Opening schools

br14 said:
Well you're not wrong. Last numbers I read, 12 people under 19 had died. 9 of whom had conditions that made them vulnerable.

So the question is, will you keep schools closed until no children die of infectious diseases? If so, they will never ever open again, because children can even die of flu. In 2009, around 30 people under 20 died during the H1N1 outbreak. So we'd best not take the risk. It was actually a pretty bad flu season this year anyway.
Click to expand...
br14, I have no idea what you think as you tend to just put peoples posts down. To answer your question directly where you compare flu to covid-19.

Flu has a mortality rate of about 0.6 and an unchecked R of 1.3. Right now we don't really know the mortality rate of covid-19 and it's R rate is currently about 1. So if you want to compare apples and oranges, perhaps you should do the maths. With an R rate of 1 for covid, you would need a mortality rate of about 0.8 for it to be comparable. Right now it's mortality rate is thought to be around 3, so we are a long way of comparing it with seasonal flu. Think before you post nonsense.

I have a 9 year old due to return to school, so I am looking at this closely as any parent should.

I would want to see an R number of below 0.5 before my daughter goes back to school.

You could, of course, argue that the mortality rate for children is much lower than adults so lower than 3, and you would be right, but until we know why and what co-existing conditions exacerbate the problem I won't be sending my daughter back to school until I see an R number of below 0.5.

So instead of just crapping on someones post, and I have no idea whether Kuepper has kids or not, you might want to think for a moment and consider what you post.
 
Randy,
The current r number for covid comes from the governments estimate. The r number for flu has been well known for years. Is this what you are asking?
 
Laughing said:
br14, I have no idea what you think as you tend to just put peoples posts down. To answer your question directly where you compare flu to covid-19.

Flu has a mortality rate of about 0.6 and an unchecked R of 1.3. Right now we don't really know the mortality rate of covid-19 and it's R rate is currently about 1. So if you want to compare apples and oranges, perhaps you should do the maths. With an R rate of 1 for covid, you would need a mortality rate of about 0.8 for it to be comparable. Right now it's mortality rate is thought to be around 3, so we are a long way of comparing it with seasonal flu. Think before you post nonsense.

I have a 9 year old due to return to school, so I am looking at this closely as any parent should.

I would want to see an R number of below 0.5 before my daughter goes back to school.

You could, of course, argue that the mortality rate for children is much lower than adults so lower than 3, and you would be right, but until we know why and what co-existing conditions exacerbate the problem I won't be sending my daughter back to school until I see an R number of below 0.5.

So instead of just crapping on someones post, and I have no idea whether Kuepper has kids or not, you might want to think for a moment and consider what you post.
Click to expand...
Why is your 9 year old thinking of returning to school, thought it was only year 6 and year 1???
 
Pak_Doo_Ik said:
Why is your 9 year old thinking of returning to school, thought it was only year 6 and year 1???
Click to expand...
Pak, the government want all school children back, in a phased approach by the end of June, so she will be expected to return soon.

Randy, you are right the R number is an estimate, I am not sure what your point is though? Where should I take the R number from when assessing risk? If you know something I don't please share it, it will help parents making the decision about their children returning to school?
 
Laughing said:
Pak, the government want all school children back, in a phased approach by the end of June, so she will be expected to return soon.

Randy, you are right the R number is an estimate, I am not sure what your point is though? Where should I take the R number from when assessing risk? If you know something I don't please share it, it will help parents making the decision about their children returning to school?
Click to expand...
My point being that relying on an estimate is just as risky as relying on your own gut feeling or relying on other science.
 
Randy, it's a valid point, but what else should I use to estimate risk? Using a government estimate and weighing that against a known R value such as flu is as good as it is going to get. So it is all I can use.

No gut feeling used here at all.
 
Laughing said:
Randy, it's a valid point, but what else should I use to estimate risk? Using a government estimate and weighing that against a known R value such as flu is as good as it is going to get. So it is all I can use.

No gut feeling used here at all.
Click to expand...
I know mate it's tough.
I personally cannot rely completely on a number that is essentially a guess and open to manipulation. Wether that's a side effect of not trusting the government? Possibly.
 
