Schools might not go back after the holiday - yippee!

[Chrysanthemums]

I just heard this on Sky news, which I don't normally watch but the dc's had it on somehow by mistake.

They said that in order to prevent it spreading further they might not open schools again in September. I wondered if this was being reported anywhere else and what people think about it.

I'm pleased as anything that makes it less likely people who are compromised or pregnant etc will catch it, is great.

I know most of us don't need to panic but those people are more at risk and therefore it merits a measure of effort to control it as far as possible, IMO.

mercedes - do you remember which station that was that you heard the program on? (r4?) sounds interesting.

I agree with Mercedes. Also, if we had closed schools etc earlier, across the board (as Mexico did) then we wouldn't be seeing what we are now with many more people getting swine flu. I read that it is 4 (or 7 sorry can't remember as I read it too early today!) times mroe harmful than seasonal flu as it goes deeper into the lungs.

Looks like there will be a program on bbc some time in the Summer about Manchester and the 19818 flu.

sweetfall. Last flu pandemic was 1968, so while flu does kill people every year its been a long time since we've had one that noone has met before. I agree that some of the tabloid press is utter garbage and working people into a real stew but I think that actually the more serious press is being quite balanced - reporting figures that they have been given and then attaching lots of 'for most people it will be mild' statements.

I am getting concerned now, I usually don't with this kind of press induced histeria,but my son(4) does attend nursery,catch everything going and is due to have an ENT operation, can someone tell me what they think,is post op classed as an underlying health condition??I am worried if he contacts it wiil his lack of ability to fight infection after the op be worth not going through with it???

The reason they are considering this is the very real risk of hospitals and intensive care units being swamped and therefore more people dying. I know it is great that we are all stiff upper lip about this, but those planning these things won't do it lightly. There's always so much competitive cynicism on MN but in this case it really may come down to trying to save more lives.

this is not media speculation,it is something seriously being considered.

OH MY DEAR GOD!!! no no no no no ARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I reckon the govt will veto it as they want people at work. Very worried about how hospitals will cope.

it's bloody ridiculous. /what on earth are they going to do? write off the next year's education for an entire generation? This could go on for months.

And what will they do? close all daycare settings as well? Surely there's no point just closing the schools as many of those children will have younger siblings in nurseries who will also be in contact with the virus. So if they close schools they surely have to close all nurseries/shut down all childminding settings, just to ensure there are no congrigations of groups of children...

I also heard the research about lower death rates, and lower hospitalisation rates, in cities that closed schools (though the one I heard was in the US, not Manchester). Will also be tearing hair out if schools closed, but if its done to save lives - I'm for it.

Can't see it myself . The alternative in order for parents to be able to continue work (like those in healthcare!) would be mass daycare which rather defeats the object. Also worth bearing in mind that Westminster is now pretty much closed until October ..... There may well be a contingency plan but with holidays and so on it may well be that the situation doesn't becoem as drastic as feared.

and it's worth bearing in mind that in times when schools were closed so presumably the last pandemic, less women were out at work and less children were in daycare settings. At this point we have to bear in mind that a much higher proportion of parents work now, which would mean that children would need to be looked after somewhere, so presumably in some kind of childcare setting.

It's hard enough to get childcare in the holidays as it is, without the potential of schools being closed for an unspecified time.

I'm a pregnant teacher and my school (north London) has sent home all pregnant women because of the pandemic. The school is also training all staff in the use of the school virtual learning environment ready for september- so worst case scenario if schools do have to close then we can still set and mark work electroncially.

I have been told I may not be allowed back in Sept (am 12 weeks now so have a while to go!) but they are waiting until Sept to make their decision about that and whether to let anyone back to school.

are all those against it really prepared to allow hospitals and intensive care units to start having to turn people away? the idea behind this is to slow the virus spread down so that people who need it can be treated adequately. As I said, I don't think the govt will allow it but there seems to be a lot of 'I'm alright Jack' attitude here.

But it won't just be schools that are closed - it will have to be all childcare settings. So all nurseries, all preschools, etc.

In short - childcare will no longer be available, so working parents will have to potentially give up work in order to look after their children. And what happens then to the companies these people work for? Do they make them take unpaid leave and replace them with people who are available? Or do they take a heavy financial loss.

School closures have too far-reaching an impact on the whole country to be a viable option.

I dont mind as long as they close the school i work at too, otherwise Im stuck!!

Poface you obv are speaking from a POV of some authority, so am glad you have come to the thread.

I'm wondering how it's seen that prospectively the jobs that are currently done by parents who use childcare are to continue to be done?

I know there are things that could fairly easily be closed - nail salons, tie rack you name it really, but there are many situations where people will have to go to work or it'll be potentially serious.

So what will those parents do? I find this really interesting. (bit like the eejit that started the thread, ahem )

Also, virtual learning sounds great but I wonder how many schools are prepared for that? It might interestingly open up a whole new perspective on part time/home education.

In a sort of 'life hands you lemons, make cordial' kind of way, for those who are dreading it (and in a rather exciting way for those of us who would love to see how that worked in practise).

The govt has been working for years to get parents to stay at work and pay for childcare (or use vouchers). Another angle from which to view the current situation I suppose. I don't know if it will have any bearing on their policies.

Wannabe, there might have to be subsidies put in place.

I agree could be a few house of cards situations. If kids don't go to school, I can't go to work (can't afford still more childcare), can't go to work, lose my job, don't find another one (recession on you know), lose my job, can't pay the rent, can't pay the rent, lose the roof over my head...

just doesn't bear thinking about.

I imagine Citronella that they would make sure people sucvh as yourself had enough to manage - suspending mortgage payments, etc etc. Well provided the banks are not all going to fold if they do that

I think we're all going back to caves and bartering.

it's not about 'I'm alright , Jack' , it is about the realistic burden to the ordinary person, who cannot go to work and therefore cannot pay their bills.. house of cards as citronella has said

the country will effectively grind to a halt and that will be catastrophic to everyone

subsidies for what? It's all very well subsidising companies to pay people who are off due to lack of childcare, but what happens to the production of those companies in the meantime?

IMO it's more likely to result in companies letting those who need to take extended leave for childcare reasons go and replacing them with others who are available to do the job "now" (god knows there are enough unemployed for companies to choose from at the moment).

I guess it comes down to how possible it is to place our society effectively into a state of suspended animation for a few months.

It's a weird one isn't it.

and the answer to that is that it is not possible. Nor is it realistic.

As I said on another thread, it would cause the already collapsing economy into a state of yet further crisis, and will have longer-term implications, with employers being less inclined to employ someone with small children in future for fear of something like this happening again.

If you have children you can basically kiss goodbye to your job, as most employers won't be willing to have staff off for an unspecified period of time, they will simply replace them. And this in turn will result in more people needing to claim benefits, which in turn will put a huge stress on the government to provide the money which in turn will need to result in cuts in other areas....

etc.

To me it seems like Hobsons choice, really. An episiotomy or a tear.
Let the country grind to a halt in a controlled way, or allow this virus to spread haphazardly in a short period of time, which may or may not cause unprepared for chaos.