My opinion: children are safer if they are attending school

[Ianno87]

Is that a serious question, or are you attempting to drop a dead cat?

Serious question about what evidence you were using as the basis for claiming that Wikipedia was more reliable than government advice.

Or *you* were making a silly, baseless statement.

Which one is it? Please confirm.

 

[Bayum]

I never said you did say children were likely to get a more severe case of Covid, if you mean more severe than most. The fact is Children almost always are either asymptomatic or get it very mildly, so much so the Swiss are unconvinced they get it at all. What is certain is the chance of a child dying from Covid, whilst not impossible (as far as we know), is vanishingly small and it should not influence, in any way, whether kids are allowed back to school.

But your use of the Swiss believing children don’t ‘get’ covid is irrelevant. They can and do.

 

[yorkie]

But your use of the Swiss believing children don’t ‘get’ covid is irrelevant. They can and do.

That isn't what the Swiss said. They were talking about children passing it on to adults.

Should we not err on the side of caution when it comes to matter such as mental health of students? Do you not think there is a balance to be struck, that considers the fact that keeping children at home is not without risk?

I really wouldn't trust the BMA or teacher unions to put the best interests of children first. They will be putting the interests of their most vocal members first.

I think your argument should not be 'this is best for children' but 'i think this is best for me' (except either way you will be needing to self isolate anyway by the sound of it).

 

[Puffing Devil]

Serious question about what evidence you were using as the basis for claiming that Wikipedia was more reliable than government advice.

Or *you* were making a silly, baseless statement.

Which one is it? Please confirm.

"Right from the start we've tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes. We set out our first advice in February... we've made sure care homes have the resources they need"

UK Government Briefing, 15th May.

Your move.

 

[Bayum]

That isn't what the Swiss said. They were talking about children passing it on to adults.

Should we not err on the side of caution when it comes to matter such as mental health of students? Do you not think there is a balance to be struck, that considers the fact that keeping children at home is not without risk?

No, read what Justin wrote in his answer please. That’s what I am responding to.

 

[507021]

UK Government Briefing, 15th May.

Completely agree.

Like many others, my Dad died from coronavirus which he caught in the care home which he was in for a respite placement, and he'd only been there a matter of days before being taken to hospital where he passed away. Considering the amount of mistakes that have been made, I don't trust a word of the government's advice and would much rather use my own common sense. As a parent, I fully support Mayor Anderson's stance of keeping Liverpool's schools closed until he is satisfied it is safe for them to be reopened again.

 

[Qwerty133]

Completely agree.

Like many others, my Dad died from coronavirus which he caught in the care home which he was in for a respite placement, and he'd only been there a matter of days before being taken to hospital where he passed away. Considering the amount of mistakes that have been made, I don't trust a word of the government's advice and would much rather use my own common sense. As a parent, I fully support Mayor Anderson's stance of keeping Liverpool's schools closed until he is satisfied it is safe for them to be reopened again.

How exactly do you think the virus should have been kept out of care homes? Short of not allowing anyone into or out of care homes, including staff I fail to see how it would be possible to keep it out considering the virus has a long incubation period and numerous asymptomatic cases during which patients can be symptomatic. Unfortunately, once the virus is present within a care home it is basically impossible to stop it spreading whilst also providing the necessary levels of care to the residents. Mobile residents with dementia will also cause a particular issue as it will be impossible to stop them wandering around the home meaning that they will continue to come into contact with other residents.

 

[507021]

How exactly do you think the virus should have been kept out of care homes? Short of not allowing anyone into or out of care homes, including staff I fail to see how it would be possible to keep it out considering the virus has a long incubation period and numerous asymptomatic cases during which patients can be symptomatic. Unfortunately, once the virus is present within a care home it is basically impossible to stop it spreading whilst also providing the necessary levels of care to the residents. Mobile residents with dementia will also cause a particular issue as it will be impossible to stop them wandering around the home meaning that they will continue to come into contact with other residents.

For a start, by not allowing the discharge or placement of very clinically vulnerable people into care homes. My Dad was on the list of very clinically vulnerable people due to a respiratory condition, and yet it was decided to move him from his earlier four-week placement with a carer to a care home without consulting me first. He certainly wasn't in bad health for someone his age, and yet a week after he was placed in the home, my Dad was dead. As a result, I will live with the guilt of needing a break, due to my mental health issues, for the remainder of my life.

