WOOHOO SB 739 has passed the house- it is on its way to the Governor-

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

From a risk based perspective, my kids less likely to get COVID playing basketball than sitting next to Larla at school for 8 hours whose parents are anti vax anti mask lunatics. I can also choose not to participate in indoor extracurricular activities. I cannot and will not choose to not send my child to in person education, which I strongly value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

DP. You are exhibit A of the problem discussed in the article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ha- I'm the OP of this thread. I'm no operative if any sort. Just a frustrated FCC mom- who social distanced, masked and vaxxed with the best of them. I closely closely follow science, and numbers etc and have the ability to change my mind. What I've seen over the last 7 months has convinced me that 'science' has very little to do with this- this is about proving our liberalism. When FCCPS refused to follow the CDC, and insisted on quarantining elementary school children for 14 days with no possibility of testing out- keeping needy children out of school- I lost faith in them. FCC has an incredibly high vaccination rate. The community obsessively masks. We have had 4 people total hospitalized for COVID in the last 90 days. Our case count has been astronomical for a long time. So where do I come down- let it go. The risk to a vaccinated person is so so minor. Why are we doing this to our kids? For the first 1.5 years of the pandemic I was willing to employ any mitigation measure that might make a difference. At this point, given the vaccines, any mitigation measure should be run through a solid cost benefit analysis. There is very little evidence that a universal mask mandate makes ANY difference for case transmission- and case transmission shouldn't really be our benchmark in any event. I'm done. My kids need normalcy and they need it now.

+1000.

Same. I'm in Arlington and am just baffled at how we're treating kids right now. Both sides often sound completely bonkers and self-righteous, so it feels impossible to move forward.

We are going to suffer a Republican congress and Trump 2.0 if we keep ignoring all of the frustrated, alienated, and overworked parents.

OP I'm with you on a lot of what you say but you completely loose me (and a lot of other people) when you forget the vaccine is NOT yet available for kids under 5. Many kids and teachers in schools have siblings and children under 5. Pre-K classes in Arlington are comprised of 4 year olds. Also, I really don't know what people are looking at that leads them to believe masks don't work. Maybe you're wearing loose bandanas or something cute off of Etsy, but there are a lot of solid mask choices that do prevent transmission. Masks are a big part (maybe the main reason) omicron has NOT spread like wild fire in early ES classrooms where kids sit inches from eachother, face to face, sharing materials all day. I mean, my kids haven't had a single cold ALL YEAR, which has NEVER happened before. Masks are stopping the spread of disease here.

PP I agree people are frustrated, alienated (especially families with children under 5 who have chronic health issues), and overworked, and while that may explain why some vote for a candidate who tells them what they want to hear even if that isn't based in reality, it is a pathetic excuse. Reality is tough right now. It has been for the past 2 years. There are a lot of groups in this country who faced ugly realities even before COVID.

So you can keep your kids in a mask if you want. We are fine with that. Please keep in mind that not a single person under the age of 40 has died of Covid in Arlington during the entirety of the pandemic. This virus simply does not justify the extreme measures taken but you should feel free to mask you kids. Just don't ask us to. Our cost-benefit analysis came out differently than yours.

All I hear from you is you got your vaccine so who cares about the under 5 kids with chronic health conditions.

Kids under 5 with chronic health conditions have to be a tiny tiny percentage of the population, and presumably not all conditions are risk factors for COVID. It makes more sense for those kids to wear KN95s or similar if they are truly at risk.

Masks are even more important to mitigate the possibility that the person wearing the mask will spread the virus which is why everyone should still wear them and your so called freedom to have your child mask free impinges on my freedom to have my child in a setting which sufficiently safe for school.

