aware that lots of children there have it and won't know as testing isn't advised anymore (we had a couple left from school testing and also from the hospital for me).

DD never caught it when it ravaged her friends last year, even ones she'd cuddled and sat with all day.

I'm worried that DD will be outcast and kind of wish I'd never tested her and just told the school that she was ill from a viral infection.

For full disclosure I'm considered ECV now according to the GP, due to the amount of asthma attacks requiring oral steroids I've had in the last year, so I'm aware of other's risks.

I'm doubting myself, even though the school have said it's fine and worried that parents will blame me, even though others may be transmitting it without knowing it.

Most people are not even testing. If school are happy for her to go in and she feels well enough then send her in.

You're doubting yourself because sending kids in to infect others is wrong. Some people are caught between a rock and a hard place, I know.

She won't be outcast. Your overthinking it.

If you’re going to test then you know the right thing is to keep her off until she’s no longer infectious. I’m keeping my kids off next week as there are too many parents sending their ill/ infectious children into school. I just want to be able to enjoy Christmas and not have it ruined. As someone who is ECV you’ll understand that if her classmates catch it that’ll result in Christmas plans with vulnerable relatives being cancelled. It amazes me that people are doing things that they know are morally wrong just because the rules say you can. You wouldn’t send a child in who was well in themself with chicken pox or shortly after vomiting so why knowingly send in a child with an active covid infection. You say how unwell you felt yet you’re happy to risk ruining other people’s Christmas so your daughter doesn’t miss out on a few fun bits at school.

@Helloautumn22 the rules are three days following a positive test for children - she returned over 5 days off, which is the same as the adult recommendation.
I felt ill I did, she didn't.

It's ludicrous to compare it to chickenpox as you know when you're no longer infectious with it.

You can test positive for a while after being positive, it would be ridiculous to keep her off for that long.

FWIW though, I did test her last night and she was negative. If her classmates get it over Christmas then it's entirely possible that they got it from her before we knew, or, more likely, that others are in the school with the virus but not testing.

As someone who is ECV there is no safety anymore.. I got if from someone who probably didn't test and there are lots and lots of people spreading it around right now....I won't be keeping her off school for 10 days in future either, not unless she is ill and won't test her again anyway.

And no I wouldn't send her in just after vomiting, but as she was unwell at the weekend, then I'm quite comfortable with my position of not keeping her off for 10 days every time she gets ill

I’m not sure why you posted! I know what the rules are but if you want her to no longer be infectious then it’s a case of waiting for a negative lft, that doesn’t mean keeping her off for 10 days. It’s pcrs that you can test positive on for a while after an infection. Lfts are far less sensitive and a positive one is an indication of high viral load and likelihood of being infectious. You know she’s still at risk of spreading it hence you doubting yourself and bothering to post. This is why there’s so much around as everyone justifies it by following a set of rules that do very little to protect others. By your response, I’m assuming you only wanted replies telling you you’ve followed the rules and had no reason to doubt yourself. It’s always interesting seeing the justification that you got it from someone who didn’t test therefore it’s ok not to take personal responsibility for spreading it. Of course her friends aren’t happy they know that if they take it home their Christmas could be ruined. I’m not vulnerable and nor are my family but I care about others and the impact covid can have both on health and the disruption to people’s life’s. Sorry I didn’t give you the response you were looking for. It’s interesting comparing your first post with your last.

What was the point of testing if you were effectively going to ignore the result and let her infect others knowingly anyway?

that’s the bit I never understand tbh.

The rules are stupid - dreamed up to appease the likes of Boris Johnson and now we have a bit of a covid shit show tbh with more people hospitalised than in 2020!

I would apply common sense. People sticking to the rules are using it as justification for spreading covid - I know people like that in real life - and get so defensive about it. The worst ones are those who test and then effectively ignore the result.

What has ten days got to do with it? She may have been negative much quicker than ten days.