Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[rudebhoy]

The transmission rate from children, including those who are asymptomatic remains unclear.

I would suggest that this is essential information.

My son teaches Years 4 & 5 but assures me that his colleagues teaching the reception and Year 1 & 6 share his views. In any event to incorporate the proposed changes in classroom practices all teaching staff at his school will be involved .

He also has two children of his own of primary school age, one of whom is in Year 1.

So you don't know the transmission rate, think it is essential information, but think it's a good idea to send kids back anyway? Brilliant logic.

Maybe when your son has had to clean up his first 4 year old pupil who has crapped themselves, he might change his mind about the level of risk.

 

[bobmac]

What do the scientists say?

 

[funkycoldmedina]

And that is precisely my point.

Evidence should be provided to parents and teachers but at the moment the waters appear to be muddied by some making decisions based upon politics rather than science.

You've no evidence of your last point other than the fact you have an issue with unions. Strong evidence is just not out their yet so I understand their concerns.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

So you don't know the transmission rate, think it is essential information, but think it's a good idea to send kids back anyway? Brilliant logic.

Maybe when your son has had to clean up his first 4 year old pupil who has crapped themselves, he might change his mind about the level of risk.

Where have I said that it is unconditional?

My criticism is of those who dismiss the idea without hearing the evidence.

If the level of risk can be confirmed then a reasoned (not political) decision can be made.

As to your last point do you really think that in his 10 years of teaching he hasn't experienced his fair share of "accidents".

 

[pendodave]

My dilemma with the schools situation is that I want to see children being educated, but I want to see people not being put at unnecessary risk.
Someone made a point about what does a few weeks difference make to 4 -5 yr olds not going to school. - Good point, period.
Although we have eased lockdown , the emphasis is still on social distancing is it not?
However, kids mingling at school can and will pass on the virus. Not so much because they have covid, but because they touch almost everything in reach including each other etc, and this virus can go from one household to others so easily via the kids., just by touch.
Adults at the child's home are practising SD, but it can all be undone by the child bringing it home, and thus the whole household get it .

I am led to the conclusion that at this time it is better for young children to stay home until the R number is appreciably lower.

By the time they get back to school they will have missed out on far more than a few weeks schooling, plus social development at an important time in their lives.
This is why hobbit's idea makes sense, at least there would be a chance of catching up.
Personally I think we're being far too relaxed about the long term damage to already disadvantaged young people, and a whole lot too unrelaxed about the level of risk to young people and youngish parents/teachers caused by the virus.
Maybe all the huffing and puffing and political point scoring will end up with a solution that everyone's comfortable with. I certainly hope so.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

You've no evidence of your last point other than the fact you have an issue with unions. Strong evidence is just not out their yet so I understand their concerns.

Wrong again.

I have an issue with union leaders who attempt to pursue an ideological agenda under the guise of "speaking for their members".

 

[funkycoldmedina]

Wrong again.

I have an issue with union leaders who attempt to pursue an ideological agenda under the guise of "speaking for their members".

You've absolutely no idea if that's what's happening, it's just your own prejudices.
If you can point me to the evidence it's safe then I'll concede your point.

 

[Foxholer]

And that is precisely my point.

Evidence should be provided to parents and teachers but at the moment the waters appear to be muddied by some making decisions based upon politics rather than science.

That's ALWAYS likely to happen - unfortunately!

Your comments DO seem to be tainted by your view on how Unions work though - and that's not meant to be a criticism of your view, as it's one I have a lot of empathy with.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

You've absolutely no idea if that's what's happening, it's just your own prejudices.
If you can point me to the evidence it's safe then I'll concede your point.

Well SAGE appears to suggest that it should be safe by 1 June and other countries are starting a return to school.

 

[Foxholer]

...
I have an issue with union leaders who attempt to pursue an ideological agenda under the guise of "speaking for their members".

But having been voted into their position by 'the members', surely that have a right to declare that expression! Isn't that the 'democracy' you were after earlier?

 

[funkycoldmedina]

Well SAGE appears to suggest that it should be safe by 1 June and other countries are starting a return to school.

Is it unreasonable for the unions to see the SAGE reasoning behind the decision?

 

[Wolf]

Well SAGE appears to suggest that it should be safe by 1 June and other countries are starting a return to school.