+1,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ha- I'm the OP of this thread. I'm no operative if any sort. Just a frustrated FCC mom- who social distanced, masked and vaxxed with the best of them. I closely closely follow science, and numbers etc and have the ability to change my mind. What I've seen over the last 7 months has convinced me that 'science' has very little to do with this- this is about proving our liberalism. When FCCPS refused to follow the CDC, and insisted on quarantining elementary school children for 14 days with no possibility of testing out- keeping needy children out of school- I lost faith in them. FCC has an incredibly high vaccination rate. The community obsessively masks. We have had 4 people total hospitalized for COVID in the last 90 days. Our case count has been astronomical for a long time. So where do I come down- let it go. The risk to a vaccinated person is so so minor. Why are we doing this to our kids? For the first 1.5 years of the pandemic I was willing to employ any mitigation measure that might make a difference. At this point, given the vaccines, any mitigation measure should be run through a solid cost benefit analysis. There is very little evidence that a universal mask mandate makes ANY difference for case transmission- and case transmission shouldn't really be our benchmark in any event. I'm done. My kids need normalcy and they need it now.

+1000.

Same. I'm in Arlington and am just baffled at how we're treating kids right now. Both sides often sound completely bonkers and self-righteous, so it feels impossible to move forward.

We are going to suffer a Republican congress and Trump 2.0 if we keep ignoring all of the frustrated, alienated, and overworked parents.

OP I'm with you on a lot of what you say but you completely loose me (and a lot of other people) when you forget the vaccine is NOT yet available for kids under 5. Many kids and teachers in schools have siblings and children under 5. Pre-K classes in Arlington are comprised of 4 year olds. Also, I really don't know what people are looking at that leads them to believe masks don't work. Maybe you're wearing loose bandanas or something cute off of Etsy, but there are a lot of solid mask choices that do prevent transmission. Masks are a big part (maybe the main reason) omicron has NOT spread like wild fire in early ES classrooms where kids sit inches from eachother, face to face, sharing materials all day. I mean, my kids haven't had a single cold ALL YEAR, which has NEVER happened before. Masks are stopping the spread of disease here.

PP I agree people are frustrated, alienated (especially families with children under 5 who have chronic health issues), and overworked, and while that may explain why some vote for a candidate who tells them what they want to hear even if that isn't based in reality, it is a pathetic excuse. Reality is tough right now. It has been for the past 2 years. There are a lot of groups in this country who faced ugly realities even before COVID.

So you can keep your kids in a mask if you want. We are fine with that. Please keep in mind that not a single person under the age of 40 has died of Covid in Arlington during the entirety of the pandemic. This virus simply does not justify the extreme measures taken but you should feel free to mask you kids. Just don't ask us to. Our cost-benefit analysis came out differently than yours.

All I hear from you is you got your vaccine so who cares about the under 5 kids with chronic health conditions.

Kids under 5 with chronic health conditions have to be a tiny tiny percentage of the population, and presumably not all conditions are risk factors for COVID. It makes more sense for those kids to wear KN95s or similar if they are truly at risk.

Masks are even more important to mitigate the possibility that the person wearing the mask will spread the virus which is why everyone should still wear them and your so called freedom to have your child mask free impinges on my freedom to have my child in a setting which sufficiently safe for school.

+1,000

Actually in the confused morass of masking studies it is unclear whether masks work best as source control or to protect the wearer. You and I could go find studies on both sides, but I wouldn't say it's settled science. Probably they work best on the person who is most motivated to wear them consistently and correctly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interestingly the Governor wants to add a paragraph to SB 739 that allows a Governor to still close schools or mandate masks if there's a state of emergency. Does that not provide the flexibility that people are screaming about here if there's an absolutely horrendous variant?

I support that addition fwiw.

I can't tell if I support it. If VA were governed by Hochul or Newsome we would literally still be under a state of emergency and they'd happily mask kids in schools while letting the rest of life go on, just like they are in NY or CA. I think I'd be more comfortable with it if the legislature had to renew the state of emergency regularly or authorize a longer state of emergency, but with a part-time legislature that's a pain.