I accept your point, but what I've said is why I don't trust a single word of the government's advice, and why I'm glad the Mayor of Liverpool isn't re-opening the city's schools until he's satisfied it's safe.

 

[Qwerty133]

For a start, by not allowing the discharge or placement of very clinically vulnerable people into care homes. My Dad was on the list of very clinically vulnerable people due to a respiratory condition, and yet it was decided to move him from his earlier four-week placement with a carer to a care home without consulting me first. He certainly wasn't in bad health for someone his age, and yet a week after he was placed in the home, my Dad was dead. As a result, I will live with the guilt of needing a break, due to my mental health issues, for the remainder of my life.

I accept your point, but what I've said is why I don't trust a single word of the government's advice, and why I'm glad the Mayor of Liverpool isn't re-opening the city's schools until he's satisfied it's safe.

Where do you suggest people who were medically fit for discharge from hospital but who had significant care needs that couldn't be met in the community were moved to?
The NHS simply couldn't justify keeping such people who had no apparent medical need to be in hospital in beds that were needed for people who actually had to be there (and doing so would have almost certainly have cost more lives through a lack of access to treatment), so there was an urgent need to get such people out of hospitals into other residential settings that could meet their needs which overwhelmingly meant care homes. At the same time there was a significant number of people living alone with dementia for whom following the guidance to stay at home would have been impossible (due to a lack of understanding or retention of knowledge of such restrictions) and for whom the risk of not following the restrictions could have been catastrophic so such people had to be removed from the community at speed.
While I obviously cannot comment on the particulars of your Dad's case (although obviously every individual death is sad and my thoughts are with you), while placements in the home of individual carers can work in some circumstances, in many circumstances it becomes apparent that such an arrangement is not safe for either the carer or the person with care needs. In such circumstances it is essential, both to protect the safety of those involved and also to get any carer to agree to trial such an arrangement, that a movement to a more appropriate setting takes place as soon as is physically possible (which will on occasion mean before the family are informed). Agreements to trial such a form of care would usually be extremely clear that there may be a need to transfer the person requiring care to an alternative setting without notice and what the alternative arrangements would likely to be in such circumstances.

 

[yorkie]

I'm glad the Mayor of Liverpool isn't re-opening the city's schools until he's satisfied it's safe.

How do you define safe, and when do you think this could be? How long are you prepared for children to go without a proper education for?

 

[Puffing Devil]

How do you define safe, and when do you think this could be? How long are you prepared for children to go without a proper education for?

Safe: When the virus has been contained with proper testing and tracing. Other countries have shown that it is possible and achievable. We should be able to mimic this in the UK by September.

How Long: I am happy to for my child to miss a term and a half of "proper" education. He's been working remotely and following the school curriculum, with support from his parents, a sibling and the school. In terms of missing education, I would suggest that he is in no way behind in terms of covering the planned curriculum. He's getting more 1-2-1 help than he would in a classroom. However, even if he were unsupported and didn't have "explainers" on tap, he could have progressed as planned.

 

[507021]

Where do you suggest people who were medically fit for discharge from hospital but who had significant care needs that couldn't be met in the community were moved to?
The NHS simply couldn't justify keeping such people who had no apparent medical need to be in hospital in beds that were needed for people who actually had to be there (and doing so would have almost certainly have cost more lives through a lack of access to treatment), so there was an urgent need to get such people out of hospitals into other residential settings that could meet their needs which overwhelmingly meant care homes. At the same time there was a significant number of people living alone with dementia for whom following the guidance to stay at home would have been impossible (due to a lack of understanding or retention of knowledge of such restrictions) and for whom the risk of not following the restrictions could have been catastrophic so such people had to be removed from the community at speed.
While I obviously cannot comment on the particulars of your Dad's case (although obviously every individual death is sad and my thoughts are with you), while placements in the home of individual carers can work in some circumstances, in many circumstances it becomes apparent that such an arrangement is not safe for either the carer or the person with care needs. In such circumstances it is essential, both to protect the safety of those involved and also to get any carer to agree to trial such an arrangement, that a movement to a more appropriate setting takes place as soon as is physically possible (which will on occasion mean before the family are informed). Agreements to trial such a form of care would usually be extremely clear that there may be a need to transfer the person requiring care to an alternative setting without notice and what the alternative arrangements would likely to be in such circumstances.

