Kids being sent back to school [split topic]

[greencalx]

In the space of about three days, the Scottish Government has gone from "Kids are going to be learning from home until the end of the next academic year" to "100% school attendance in August". The official reason is that the infection control is working better than anticipated a month ago. The real reason is that parents were largely of a "fuck that" persuasion.

[BlodwynPig]

In the space of about three days, the Scottish Government has gone from "Kids are going to be learning from home until the end of the next academic year" to "100% school attendance in August". The official reason is that the infection control is working better than anticipated a month ago. The real reason is that parents were largely of a "fuck that" persuasion.

good to see the Scottish government are following the science too...

[chveik]

well kids are fairly immune and are less likely to infect others, and the toll of them not being able to socialise at school is quite heavy.

[imitationleather]

None of us on here socialised at school and we're all just fine.

[bgmnts]

Its much easier to socialise in a highly regimented institution whilst wearing stuffy, uncomfortable clothing unable to express yourself. Much better than going out to play.

[chveik]

another good, thoughtful post from bgmnts, quelle surprise

[bgmnts]

You don't need to think a lot to know how shit school is to be fair.

[chveik]

that's not the point. pragmatically, young kids need to see people of their age.

[bgmnts]

Agreed.

[BlodwynPig]

that's not the point. pragmatically, young kids need to see people of their age.

28 years old they are

[olliebean]

well kids are fairly immune and are less likely to infect others

On what are you basing that supposition?

[Ferris]

Kids are definitely more immune to immediate serious impacts if infected, but they are just as much of a spreading vector as anyone else. More so, probably, because they don't care about personal space and interact with loads of kids their age vs lonely bald men in their 30s who shun the public in general.

[chveik]

On what are you basing that supposition?

some studies.

https://www.rivm.nl/en/novel-coronavirus-covid-19/children-and-covid-19


I'm no epidemiologist of course, but I have yet to see a spike since the schools have reopened in a few european countries, and most of the new clusters haven't happened in schools.

[Sheffield Wednesday]

Children are more likely to be asymptomatic, and therefore it's more difficult to confidently identify a school as the source of a cluster.

[evilcommiedictator]

well kids are fairly immune and are less likely to infect others, and the toll of them not being able to socialise at school is quite heavy.

some studies.

https://www.rivm.nl/en/novel-coronavirus-covid-19/children-and-covid-19


I'm no epidemiologist of course, but I have yet to see a spike since the schools have reopened in a few european countries, and most of the new clusters haven't happened in schools.

Shoutouts to my home state of Victoria, Australia who have had a spike including cases innnnnnnn ***drumroll*** primary schools! Shoutouts to those who love probability!

[chveik]

so? I haven't said it couldn't happen. and I can only reiterate that I'm no expert.

I guess witnessing kids going mental during the lockdown makes me biased in this matter.

[evilcommiedictator]

Your kids are shit and how you're all not coming to the realization that teachers are underpaid for not only putting up with them but teaching them to become actual proper people astounds me. (not a teacher)

[chveik]

Your kids are shit and how you're all not coming to the realization that teachers are underpaid for not only putting up with them but teaching them to become actual proper people astounds me. (not a teacher)

I don't have kids. and teachers certainly aren't underpaid in my country.

anything else to sneer at?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

He messaged me to say No, that was all.

[GMTV]

Hang back a few days on any decisions to berate Westminster, then do almost exactly the same thing anyway.

[Butchers Blind]

Get these cunts back in the classroom and off the streets.

[Captain Z]

I'm torn, on the one hand I want to get these furlough-addicted layabouts off their six-month holiday, off their arses and off MY TAX MONEY and back to work, but on the other hand then they'll be free to fill our kids heads full of their woke liberal hard-left Marxist ideology.

[Puce Moment]

... and how you're all not coming to the realization that teachers are underpaid for not only putting up with them but teaching them to become actual proper people astounds me. (not a teacher)

I know - there isn't a single person on this forum that holds that view. In general, we just want teachers to look after our kids so we can get daytime drunk watching Home under the Hammer.

They are worse than the kulaks.

[greencalx]

If you'd said to my son before this that he'd get three or four months with no school, no after school clubs, swimming lessons and so on, and he'd be spending a lot more time on electronic devices and playing games he'd have been cook a hoop. Now he's bursting into tears once or twice a week and going on about how he wants to do all these things. A side effect of all this is that he's also realised that being a grown up isn't one big party. Around half of my week is consumed with fecking zoom meetings, which limits the amount of time I can spend with him.

Sure, you have to balance the physical and mental health risks, but unfortunately both are hard to quantify. The bottom line is that the metal health damage to kids is happening now. The talk of things reopening and the ability now to meet up with friends is helping, and fingers crossed this in itself with avert any major disasters. As I understand it the science around infection risk in schools is murky. I have seen it said that the chance of a child dying from C19 is less than that of being killed while walking to school. (But even then it's unclear if the C19 risk is derived from an epoch where children aren't attending school...). It's even more unclear whether the reason that kids aren't becoming seriously ill with this thing is because they don't get it in the first place, don't spread it if they do get it or don't show symptoms. Perhaps a combination of all three. I guess the worry is that they do get it, don't show it, and spread it to vulnerable staff and family members.