SB 4 passed the senate 29-11, would do exactly what I was hoping for - limit the duration of emergency powers unless the Assembly steps in. These two working together are a pretty good backstop against executive overreach or a crazy insane pandemic. Good stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

The problem you are identifying is that the rest of society isn't doing what it can and should to protect vulnerable people. You know, the kids with chronic health conditions at risk for covid complications who are too young for a vaccine.

If anyone were talking about the reality that there are some kids (like hearing impaired) who have legitimate, serious problems wearing masks, then I would hope we could come up with some clear exceptions to mask mandates. I suspect we're talking pretty small numbers here. (which isn't to say that those kids are unimportant, simply that I think unmasking kids who have legitimate need to be unmasked would be a small increase in transmission risk). But where is that line? Parents, such as myself, who support masks in school to protect my under 5 with a COVID health risk, aren't trying to harm other kids. The problem is I hear too many parents screaming that they're tired of wearing a mask, they're tired of not living their life the way they want to. Its all about them, them, them and what they want. The parents complainign they're just tired of masks, and they are done looking out for other people are the problem. The trouble is defining what is and is not a legit need to unmask in school. Parents of kids at risk for COVID complications and parents of kids with legitimate problems wearing masks have a lot in common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

The problem you are identifying is that the rest of society isn't doing what it can and should to protect vulnerable people. You know, the kids with chronic health conditions at risk for covid complications who are too young for a vaccine.

If anyone were talking about the reality that there are some kids (like hearing impaired) who have legitimate, serious problems wearing masks, then I would hope we could come up with some clear exceptions to mask mandates. I suspect we're talking pretty small numbers here. (which isn't to say that those kids are unimportant, simply that I think unmasking kids who have legitimate need to be unmasked would be a small increase in transmission risk). But where is that line? Parents, such as myself, who support masks in school to protect my under 5 with a COVID health risk, aren't trying to harm other kids. The problem is I hear too many parents screaming that they're tired of wearing a mask, they're tired of not living their life the way they want to. Its all about them, them, them and what they want. The parents complainign they're just tired of masks, and they are done looking out for other people are the problem. The trouble is defining what is and is not a legit need to unmask in school. Parents of kids at risk for COVID complications and parents of kids with legitimate problems wearing masks have a lot in common.

Except that the fight seems to be only for one group (kids at risk for Covid complications) and not for the other (kids who legitimately have issues from masking).

Did you know the CDC defined all primary grade kids learning to read as being potentially at risk from masking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

Options that aren't masks for mitigation:

1) easy access to preventatives and treatment
2) improved ventilation

Honestly, if you're scared now send a Corsi-Rosenthal box to class with your kid after the emergency order goes into law.

When did treatment become easily availalbe? I missed that. Please share more info.

I agree improved ventilation would be wonderful. It really frustrates me school boards haven't done more of this, but their failure is NOT a reason to take off masks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

The problem you are identifying is that the rest of society isn't doing what it can and should to protect vulnerable people. You know, the kids with chronic health conditions at risk for covid complications who are too young for a vaccine.

If anyone were talking about the reality that there are some kids (like hearing impaired) who have legitimate, serious problems wearing masks, then I would hope we could come up with some clear exceptions to mask mandates. I suspect we're talking pretty small numbers here. (which isn't to say that those kids are unimportant, simply that I think unmasking kids who have legitimate need to be unmasked would be a small increase in transmission risk). But where is that line? Parents, such as myself, who support masks in school to protect my under 5 with a COVID health risk, aren't trying to harm other kids. The problem is I hear too many parents screaming that they're tired of wearing a mask, they're tired of not living their life the way they want to. Its all about them, them, them and what they want. The parents complainign they're just tired of masks, and they are done looking out for other people are the problem. The trouble is defining what is and is not a legit need to unmask in school. Parents of kids at risk for COVID complications and parents of kids with legitimate problems wearing masks have a lot in common.

Except that the fight seems to be only for one group (kids at risk for Covid complications) and not for the other (kids who legitimately have issues from masking).

Did you know the CDC defined all primary grade kids learning to read as being potentially at risk from masking?