I do agree with what you're saying, completely, and appreciate your kind words.

However in my Dad's case, I was not consulted about whether I was in a position to take care of him again (which I was), and he was moved. Whilst sadly, there are a number of care home deaths which were unavoidable due to the circumstances which you've explained, my Dad's certainly was. I'm sure there's many others which were as well.

 

[yorkie]

Safe: When the virus has been contained with proper testing and tracing. Other countries have shown that it is possible and achievable. We should be able to mimic this in the UK by September.

How low? Which comparable countries have done this?

How Long: I am happy to for my child to miss a term and a half of "proper" education. He's been working remotely and following the school curriculum, with support from his parents, a sibling and the school. In terms of missing education, I would suggest that he is in no way behind in terms of covering the planned curriculum. He's getting more 1-2-1 help than he would in a classroom. However, even if he were unsupported and didn't have "explainers" on tap, he could have progressed as planned.

I'm glad your child is having a good experience. But do you think disadvantaged children are likely to be going through a similar experience? What about those who experience high levels of domestic violence? What about those whose mental health is suffering as a result?

 

[Puffing Devil]

How low? Which comparable countries have done this?

Germany.

I'm glad your child is having a good experience. But do you think disadvantaged children are likely to be going through a similar experience? What about those who experience high levels of domestic violence? What about those whose mental health is suffering as a result?

No, I do not think that disadvantaged children will be going through a similar experience.

Addressing this and your other "whatabouteries". Wholesale opening of the school system to address issues in a small minority of the school population is not the solution. Making schools available to at-risk children, as is happening now, is a solution. They can be supported in a caring environment with space to socially distance and a high staffing ratio. Social services continue to be available for those children trapped in homes with high levels of domestic violence. Support should continue and perhaps be extended, though I have not seen any data that shows the extent of the problem.

If you would like to entertain my own "what about" - consider the children who no longer have exam stress this year. SATS, GCSE and A-Levels have been scrapped. Exam stress has been on the rise and will not be a factor this year - perhaps freeing up resources for those suffering mental health issues as a result of the lockdown?

 

[507021]

How do you define safe, and when do you think this could be? How long are you prepared for children to go without a proper education for?

Puffing Devil has answered those questions for me.

I do however strongly disagree with the suggestion that my eldest daughter is missing out on a proper education. We have had excellent and regular support from her school which has been incredibly invaluable in helping me to ensure that she's still learning, even though she's at home, so she's not missed out on anything at all.

 

[Domh245]

If you would like to entertain my own "what about" - consider the children who no longer have exam stress this year. SATS, GCSE and A-Levels have been scrapped. Exam stress has been on the rise and will not be a factor this year - perhaps freeing up resources for those suffering mental health issues as a result of the lockdown?

Of course, for some of those, the exam stress has been replaced by all manner of anxiety as to what on earth they'll be doing come September

 

[class387]

If you would like to entertain my own "what about" - consider the children who no longer have exam stress this year. SATS, GCSE and A-Levels have been scrapped. Exam stress has been on the rise and will not be a factor this year - perhaps freeing up resources for those suffering mental health issues as a result of the lockdown?

From what I've seen the stress is usually about the results rather than the exam itself. I'd say that's now gotten worse as it's out of our control what grades we get. I was very lucky to get excellent mock results in January so am not worried about my predicted grades, but many of my friends underperformed on their mocks, planned on cramming before the actual exams and are now stressed because they think they'll get lower grades than they're capable of.

 

[nedchester]

That isn't what the Swiss said. They were talking about children passing it on to adults.

Should we not err on the side of caution when it comes to matter such as mental health of students? Do you not think there is a balance to be struck, that considers the fact that keeping children at home is not without risk?

I really wouldn't trust the BMA or teacher unions to put the best interests of children first. They will be putting the interests of their most vocal members first.

I think your argument should not be 'this is best for children' but 'i think this is best for me' (except either way you will be needing to self isolate anyway by the sound of it).

I am going to take issue with you re both the BMA and Teacher Unions.