The obvious thing to have done would have been to have had a slow reopening, monitoring the situation closely, and ramping up if it seems that there was no impact on public health more generally. This was sort of what they wanted to do in the first place (in Scotland) but the big blunder was proposing to start that process in August. Timing is unfortunate here - school holidays in Scotland run from beginning of July to mid August, and no one sees any point in going back for just one week as a try-out. But given this, I think most parents got it into their head that if in principle you might start a limited opening now, then after six weeks you would expect to see a much greater level of attendance so being told that were starting from scratch in August was not going to fly. I don't want this to become party political (we've got the Scotland thread for that) but this is uncharacteristic of the SNP government which normally has its finger more on the pulse.

Part of the problem has been the talk of reopening other parts of the economy. There are two issues there. First, if it's ok to open hotels, pubs etc, then why not schools? Second, if you're expecting adults to return to work in significant numbers, what are their kids supposed to do? The exit route map has been astonishingly vague on the latter point. I am involved in a charity that provides out-of-school care for kids, and we've been studying the guidance closely. In principle you would have thought that an outfit with qualified staff that provides mostly outdoor play-based care with ratios such that kids can be hived off into small groups and limited contact with adults would serve as a perfect pilot for school reopening. It seems that the authorities would much rather the staff leech 80% of their salary from the state than give respite to families whose kids are climbing the walls.

I appreciate that different people have different assessments of the risk associated with various activities. Personally I am tired of lockdown fetishists who have declared catching C19 as the only risk worth considering. It seems that - at least as far as education is concerned - the majority view has shifted towards the risk of not receiving full time education outweighing the public health risk. This is not based on science. The political climb down is a reaction to the change in public mood. They're trying to beef it up with some science credentials, I guess so that they can blame the scientists if they make the wrong call.

[BlodwynPig]

No. Lockdown is necessary when there has been no leadership and authority in controlling the virus. The mental health issues are laid squarely at the feet of Johnson, not the 'fetishists'. Don't play that game.

[greencalx]

I think gaslighting is a horrible and overused phrase but I think that's what you are doing right now.

What fucking right do you have to tell me what I am seeing with my own eyes is not happening?

Get. To. Fuck.

C19 is not the riskiest thing ever. We need grown up nuanced balancing of risk.

[BlodwynPig]

I think gaslighting is a horrible and overused phrase but I think that's what you are doing right now.

What fucking right do you have to tell me what I am seeing with my own eyes is not happening?

Get. To. Fuck.

C19 is not the riskiest thing ever. We need grown up nuanced balancing of risk.

I think we are both fearful in our own ways. Doesn't mean that one person's fear is any less than the other's. What I am saying is that there was a path through this pandemic the would have allayed all fears, but it was not taken. This means tough choices on the shoulders of the populace rather than the Government. I would rather caution was exercised, you want to protect the children. I think we both want the same thing, but there is little clarity as to how this can be achieved when the virus is still circulating at a significant rate. Again, I would not wish anyone to suffer a Covid hospitalisation - its terrifying. There should be structures in place to protect the mental health of children and adults alike. Repurposing large buildings, playing fields, private land - outdoor schools, that would be one way.

[olliebean]

[greencalx]

I think we are both fearful in our own ways. Doesn't mean that one person's fear is any less than the other's. What I am saying is that there was a path through this pandemic the would have allayed all fears, but it was not taken. This means tough choices on the shoulders of the populace rather than the Government. I would rather caution was exercised, you want to protect the children. I think we both want the same thing, but there is little clarity as to how this can be achieved when the virus is still circulating at a significant rate. Again, I would not wish anyone to suffer a Covid hospitalisation - its terrifying. There should be structures in place to protect the mental health of children and adults alike. Repurposing large buildings, playing fields, private land - outdoor schools, that would be one way.

You sounded pretty dismissive to me. But apology accepted.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not a maga-style "there is no virus" theorist. The lockdown in March was an entirely reasonable measure to limit the spread. Social distancing now likely remains essential and in some form until we have a vaccine. I don't quite see the argument for opening pubs etc - I think adults can hang in there a bit longer.

But when it comes to education it's a case of difficult difficult lemon difficult. But I think it starts with accepting that long-term home-based education is unsustainable for a variety of reasons. First, inequality is widening every day it goes on. Second, the impact is disproportionate on women. And third, schools (or education settings construed more generally, to include sports clubs, outdoor ed etc) do a hell of a lot more for kids development than just the three Rs which is the bit you can do at home.

I believe reopening can be done slowly and safely, for example, but starting with small-group outdoor-based activities where transmission risk is known to be low (as I suggested). Going straight to a full reopening of schools now would clearly be reckless. Key worker bases have been operating for many weeks and we should be looking there for evidence of the risk of outbreaks etc and how to mitigate them. I've not sought out this evidence myself but I'm guessing it would have been a major news story of such settings were responsible for a large number of infections. This gives me confidence that we can get kids back to school to a reasonable level without putting too many people at risk. (Vulnerable kids and staff, including those with vulnerable relatives do need thinking about though).

I take the point about not wishing C19 on anyone. But I also think it's unacceptable to say that C19 deaths are the only deaths that matter.

[finnquark]

(Vulnerable kids and staff, including those with vulnerable relatives do need thinking about though).

Not to say non-attendance would be at the same level now as it was in March, but our college had to cease teaching Lower Sixth (half the intake) for the 3 teaching days before the college shut as a direct consequence of the number of staff who were vulnerable, or had vulnerable family members. I'd really like to be back - teaching via the internet is boring as fuck, relatively ineffective and the negative effects on our students are very clear.