Every Head teacher desperately want to find a way to get pupils back as everyone can see the massive benefits this will bring particularly for youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds. I can see schools opening in early June - not the 1st, for older primary (Year 6) only. This allows schools to bring in pupils who know the building and staff best and can test the systems put in place. If this works Y1 could follow but the really young ones Nursery and Reception are unlikely to come back before Summer break as given the environment they are taught in appropriately managing the risk for them is simply not possible. The problem is extending it further by bringing Y5, Y4 etc.. in starts to create significant premises issues. Parents must realise that in primary school social distancing reduces as pupils get younger. The government has already accepted social distancing isn’t possible for younger year groups. For parents then an offer of some sort of return for some pupils will be made in the coming weeks. It will be for parents to decide whether the benefits outweigh the risks. Aspirations for Secondary education is a lot quieter as transport requirements make this a lot more difficult.
 
My wife and I have been talking about this for the last few days. Our 4 year old is due to start school in September. She hasn't been since early March and we've had a letter asking parents if they would bring their child back to school if it re-opened on June 1st. The school plans to stage returns over 4 weeks.

We both agree she wont' be going back on the first day, there are just too many unknowns. We can't account for every other parents behaviour and their child, we don't know where they've been, who they've interacted with, what effect its had.

The government have no say in this for us. We, as parents are ultimate custodians of our daughter and we'll do whats best for her. What makes that decision easier is that its Gove, Hancock, Johnson et al saying, yes its fine, its measured, people are safe. Sorry, but thats b***ks. Their track record shows they don't give a toss about people. How many of them would be sending their own kids back to school on the 1st. Pretty certain its zero.

We'll look at it again in mid June and see if things have changed. We haven't taken this decision lightly. Our daughter is autistic and school has been fantastic for her development, she had come on leaps and bounds. She has definitely regressed in the last 8-10 weeks and if she doesn't go back till September, she may end up having to stay back a year to catch up. But, its the lesser of two evils compared to her getting Covid-19.

Its a s***y time for lots of parents, none of us has an easy decision.
 
Baron, my wife and I are having the same conversations. Our daughter is 9 so we have a bit more time to make a decisions. See where the R number is, find out abit more about this kawasaki like syndrome.

Had the government acted in a transparent, open manner, even after making mistakes, but admitted those, we would all have a little more trust in them. As things stand we are left abandoned by them and have to make our own decisions.
 
That mirrors a parent on BBC this morning.
‘The health and well-being of my daughter is absolutely my priority. I’m not confident in sending her back to school and I will take any fines etc and ignore.’

Also mentioned it appears a London centric approach. Things better in London so decisions are made. Many northern working class towns are still high risk.
 
Finny our local school has emailed parents and let us know that if we do not feel comfortable sending our children back, they understand and will continue to send the WFH homework home every week. So no fines here. I am not sure if it is the cnetral beds LEA or just our local school. We live in a smallish village with a lower and middle school only.
 
Legally the Covid19 Act means schools are closed so there is no statutory duty on parents to send their children in. That is why it is an aspiration of the government rather than a direction and if parents don’t send their child in they can’t be prosecuted. The legal bit that does still apply is H&S legislation which is the employers not the governments liability. The employer is the Council in the case of maintained schools and the Trust Board for academies. This is behind Councils like Liverpool and Hartlepool’s decision.
 
Education Authorities and School’s themselves are making their own decisions and many are not allowing children to return as they can’t maintain social distancing and safety is absolutely paramount, it appears the Government have had to ease their original stance and accept that common sense phased returns are the best option, I’m led to believe that many schools are also taking a view on parents returning to work and offering support in that direction on a case by case basis, on a wider issue this does seem to be the Government strategy of making wide sweeping announcements one day and then changing them the next to incorporate a more workable approach. Personally think it’s better to detail before delivery so there’s no confusion, but that’s just an opinion.
 
AM most opinions I have heard over phase 2 of lockdown seem to be better thought out than the governments approach. If they had spent just another hour considering it they would have noticed and amended or accounted for the many many inconsistancies in their "guidance". It was and still is a shocking example of communication.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top