Allegedly there are several options for the fall none of which include being back full time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what happens if a vaccine takes 3, 4, 5 years?

Or doesn't happen at all?

Do we just completely abandon in person public education in this country?

I keep saying that a vaccine is not going to automatically appear, and it could take years. Not to mention the fact that we have to get it to the billions of people worldwide.
It's time to open schools.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think any teacher has said that that they don’t want to go back to school in any way. Most are just very nervous because of the lack of safety at the moment.

In the end, teachers have very little say in all this, so don’t blame teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Scientist here, with a background in virology. I see there's a lot of misinformation on this thread.

1. Caution is the name of the game in science and medicine.
SARS-Cov-2 is a novel virus that just jumped the species barrier, not a well-known virus that is long adapted to humans. Consequently, we are looking at a high standard of confirmation for any study that shows a portion of the population may not transmit viral particles easily. This is because airborne viruses usually don't discriminate in the transmission department. Why should this virus be different? While children seem to have fewer symptoms than adults, this does not mean, and has never meant, that they transmit less virus. Any study showing that children are not likely carriers of Covid-19 should be looked at suspiciously until we can replicate the study multiple times and confirm the finding. This has not yet happened.

2. Schools are accelerators of viral spread, because children with poor hygiene and lack of physical distancing will expose each other and expose household members and school staff, and their household members, and into the community, a portion of which is in higher-risk categories.

3. There are precious few schools where physical distancing is feasible without at least some remote learning. Most children are 25-30 to a class. Core spaces like cafeterias, gyms, media centers, music rooms, athletic changing rooms, are not designed for physical distancing. Buses pose a particular risk.

4. The great news is that vaccine production seems to be advancing ahead of schedule, and will be ready as early as the beginning of 2021. It's true vaccine specialists have cut corners, there's no denying it. But basic safeguards are not ignored. Clinical studies testing for SAFETY and EFFICACY are happening and will happen.

5. Just because protesters find it important to assemble in person and express their views, with or without elementary precautions against viral transmission, does not mean the pandemic isn't just as dangerous as it was before. We must all wear masks and physically distance as much as we can.

Wow! Early 2021! So our kids only need to lose 5-6 more months of valuable education???? Fantastic!

The vaccine isn't going to make a bit of difference. And I don't believe your a scientist for a second.

No one on DCUM thought MCPS was “valuable education” before March 13. Y’all were constantly complaining that your children learned nothing in school and you taught them more in one hour a day after dinner than they learned in 6 hours at school. What happened to all the posters who said the workbooks you bought on Amazon were worth more than anything MCPS could muster?

You’re just angry that your free babysitting is gone and you have to spend all day with your kid.

I really understand where this person is coming from. I’m not offended or upset that she teaches my kids at all. I carry a lot of hurt from the disrespect toward MCPS and teachers I see on here sometimes. School is called a joke, teachers are called incompetent, and parents insist they could do a better job managing a classroom, creating a curriculum, you name it. It is hard to face down the health risks I will face by going back under the current circumstances, and it pains me more to think we might be forced to go back earlier than we should for the convenience of parents who have criticized us so much.

[Anonymous]

I’m a teacher and administration told us today that we may not be back in the buildings in September, October, or November and to be prepared. We all feel really anxious and overwhelmed. Remote learning is boring and exhausting and joyless. No one wants this to continue, but we also won’t go back without protocols in place to keep everyone safe. I see a lot of parents on here who seem angry about the fact that schools will not just go back “as normal”. If you want schools to open up you need to support these measures. If parents are largely unwilling to comply with safety precautions it just won’t work.

This.

How will we measure the cost of all of those kids who could have been inspired, kept a spark and desire to keep learning, but now won't because they are stuck with "remote learning" that in the best of circumstances (ie, functional family, good wifi, sufficient computers, etc) is boring and joyless? Not to mention all those kids who don't have the best of circumstances? Not to mention the drop-off in referrals for child abuse (because the teachers aren't there to see it), etc.

We need to go back to school in person. To the extent the school is able to put in place the safety measures, it should. But if the safety measures are not feasible that should not lead to no (or only half-time or quarter-time) in-person school. Fact: people are going to die of this disease. Most of them will be elderly. That is very sad. But it is even more sad to lose a generation of kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Former HIV immunology researcher and current MCPS teacher here:

A couple of points:
Vaccines are not perfect. You hope for at least 70% effectiveness to release. For some age groups the vaccines may not be effective. We may need seasonal vaccines if the corona virus has new strains similar to flu. We are already seeing new strains in the wild.

I don't feel safe in a classroom with students. The reality is that students will challenge any guidelines we set up. Students are not very reliable at following social distancing or washing hands. Some can't keep their hands off each other. I am concerned about staff that are high risk and the family of students that are high risk.