The BMA are the professional doctors organisation and probably know more about what the situation is medically than you or the Government. The Teacher's Unions are looking after the welfare of their members.

Now believe it or not many teachers and the union have come up with a suggestion that would work in schools. It mainly involves Years 6/10/12 not very young kids in Reception and Year 1 who will NOT be able to socially distance.

From my previous posts you will know that I advocate the UK getting back to normal as soon as possible. However, a number of things need to be in place for this to happen. One thing is effect track and trace which is not yet in place. That's the route out of this issue.

My wife who is a primary school teacher has made a number of suggestions about a return to school for Year 6 (and some of Year 1) can happen from June 1st. The problem is what works in one school doesn't work in another due to size, number of rooms etc.

So why don't you trust the BMA and all of the teaching unions? Beware of what you read in the Daily Mail or The Sun

Of course good old Michael Gove quoted that 'we are sick of experts' so maybe that's where this view is coming from?

 

[nedchester]

If you think that teachers have it so easy, then why not re-train? Perhaps when you’ve then tried the job for a year or so you can come back and tell us all about your experience?

Which is always my argument. Those the criticise teachers know nothing about the job (except they all went to school once)

 

[sjpowermac]

I am going to take issue with you re both the BMA and Teacher Unions.

The BMA are the professional doctors organisation and probably know more about what the situation is medically than you or the Government. The Teacher's Unions are looking after the welfare of their members.

Now believe it or not many teachers and the union have come up with a suggestion that would work in schools. It mainly involves Years 6/10/12 not very young kids in Reception and Year 1 who will NOT be able to socially distance.

From my previous posts you will know that I advocate the UK getting back to normal as soon as possible. However, a number of things need to be in place for this to happen. One thing is effect track and trace which is not yet in place. That's the route out of this issue.

My wife who is a primary school teacher has made a number of suggestions about a return to school for Year 6 (and some of Year 1) can happen from June 1st. The problem is what works in one school doesn't work in another due to size, number of rooms etc.

So why don't you trust the BMA and all of the teaching unions? Beware of what you read in the Daily Mail or The Sun

Excellent post and good to hear that your wife’s suggestions have been listened to.

I think there’s a lot more happening at a local level that’s constructive than people realise. In my city all of the schools are working together to pool ideas

To be fair, several of the staff suggestions at my school have been taken forward regarding practical aspects of re-opening.

Regarding vulnerable students, many of them in my school had disappeared long before the lockdown started, there was no way their parents wanted them in school. When I was in school last week our SEND coordinator was busy contacting parents again, but most of the conversations were very short and ended in ‘no thank-you’.

Obviously, both observations are from just one city.

The reports in the newspapers are just this week’s noise

 

[Puffing Devil]

Of course, for some of those, the exam stress has been replaced by all manner of anxiety as to what on earth they'll be doing come September

Some, though we have no idea how many. And of those, who would not be feeling stressed after completing exams?

 

[Yew]

UK Government Briefing, 15th May.

Your move.

If I remember correctly from that briefing, the journalist presented some pretty damming evidence that no compulsory measures were in place, and Hancock just tried to shrug it off.

 

[richw]

The one thing that I don’t think is fair is making staff on the ‘clinically vulnerable’ list return. I think numbers of pupils are likely to be low enough for schools to be able to accommodate them without the need for vulnerable staff to attend.

Those teachers on the clinically vulnerable list would be expected to take sick leave I imagine.

 

[Belperpete]

Whatever happens, I certainly don't envy Reception class teachers' jobs come September.... They'll have to push back some of the curriculum, almost certainly to all pupils' disbenefit.

Assuming that schools return to normal in September (and I accept that may be a big assumption), children will have missed out on a term-and-a-half of teaching. In other words, half a school year. For those taking a two-year A level course, that is a quarter of the teaching time. This is going to effect those taking A level exams in 2021. At some time, someone is going to have to make a decision what to do about this - preferably sufficiently early before the Autumn term starts that teachers can plan for it. Making up that time in all subjects is surely not going to be possible. Should a quarter of the syllabus be dropped?

A similar problem is going to affect those taking GCSE and degree exams in 2021, although the proportion lost will not be quite so great. Of course, if schools do not return to normal in September, we would rapidly get to the point where everyone just gets put back a year.