The conversation is all masks or none at all. This is a problem. Parents with at risk under 5s vs. whiny parents who are just tired of covid AND parents with kids who have legitimate issues with masks. Parents with at risk under 5s don't trust this second group because it includes whiny parents who want zero limitations on who can be maskless. Parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks don't trust the other side to ever have an off ramp, and don't trust a limitation on who can be maskless because they fear it won't include their child. I do think the biggest problem is the whiny parents who are just tired of COVID. They're the ones screaming loudest for zero restrictions anywhere. They know they don't have a legitimate medical basis for their kids to take off their masks. Kids I know with legitimate issues with masks also have some other challenges, so their parents are all too familiar with the world not being as available to them as it is to everyone else. I'm not saying that is right. I'm simply saying in my limited experience these are NOT the families throwing tantrums demanding they be allowed to take masks off just because they feel like it. I don't know how to solve this, I'm simply pointing out that two groups with a lot in common (parents with at risk under 5s and parents with kids who have legit issues with masks) are getting wedged apart by a very loud and selfish group of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

The problem you are identifying is that the rest of society isn't doing what it can and should to protect vulnerable people. You know, the kids with chronic health conditions at risk for covid complications who are too young for a vaccine.

If anyone were talking about the reality that there are some kids (like hearing impaired) who have legitimate, serious problems wearing masks, then I would hope we could come up with some clear exceptions to mask mandates. I suspect we're talking pretty small numbers here. (which isn't to say that those kids are unimportant, simply that I think unmasking kids who have legitimate need to be unmasked would be a small increase in transmission risk). But where is that line? Parents, such as myself, who support masks in school to protect my under 5 with a COVID health risk, aren't trying to harm other kids. The problem is I hear too many parents screaming that they're tired of wearing a mask, they're tired of not living their life the way they want to. Its all about them, them, them and what they want. The parents complainign they're just tired of masks, and they are done looking out for other people are the problem. The trouble is defining what is and is not a legit need to unmask in school. Parents of kids at risk for COVID complications and parents of kids with legitimate problems wearing masks have a lot in common.

Except that the fight seems to be only for one group (kids at risk for Covid complications) and not for the other (kids who legitimately have issues from masking).

Did you know the CDC defined all primary grade kids learning to read as being potentially at risk from masking?

The conversation is all masks or none at all. This is a problem. Parents with at risk under 5s vs. whiny parents who are just tired of covid AND parents with kids who have legitimate issues with masks. Parents with at risk under 5s don't trust this second group because it includes whiny parents who want zero limitations on who can be maskless. Parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks don't trust the other side to ever have an off ramp, and don't trust a limitation on who can be maskless because they fear it won't include their child. I do think the biggest problem is the whiny parents who are just tired of COVID. They're the ones screaming loudest for zero restrictions anywhere. They know they don't have a legitimate medical basis for their kids to take off their masks. Kids I know with legitimate issues with masks also have some other challenges, so their parents are all too familiar with the world not being as available to them as it is to everyone else. I'm not saying that is right. I'm simply saying in my limited experience these are NOT the families throwing tantrums demanding they be allowed to take masks off just because they feel like it. I don't know how to solve this, I'm simply pointing out that two groups with a lot in common (parents with at risk under 5s and parents with kids who have legit issues with masks) are getting wedged apart by a very loud and selfish group of people.

In my experience the parents of kids who have legitimate issues with masks are highly favorable of simply mask optional for everyone, which is also what parents of kids who are simply mask haters want. Nobody is asking for a return to 2019 where masks are illegal to wear in Virginia and schools also prohibit them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

The problem you are identifying is that the rest of society isn't doing what it can and should to protect vulnerable people. You know, the kids with chronic health conditions at risk for covid complications who are too young for a vaccine.