I don't think 7-12th grades should return to school for these reasons. I think the younger grades should return and spread out in all the classrooms with the option for staff to opt out and teach remotely as hybrid model. I also think ESOL, 504, and IEP students should return. Basically all learning should be online but students in the classes have adult supervision and stay in class together all day. I have no idea how buses would work though. The students are all over each other in the lines and on the buses.

This is a sensible plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former HIV immunology researcher and current MCPS teacher here:

A couple of points:
Vaccines are not perfect. You hope for at least 70% effectiveness to release. For some age groups the vaccines may not be effective. We may need seasonal vaccines if the corona virus has new strains similar to flu. We are already seeing new strains in the wild.

I don't feel safe in a classroom with students. The reality is that students will challenge any guidelines we set up. Students are not very reliable at following social distancing or washing hands. Some can't keep their hands off each other. I am concerned about staff that are high risk and the family of students that are high risk.

I don't think 7-12th grades should return to school for these reasons. I think the younger grades should return and spread out in all the classrooms with the option for staff to opt out and teach remotely as hybrid model. I also think ESOL, 504, and IEP students should return. Basically all learning should be online but students in the classes have adult supervision and stay in class together all day. I have no idea how buses would work though. The students are all over each other in the lines and on the buses.

This is a sensible plan.

No, it is not. Parent of a HS student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Scientist here, with a background in virology. I see there's a lot of misinformation on this thread.

1. Caution is the name of the game in science and medicine.
SARS-Cov-2 is a novel virus that just jumped the species barrier, not a well-known virus that is long adapted to humans. Consequently, we are looking at a high standard of confirmation for any study that shows a portion of the population may not transmit viral particles easily. This is because airborne viruses usually don't discriminate in the transmission department. Why should this virus be different? While children seem to have fewer symptoms than adults, this does not mean, and has never meant, that they transmit less virus. Any study showing that children are not likely carriers of Covid-19 should be looked at suspiciously until we can replicate the study multiple times and confirm the finding. This has not yet happened.

2. Schools are accelerators of viral spread, because children with poor hygiene and lack of physical distancing will expose each other and expose household members and school staff, and their household members, and into the community, a portion of which is in higher-risk categories.

3. There are precious few schools where physical distancing is feasible without at least some remote learning. Most children are 25-30 to a class. Core spaces like cafeterias, gyms, media centers, music rooms, athletic changing rooms, are not designed for physical distancing. Buses pose a particular risk.

4. The great news is that vaccine production seems to be advancing ahead of schedule, and will be ready as early as the beginning of 2021. It's true vaccine specialists have cut corners, there's no denying it. But basic safeguards are not ignored. Clinical studies testing for SAFETY and EFFICACY are happening and will happen.

5. Just because protesters find it important to assemble in person and express their views, with or without elementary precautions against viral transmission, does not mean the pandemic isn't just as dangerous as it was before. We must all wear masks and physically distance as much as we can.

Here's the thing, scientist with a background in virology: the effects of this pandemic are not, and never have been, solely about the virus. The mitigation efforts have caused enormous problems related to mental health, unemployment, child abuse, etc. We absolutely need virologists at the table when these kinds of decisions are made, but we also need educators, economists, psychologists, sociologists, and others in the social science realm. We can't decide that it's worse for (mostly) elderly to die of COVID-19 than it is for children to be beaten to death by their parents, at least, not without some discussion of those trade-offs.

Moreover, there's actual data suggesting that kids don't get infected as often as adults: https://explaincovid.org/post/kids-and-covid-19/iNR6ns6TY6OqDPfWrcqg The studies described are preliminary, and the article is a summary, but it provides better data than your speculation about SARS-CoV2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former HIV immunology researcher and current MCPS teacher here:

A couple of points:
Vaccines are not perfect. You hope for at least 70% effectiveness to release. For some age groups the vaccines may not be effective. We may need seasonal vaccines if the corona virus has new strains similar to flu. We are already seeing new strains in the wild.

I don't feel safe in a classroom with students. The reality is that students will challenge any guidelines we set up. Students are not very reliable at following social distancing or washing hands. Some can't keep their hands off each other. I am concerned about staff that are high risk and the family of students that are high risk.

I don't think 7-12th grades should return to school for these reasons. I think the younger grades should return and spread out in all the classrooms with the option for staff to opt out and teach remotely as hybrid model. I also think ESOL, 504, and IEP students should return. Basically all learning should be online but students in the classes have adult supervision and stay in class together all day. I have no idea how buses would work though. The students are all over each other in the lines and on the buses.

This is a sensible plan.

No, it is not. Parent of a HS student.

Agreed. NOT a sensible plan.

-Parent of 2 HS students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Scientist here, with a background in virology. I see there's a lot of misinformation on this thread.