What other countries do is a kop out excuse. The unions and government have a responsibility to this countries teacher's and children only not to anyone else's.

I don't want my Yr1 daughter going back until we know its safe to do so for her and for everyone in the family. They don't live with me but her mum is high risk category with a newborn and I wouldn't want them at risk as a result of my little girl inadvertently bringing it home. So perhaps those scientists could show the actual evidence to help ally those fears.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

But having been voted into their position by 'the members', surely that have a right to declare that expression! Isn't that the 'democracy' you were after earlier?

Fair point.

The problem, of course, lies in the apathy displayed by much of unions' membership.

As a result the leadership is very rarely, if ever, truly representative of it's members.

And with a FPTP system the same is true of government.

 

[Foxholer]

Well SAGE appears to suggest that it should be safe by 1 June and other countries are starting a return to school.

'Cautious consensus' and 'lack of evidence in the role children play in transmitting the virus is one factor that creates uncertainty in what the impact of opening schools could be.' according to one report from a SAGE participant I've seen. He also stated that 'It is worth reopening schools even if they have to be shut again'.

So not particularly strong argument for such re-opening as 'the right' decision imo!

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Is it unreasonable for the unions to see the SAGE reasoning behind the decision?

They had a meeting with SAGE on Friday I believe.

There appears to be some disagreement over the information and evidence.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

What other countries do is a kop out excuse. The unions and government have a responsibility to this countries teacher's and children only not to anyone else's.

I don't want my Yr1 daughter going back until we know its safe to do so for her and for everyone in the family. They don't live with me but her mum is high risk category with a newborn and I wouldn't want them at risk as a result of my little girl inadvertently bringing it home. So perhaps those scientists could show the actual evidence to help ally those fears.

But what is safe?

Do we keep children out of school until a) a vaccine has been found and b) the whole population have been vaccinated.

Even then there may still be dangers.

 

[Wolf]

But what is safe?

Do we keep children out of school until a) a vaccine has been found and b) the whole population have been vaccinated.

Even then there may still be dangers.

Safe would be showing us the actual evidence that they are supposedly using to send the most inappropriate group of children back to school that have no idea what SD is, to prove there is evidence that this is the correct course of action.

I've not said we should wait till vaccine but I am saying show us the evidence that proves this is the right decision. I believe Hobbit idea sums it up perfectly, gives more time to reduce R rate and allows for any missed time to be made up and it gives us time to be shown the facts behind this decision. A little transparency is all that's needed.

 

[pendodave]

What other countries do is a kop out excuse. The unions and government have a responsibility to this countries teacher's and children only not to anyone else's.

I don't want my Yr1 daughter going back until we know its safe to do so for her and for everyone in the family. They don't live with me but her mum is high risk category with a newborn and I wouldn't want them at risk as a result of my little girl inadvertently bringing it home. So perhaps those scientists could show the actual evidence to help ally those fears.

Thus seems reasonable for you and your circumstances, but what about the very large numbers of kids who aren't in this position?
Some sort of middle ground allowing those who can safely return to school to do so, while supporting those who can't is surely better than a blanket closure?
A binary wright/right open/shut all/nothing approach is going to cripple our country.

 

[Wolf]

Thus seems reasonable for you and your circumstances, but what about the very large numbers of kids who aren't in this position?
Some sort of middle ground allowing those who can safely return to school to do so, while supporting those who can't is surely better than a blanket closure?
A binary wright/right open/shut all/nothing approach is going to cripple our country.

How do we know its safe to return without the facts being shown to us. I used my daughter as an example but I believe it goes for all in that category of age group they have no idea of SD and its teachers being put at risk as much as the children's families. I have older children who better understand SD & what's happening who would be lower risk of breaking SD yet they're deemed not suitable so must remain at home but their little sister who is tactile and doesn't get it is safe to return!

All those being put at risk in this situation deserve to be shown the facts to ensure the reason behind it.

A teacher will tell my child to show her workings out when she does sums, so why should we expect teachers to go back with the hardest group to control without showing them the workings out the government has used to decide this is best course of action.

 

[Hobbit]

Someone mentioned that the passing of the infection between the young and their teachers isn't known. Unfortunately the only way to find out is by the children going back to school. Isn't that like inventing dynamite and asking shall I hold it in one hand and see what happens when I put a match to it?