 

[Bow Fell]

I am going to take issue with you re both the BMA and Teacher Unions.

The BMA are the professional doctors organisation and probably know more about what the situation is medically than you or the Government. The Teacher's Unions are looking after the welfare of their members.

Now believe it or not many teachers and the union have come up with a suggestion that would work in schools. It mainly involves Years 6/10/12 not very young kids in Reception and Year 1 who will NOT be able to socially distance.

From my previous posts you will know that I advocate the UK getting back to normal as soon as possible. However, a number of things need to be in place for this to happen. One thing is effect track and trace which is not yet in place. That's the route out of this issue.

My wife who is a primary school teacher has made a number of suggestions about a return to school for Year 6 (and some of Year 1) can happen from June 1st. The problem is what works in one school doesn't work in another due to size, number of rooms etc.

So why don't you trust the BMA and all of the teaching unions? Beware of what you read in the Daily Mail or The Sun

Of course good old Michael Gove quoted that 'we are sick of experts' so maybe that's where this view is coming from?

Don’t be fooled by this thread as an attempt to have genuine concern for children’s education. It’s a good old excuse to have a go at the unions plain and simple!

You could have a replaced teachers in this thread with any other profession and included the word union, and it would have been negative every time.

I genuinely can’t wait until we get back to normal, of course there will be a new ‘normal’

But this attempt to reopen schools no matter what come next month, let’s actually see what happens. It’s been only a week since some lockdown measures were eased, and in all honesty my routine hasn’t changed, since the ‘full’ going to work as normal (the only thing that has remained constant through all this) and going for some exercise on my bike. It will take a lot more to convince me to return to normal.

Give it a month/six weeks when we have a better idea of any significant changes in the R rate and death rate, and then ask people again whether it’s a good idea.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Assuming that schools return to normal in September (and I accept that may be a big assumption), children will have missed out on a term-and-a-half of teaching. In other words, half a school year. For those taking a two-year A level course, that is a quarter of the teaching time. This is going to effect those taking A level exams in 2021. At some time, someone is going to have to make a decision what to do about this - preferably sufficiently early before the Autumn term starts that teachers can plan for it. Making up that time in all subjects is surely not going to be possible. Should a quarter of the syllabus be dropped?

A similar problem is going to affect those taking GCSE and degree exams in 2021, although the proportion lost will not be quite so great. Of course, if schools do not return to normal in September, we would rapidly get to the point where everyone just gets put back a year.

My boy is following the online learning provided by the school and is working well; I don't anticipate him being behind should school start as planned in September as he starts his GCSE year. My daughter should have been taking A-Levels this year - she had already completed the syllabus when lockdown started.

You may argue that not all children will be so diligent - I would say that those who do not focus outside of school will be the same ones who perform badly in school.

 

[Belperpete]

As an engineer who has done some teaching, I have to side with the teachers. A handful of academies are cronying up to the government, and the usual union-hating press are bigging this up. However, what is being offered is purely a sop to those who want lockdown lifted, but in practice will achieve very little in practical terms. When you think about it, it rapidly becomes obvious how pointless it is:

• Only a couple of year groups will be going back, so only a very small proportion of children will be going back. Most families will still have children at home, particularly those with two or more children who are unlikely to both be going back. Only very limited after-school child-minding will be available, so this is going to do almost nothing to help parents return to work.
• They will only going back for a handful of weeks. Part of that time is going to have to be spent recapping previous work ("carrying on from we left off two months ago....." is unrealistic).
• The majority of children will be taught by a teacher unfamiliar with that subject matter. (half-sized classes means that one half of the class will have to be taught by a stand-in, and many of the regular teachers will be unavailable). Anyone who has been taught by a stand-in teacher knows how poor they can be (I was taught English by a PE teacher, and Physics by a chemistry teacher - both were hopeless at it, and we basically just trod water until the regular teacher got back)
• A significant number of pupils will be unhappy about going back while their siblings and classmates get to stay at home, and are likely to be highly disruptive.
• Everything the teacher goes through is going to have to be repeated all over again when the significant number of missing class-members return. Both teachers and older pupils will know this, which is hardly likely to invoke much enthusiasm.