1. Caution is the name of the game in science and medicine.
SARS-Cov-2 is a novel virus that just jumped the species barrier, not a well-known virus that is long adapted to humans. Consequently, we are looking at a high standard of confirmation for any study that shows a portion of the population may not transmit viral particles easily. This is because airborne viruses usually don't discriminate in the transmission department. Why should this virus be different? While children seem to have fewer symptoms than adults, this does not mean, and has never meant, that they transmit less virus. Any study showing that children are not likely carriers of Covid-19 should be looked at suspiciously until we can replicate the study multiple times and confirm the finding. This has not yet happened.

2. Schools are accelerators of viral spread, because children with poor hygiene and lack of physical distancing will expose each other and expose household members and school staff, and their household members, and into the community, a portion of which is in higher-risk categories.

3. There are precious few schools where physical distancing is feasible without at least some remote learning. Most children are 25-30 to a class. Core spaces like cafeterias, gyms, media centers, music rooms, athletic changing rooms, are not designed for physical distancing. Buses pose a particular risk.

4. The great news is that vaccine production seems to be advancing ahead of schedule, and will be ready as early as the beginning of 2021. It's true vaccine specialists have cut corners, there's no denying it. But basic safeguards are not ignored. Clinical studies testing for SAFETY and EFFICACY are happening and will happen.

5. Just because protesters find it important to assemble in person and express their views, with or without elementary precautions against viral transmission, does not mean the pandemic isn't just as dangerous as it was before. We must all wear masks and physically distance as much as we can.

Wow! Early 2021! So our kids only need to lose 5-6 more months of valuable education???? Fantastic!

The vaccine isn't going to make a bit of difference. And I don't believe your a scientist for a second.

I don’t either because studies show schools are NOT accelerators of virus spread.

It doesn't matter whether the PP is a scientist or not. It doesn't take a scientist to write what she wrote, but more importantly, whether and how we open schools or not is not a purely scientific decision. It is a decision that should be based on a thorough analysis of costs and benefits, with a view to the long term. The "scientist" PP wants to have proof that kids do NOT spread the virus before opening schools. An equally valid position would be to demand proof that kids DO spread the virus, and that their spread DOES significantly contribute to community spread before keeping schools closed indefinitely. If you consider the harms of closed schools greater than the potential harms of a potentially slight increase in overall community spread (and all currently available evidence points to the impact being slight), schools should return to regular operations with reasonable precautions. There is plenty of evidence that closed schools have a negative long-term impact on kids' futures, and it is not for someone with a background in virology to make the call whether those harms can be neglected because of a potential but unproven impact on viral community spread. It was estimated (I think it was in The Lancet), that opening schools *may potentially* lead to a 2-4% increase in overall deaths. Whether those deaths (which will be concentrated among the elderly) are a greater harm than the harms of lost education is not a scientific question but question of bioethics. Simply deferring to the virologists (who will always argue for the policies that will most minimize viral transmission) on the much more complex dilemmas we are facing is a cop out on the part of decision makers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Scientist here, with a background in virology. I see there's a lot of misinformation on this thread.

1. Caution is the name of the game in science and medicine.
SARS-Cov-2 is a novel virus that just jumped the species barrier, not a well-known virus that is long adapted to humans. Consequently, we are looking at a high standard of confirmation for any study that shows a portion of the population may not transmit viral particles easily. This is because airborne viruses usually don't discriminate in the transmission department. Why should this virus be different? While children seem to have fewer symptoms than adults, this does not mean, and has never meant, that they transmit less virus. Any study showing that children are not likely carriers of Covid-19 should be looked at suspiciously until we can replicate the study multiple times and confirm the finding. This has not yet happened.

2. Schools are accelerators of viral spread, because children with poor hygiene and lack of physical distancing will expose each other and expose household members and school staff, and their household members, and into the community, a portion of which is in higher-risk categories.

3. There are precious few schools where physical distancing is feasible without at least some remote learning. Most children are 25-30 to a class. Core spaces like cafeterias, gyms, media centers, music rooms, athletic changing rooms, are not designed for physical distancing. Buses pose a particular risk.

4. The great news is that vaccine production seems to be advancing ahead of schedule, and will be ready as early as the beginning of 2021. It's true vaccine specialists have cut corners, there's no denying it. But basic safeguards are not ignored. Clinical studies testing for SAFETY and EFFICACY are happening and will happen.

5. Just because protesters find it important to assemble in person and express their views, with or without elementary precautions against viral transmission, does not mean the pandemic isn't just as dangerous as it was before. We must all wear masks and physically distance as much as we can.