If anyone were talking about the reality that there are some kids (like hearing impaired) who have legitimate, serious problems wearing masks, then I would hope we could come up with some clear exceptions to mask mandates. I suspect we're talking pretty small numbers here. (which isn't to say that those kids are unimportant, simply that I think unmasking kids who have legitimate need to be unmasked would be a small increase in transmission risk). But where is that line? Parents, such as myself, who support masks in school to protect my under 5 with a COVID health risk, aren't trying to harm other kids. The problem is I hear too many parents screaming that they're tired of wearing a mask, they're tired of not living their life the way they want to. Its all about them, them, them and what they want. The parents complainign they're just tired of masks, and they are done looking out for other people are the problem. The trouble is defining what is and is not a legit need to unmask in school. Parents of kids at risk for COVID complications and parents of kids with legitimate problems wearing masks have a lot in common.

Except that the fight seems to be only for one group (kids at risk for Covid complications) and not for the other (kids who legitimately have issues from masking).

Did you know the CDC defined all primary grade kids learning to read as being potentially at risk from masking?

The conversation is all masks or none at all. This is a problem. Parents with at risk under 5s vs. whiny parents who are just tired of covid AND parents with kids who have legitimate issues with masks. Parents with at risk under 5s don't trust this second group because it includes whiny parents who want zero limitations on who can be maskless. Parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks don't trust the other side to ever have an off ramp, and don't trust a limitation on who can be maskless because they fear it won't include their child. I do think the biggest problem is the whiny parents who are just tired of COVID. They're the ones screaming loudest for zero restrictions anywhere. They know they don't have a legitimate medical basis for their kids to take off their masks. Kids I know with legitimate issues with masks also have some other challenges, so their parents are all too familiar with the world not being as available to them as it is to everyone else. I'm not saying that is right. I'm simply saying in my limited experience these are NOT the families throwing tantrums demanding they be allowed to take masks off just because they feel like it. I don't know how to solve this, I'm simply pointing out that two groups with a lot in common (parents with at risk under 5s and parents with kids who have legit issues with masks) are getting wedged apart by a very loud and selfish group of people.

In my experience the parents of kids who have legitimate issues with masks are highly favorable of simply mask optional for everyone, which is also what parents of kids who are simply mask haters want. Nobody is asking for a return to 2019 where masks are illegal to wear in Virginia and schools also prohibit them.

I suspect that is the case because there isn't a clear way to define who has legitimate issues with masks and parents fear their kid will be left out. A child development or medical professional could probably come up with one. I just think parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks and parents of at risk kids under 5 have a lot in common. We have kids with "extra" needs and its our job to protect them. We're not trying to hurt other kids. I think we gravitate to the all or nothing extremes because there are so many people in the middle who are acting selfishly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

Options that aren't masks for mitigation:

1) easy access to preventatives and treatment
2) improved ventilation

Honestly, if you're scared now send a Corsi-Rosenthal box to class with your kid after the emergency order goes into law.

When did treatment become easily availalbe? I missed that. Please share more info.

I agree improved ventilation would be wonderful. It really frustrates me school boards haven't done more of this, but their failure is NOT a reason to take off masks.

Treatment isn't easily available, though it's getting there. I think one of Youngkin's pushes right now (alongside his vaccine push) should be a website to go and find evushield (preventative monoclonal antibody) if you need it and some good way to get an antiviral into the hands of providers for patients who need it. I know providers can order it already, but make it stupid easy.

Right now some software engineer has a website where people who need it can look up where evushield is available: https://rrelyea.github.io/evusheld/?state=VA

Fairfax spent as much ESSER II money on ventilation as on school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst case, it’s just over two weeks until we find out which kids have completely antisocial, self-absorbed parents, and therefore are best avoided.

Yep - just look for the kids wearing masks and then you will know who has parents like that !

You know that kid or someone in their household could’ve medically fragile and therefore have strong reason for needing the mask, especially as your kid goes without, right?

