Time people took responsibility and not relied on others telling them what to do. If your child has health problems, keep them off school. For obvious reasons. If you're old, or your parents live with you and they're old, or they rely on you visiting regularly to help them, don't expose yourself and your children to the virus which you can pass on to your vulnerable relatives. But if you're young and healthy and your children are healthy and your parents can cope without you having to look after them, then send your kids to school and go to work. You might get the virus, you might not, but even if you do the chances are (as in the odds are massively stacked in your favour) that you and your kids will be absolutely fine. Better than fine. For both yourselves and society. You won't get it again, in the future, when you may not be so healthy and not so able to fight it off, and you won't be a carrier in the future, you won't spread it. You might get it and not even realise you have it the symptoms can be that mild. Or you might have a bad case of flu symptoms. But you'll be OK. And have kept society running. Our government are trying their best to do the right thing. I believe, as much as I hate the Tories, and Boris in particular, that they're performing better than most. Listening to scientists more than most. But there isn't a right answer. Have a think about what is the best outcome. Hiding everyone away isn't it. Exposing everyone isn't it either. Think what's right in your circumstances.
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I'm still cautious. Early evidence is pointing to potential permanent damage to Lungs, kidneys and other organs in some cases, even when death isn't the outcome. There is also evidence coming of people being infected twice with the virus. I genuinely don't know what the right answer is, but saying "if you get it, you'll be fine" doesn't sit right with me when talking about a virus less than 6 months old.
If schools closing meant more would be at home self isolating then great. But the likelihood is the kids would be bored, the stay at home parent would be going stir crazy and all that would happen is even more people shopping for big roll.
No there not, but they are trained in dealing with children, are DBS checked and would be available. There’s also no reason why they shouldn’t get paid for it either. What is the alternative that the people needed in the NHS etc are unavailable because they have no child care, making the strain even harder? I’m sure most teachers if possible would make themselves available to help.
But therein lies the issue... you’re assuming that teachers will be disease free and without their own children. Your view is very simplistic .
So basically, shut the schools and then get the teachers to go to a work place like building to have children placed in their care. A bit like a school. Perhaps if they get bored they could fill the time by teaching the kids some stuff.
Genuine question, why would it be your wife automatically taking all the time off when she’s a nurse during a pandemic, and not you, or you both sharing the time off?
Your right it is simplistic, it’s not without risk or it’s problems but it’s an option to a problem. It’s a real simplistic option to have the teachers self diagnose (like their being asked to now) and to have their children there. perhaps you have a better option to help ensure the NHS staff can be available when needed the most? Or perhaps we should take the simplistic view and shut all the hospitals because the staff ‘might’ have the disease and leave everyone for a free for all.
I really don’t understand how we will slow down the progress of this and keep the hospital running, if we’re letting large groups of children sit in close proximity to each other, then go home to their family... why do you think they are banning pubs and cinema? Or are you suggesting that all kids should stay at school as boarders until everything blows over and the nurses have done their job?
No, not at all, there would probably less than 10% of current children at school, they can be managed much better in smaller quantities. It is completely nothing like pubs and cinemas, which are more often than not in much smaller spaces and reliant on individual adults to self manage, whereas this would be much more controlled. Anyone getting symptoms would self isolate like now at home. There will always be exceptions to the rules, care homes for one, the environment in many of them would be far worse but they will continue to exist and the carers will continue to go in(or in some cases they are asking them to live there until over), or perhaps on you’re basis the carers should abandon them? Like I said it’s not without it’s problems but it can make a difference, the alternative is we short staff the hospitals, in turn increase the mortality rate etc etc,
Teachers ARE child sitters !!! FACT. My wife is a supply teacher, up till recently was a full time teacher. She and all the others she is with now say that teachers are nothing more than child minders and baby sitters for kids whose parents pack them off to school every day and then don't give a toss. You may think differently but I'm married to a teacher and I hear the dreadful stories daily. Kids these days in the area she works in are irresponsible oiks, I cannot imagine how teachers cope. We are talking secondary education in Scunthorpe by the way. So closing her school would mean an immediate loss of a wage. She's not salaried, gets paid for the days she works.