Most teachers are dedicated to what they do (let's face it, they don't do it for the money), and I suspect would jump at the chance to do something useful. But if I were in their shoes, I would not be taking a totally unnecessary risk (however big or small you may think it might be), for something that is pure posturing by Boris. TBH, I wouldn't be surprised if Boris has deliberately engineered this to distract the tabloids into their favourite hobby of union-bashing.

 

[Belperpete]

My boy is following the online learning provided by the school and is working well; I don't anticipate him being behind should school start as planned in September as he starts his GCSE year. My daughter should have been taking A-Levels this year - she had already completed the syllabus when lockdown started.
You may argue that not all children will be so diligent - I would say that those who do not focus outside of school will be the same ones who perform badly in school.

Agreed about those taking A levels this year. Most syllabuses would have ended by Easter, with the time after Easter spent on revision and exam preparation. I had pondered on whether it might be possible for pupils to sit A level exams this year, until you consider the logistics of setting the papers, let alone sitting them.

I would argue that not all children will have had the opportunity to be so diligent as yours. Many will have been acting as child-minders for younger children, or just had the distraction of coping with them.

If teachers just ignore those who were not able to study at home, then they will rapidly become disruptive when they are unable to connect with the teaching.

 

[Adam Williams]

We're starting to see some research on paediatric transmission of Covid-19; I read the following with some interest:

• Children are unlikely to have been the primary source of household SARS-CoV-2 infections
• Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) [p. 11]
• Research summary, bringing together 101 separate papers

It's looking encouraging at the moment, but there's still not certainty:

The importance of children in transmitting the virus is difficult to establish, in particular given the number of asymptomatic cases, but there is some evidence that their role in transmitting the virus is fairly limited. Precise details regarding paediatric transmission cannot be confirmed without widespread sero surveillance, but trends are emerging.

This is a rapidly developing area and current published finding may be out of date. We will update this as soon as further information becomes available.

Whether children are spreaders or not remains "one of the many unknowns with the current coronavirus outbreak", says Prof Matthew Snape from the University of Oxford. He is beginning research into how many children and teenagers have been infected and developed immunity.

"Understanding this is vital to understanding how to manage the outbreak response, including decisions about when to re-open schools," he says.

If further research continues to indicate that child->adult transmission is very unlikely then I'd personally be more supportive of schools reopening, since this was one of the main concerns I had which influenced my own opinion.. particularly since a lot of parents and school staff are likely to be vulnerable to the more severe symptoms of Covid-19 than the children.

The other concern is around the risk of complications in children that are starting to be discovered now, including reports of a Kawasaki-like disease (PIMS-TS):

The recognition of this disease late in the first pandemic wave might relate to its rarity and the difficulty of recognising uncommon syndromes in fragmented health-care systems rapidly reorganising to deal with a pandemic. Alternatively, it suggests that the mechanism for the Kawasaki-like disease described here and PIMS-TS might represent post-infectious inflammatory syndrome, which might be antibody or immune-complex mediated, particularly because in this Italian cohort there was little evidence of viral replication

You can see from the quote that we don't yet know whether this is something that's just rare, or something that can crop up after the patients have effectively fought off the virus. It's dangerous, because it can cause heart issues if untreated/unresponsive to treatment. I'm hopeful that it will be the former - a complication that only happens in a tiny minority of cases, and not something worth worrying over compared to the other potential problems with keeping schools closed, but the view is that we should try and explore further to confirm this.

There's active work being done here to investigate this, but science takes time:

In the UK, a British Paediatric Surveillance Unit study has been rapidly opened to explore the extent of PIMS-TS nationally. Two COVID-19 priority studies in the UK (DIAMONDS [Central Portfolio Management System 45537] and ISARIC [UK Clinical Research Network 14152]) are collaborating to ensure that every child with this emerging syndrome has the opportunity to consent to take part in a study exploring mechanisms

I agree with @yorkie that it's crucially important to try and keep perspective on the actual risks of the virus and weigh up the other, very valid concerns associated with keeping schools closed. I think mental health is going to have suffered throughout the population throughout this period, and there will be long-lasting effects for everyone in the education system.

 

[6Gman]

I would argue that the teaching unions are now the most powerful in the country. Without them agreeing to go back to work, millions can't. They've got the government by the short and curlies, I don't see this dispute ending soon.

Quite a lot of teachers have worked throughout the lockdown.