NicoleC1971
BANNED
- Messages
- 3,450
- Type of diabetes
- Type 1
- Treatment type
- Pump
I think a major trait of the government is that the plight of anyone less fortunate than him is simply not on his radar. He is in his own privileged little bubble. It's well documented hes not one for reading policy documents. I dont think he can comprehend that someone might have to be forced to choose between work and maintaining their health or keeping a roof over their head. If he had any insight I really dont think it bothers him.
Care homes is an interesting one. I think the one visitor rule is to reduce the number of contacts. Of course everyone varies, it could be a partner and daughter who themselves are shielding. On the other hand a lady I worked with had a massive and very lovely family ranging from two daughters to great grandchilderen. They organised it so that people popped in every day. Goodness knows how they will choose. It certainly will cause a lot of upset but when I think of all the contacts each of those people have it makes sense. I'm surprised the government have shown an consideration at all towards care homes. That said it looks as though they care but it's not costing them anything.!
Why consideration however minor towards care homes but not schools? Both settings are incredibly similar. Problems with social distancing, asymptomatic individuals etc.
Again Boris probably assumes all schools resemble the private schools of his experience. Same way I think we hoped his experience of Coronavirus and the nurses who supported him might lead to change,nope that group dont contribute to Tory fundsenough to be given any special attention!
Childeren must return to school so their parents can return to work. Even childeren who have been shielded are said to not be at risk and so can go back according to Gov.Uk. Any parents who argue will be fined! The ripples are immense from high risk childeren to everyone who works in the school. Many parents rely heavily on grandparents for childcare who may themselves be high risk or shielding.
Sadly those affected are collateral damage. The official line is that individuals will be safe because the schools will be safe. People must return to work. Should anyone point out to Boris that reality is completely different he will probably just stick his fingers in his ears and sing ten green bottles very loudly! We can hope that something might change in the next month but I think it will have to be something massive for Boris to alter his course!
Children are at extremely low risk of becoming ill from the virus. Adults - and particularly older adults - are far more likely to be seriously ill and die from complications. The largest study done so far, involving more than 55,000 hospital patients, found that only 0.8% were under the age of 19.8 hours ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-5...ren are at extremely low,under the age of 19.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52003804#:~:text=Children are at extremely low,under the age of 19.
This report goes on to point to the remarkably lower rates of transmission from kids to adults from the studies done to date. So we should not imagine that this spreads in the same way that cols and flu do amongst the young.
Schools are not like care homes in terms of the actual risks of serious illness and death in the setting and to the wider community.
In the meantime please think about the risk to our next generation (the ones that have to pay for the lockdown and your ongoing support if you opt out of going back to work) if they cannot return to school in September or have to be taught in masks or have an inferior version of education (blended learning).
The lockdown was supposed to protect the vulnerable but it seems to me we failed at this because we neglected care homes for the sake of saving the NHS. Lets not throw children under the bus too! (Children's Commissioners phrase not mine).