Here's the thing, scientist with a background in virology: the effects of this pandemic are not, and never have been, solely about the virus. The mitigation efforts have caused enormous problems related to mental health, unemployment, child abuse, etc. We absolutely need virologists at the table when these kinds of decisions are made, but we also need educators, economists, psychologists, sociologists, and others in the social science realm. We can't decide that it's worse for (mostly) elderly to die of COVID-19 than it is for children to be beaten to death by their parents, at least, not without some discussion of those trade-offs.

Moreover, there's actual data suggesting that kids don't get infected as often as adults: https://explaincovid.org/post/kids-and-covid-19/iNR6ns6TY6OqDPfWrcqg The studies described are preliminary, and the article is a summary, but it provides better data than your speculation about SARS-CoV2.

10:00 here and I see you beat me to it (and said it much better).

[Anonymous]

All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Scientist here, with a background in virology. I see there's a lot of misinformation on this thread.

1. Caution is the name of the game in science and medicine.
SARS-Cov-2 is a novel virus that just jumped the species barrier, not a well-known virus that is long adapted to humans. Consequently, we are looking at a high standard of confirmation for any study that shows a portion of the population may not transmit viral particles easily. This is because airborne viruses usually don't discriminate in the transmission department. Why should this virus be different? While children seem to have fewer symptoms than adults, this does not mean, and has never meant, that they transmit less virus. Any study showing that children are not likely carriers of Covid-19 should be looked at suspiciously until we can replicate the study multiple times and confirm the finding. This has not yet happened.

2. Schools are accelerators of viral spread, because children with poor hygiene and lack of physical distancing will expose each other and expose household members and school staff, and their household members, and into the community, a portion of which is in higher-risk categories.

3. There are precious few schools where physical distancing is feasible without at least some remote learning. Most children are 25-30 to a class. Core spaces like cafeterias, gyms, media centers, music rooms, athletic changing rooms, are not designed for physical distancing. Buses pose a particular risk.

4. The great news is that vaccine production seems to be advancing ahead of schedule, and will be ready as early as the beginning of 2021. It's true vaccine specialists have cut corners, there's no denying it. But basic safeguards are not ignored. Clinical studies testing for SAFETY and EFFICACY are happening and will happen.

5. Just because protesters find it important to assemble in person and express their views, with or without elementary precautions against viral transmission, does not mean the pandemic isn't just as dangerous as it was before. We must all wear masks and physically distance as much as we can.

Here's the thing, scientist with a background in virology: the effects of this pandemic are not, and never have been, solely about the virus. The mitigation efforts have caused enormous problems related to mental health, unemployment, child abuse, etc. We absolutely need virologists at the table when these kinds of decisions are made, but we also need educators, economists, psychologists, sociologists, and others in the social science realm. We can't decide that it's worse for (mostly) elderly to die of COVID-19 than it is for children to be beaten to death by their parents, at least, not without some discussion of those trade-offs.

Moreover, there's actual data suggesting that kids don't get infected as often as adults: https://explaincovid.org/post/kids-and-covid-19/iNR6ns6TY6OqDPfWrcqg The studies described are preliminary, and the article is a summary, but it provides better data than your speculation about SARS-CoV2.

10:00 here and I see you beat me to it (and said it much better).

I'm 9:49, and I appreciate your post! The more of us who make this argument, the better. Fareed Zakaria (I think) said the same thing in the Post a few weeks ago. Heck, even Tony Fauci said he thinks schools not opening in the Fall is unnecessary!

[Anonymous]

There was a research study that showed closing schools had miniscule effects on virus spread. Closing indoor bars and restaurants had an enormous effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

You are still not getting it. There is no reason to have any distance learning on the fall. There is no justification for it as there is no evidence that it has any real effect on the spread (schools that is). Nobody HAS to send their kids back to school-they can homeschool. There were people homeschooling before this and will be after this.

As far as teachers are concerned if they are that concerned then they need to find a new job. It's not like working with kids was risk free before. I work with kids and consistently get strep once a year because of it. It's never been a job without risk of getting sick. My kid got the flu from someone in his class last year and was very sick for 8 days. I didn't file a lawsuit about it.

Frankly "the I don't feel safe" argument from teachers just feels like a cop out at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

You are still not getting it. There is no reason to have any distance learning on the fall. There is no justification for it as there is no evidence that it has any real effect on the spread (schools that is). Nobody HAS to send their kids back to school-they can homeschool. There were people homeschooling before this and will be after this.

As far as teachers are concerned if they are that concerned then they need to find a new job. It's not like working with kids was risk free before. I work with kids and consistently get strep once a year because of it. It's never been a job without risk of getting sick. My kid got the flu from someone in his class last year and was very sick for 8 days. I didn't file a lawsuit about it.

Frankly "the I don't feel safe" argument from teachers just feels like a cop out at this point.

Um Covid can and does kill people. And not just elderly. Do you never look at the MoCo graphs? I work in healthcare.
Big difference