This article nails it so well: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/weve-never-protected-the-vulnerable/619981/?utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR15DA6nTNIthIUjDAArj_7CuRgD6fdeg7PkIcptLEkjgr8EuoX6uTZr6Ow

From the article:

Now, as more and more people get vaccinated, much of the country is returning to normal. Some people point to decreased hospitalization and mortality rates among the immunized, or argue that COVID-19 is here to stay but manageable and that restrictions are unnecessary. Some further argue that most who aren’t vaccinated have chosen that path, and so if risk remains, it’s on them.

Such thinking ignores a third, not-insignificant group: those who would like to be immune but aren’t. Some people are still at risk because they can’t yet be vaccinated or because vaccines don’t work for them. They hope that their fellow Americans will take care of them. They hope that the rest of us will agree to sensible precautions or protections to keep them safe until they, too, can be immunized, or until the danger from exposure eventually subsides.

Much of the public is refusing. That’s not new, though. In America, it’s always been like this.

…

Part of my job, both as a writer and as a chief health officer, is to explain how much less-risky most activities are now compared with last year. Many of the people I talk with, though, have others in their life who aren’t yet safe, and they are horrified that we can’t create exceptions or come up with policies to protect their vulnerable loved ones. I share their frustration, but I’m puzzled by their surprise. America has never cared enough. People just didn’t notice before.

At some point - something has to give and we have to give those who want it - school with no masks. Those who don’t want that are going to have to do something like apply for Virtual VA for school next year.

You’ve got it backward. Your maskless kids can apply for virtual. Makes more sense. Masks in public. None at home.

Nope sorry honey - you have it backwards. Why would 99% of folks change their behavior to accommodate the 1% versus the 1% making the necessary adjustments they need to make? You are so friggin selfish it's disgusting.

You must not be in APS. The majority of parents want to keep masks. Even that silly informal poll showed so.

Have you been to any youth basketball games in Arlington, seen and Arlington Soccer or Lax teams playing at St. James, seen their swim teams competing in meets? There are plenty of Arlington parents perfectly fine with their kids indoors unmasked. Heck, just look at any resteraunt and you'll see plenty of families.

I am comfortable allowing my fully vaccinated children unmask indoors. If the vast majority of Arlington families want to continue masking then there should be very little change from the status quo by lifting the mandate. Stop making kids protect the unvaccinated and the vulnerable while the rest of society continues on w/o restrictions. It is not okay.

The problem you are identifying is that the rest of society isn't doing what it can and should to protect vulnerable people. You know, the kids with chronic health conditions at risk for covid complications who are too young for a vaccine.

If anyone were talking about the reality that there are some kids (like hearing impaired) who have legitimate, serious problems wearing masks, then I would hope we could come up with some clear exceptions to mask mandates. I suspect we're talking pretty small numbers here. (which isn't to say that those kids are unimportant, simply that I think unmasking kids who have legitimate need to be unmasked would be a small increase in transmission risk). But where is that line? Parents, such as myself, who support masks in school to protect my under 5 with a COVID health risk, aren't trying to harm other kids. The problem is I hear too many parents screaming that they're tired of wearing a mask, they're tired of not living their life the way they want to. Its all about them, them, them and what they want. The parents complainign they're just tired of masks, and they are done looking out for other people are the problem. The trouble is defining what is and is not a legit need to unmask in school. Parents of kids at risk for COVID complications and parents of kids with legitimate problems wearing masks have a lot in common.

Except that the fight seems to be only for one group (kids at risk for Covid complications) and not for the other (kids who legitimately have issues from masking).

Did you know the CDC defined all primary grade kids learning to read as being potentially at risk from masking?

The conversation is all masks or none at all. This is a problem. Parents with at risk under 5s vs. whiny parents who are just tired of covid AND parents with kids who have legitimate issues with masks. Parents with at risk under 5s don't trust this second group because it includes whiny parents who want zero limitations on who can be maskless. Parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks don't trust the other side to ever have an off ramp, and don't trust a limitation on who can be maskless because they fear it won't include their child. I do think the biggest problem is the whiny parents who are just tired of COVID. They're the ones screaming loudest for zero restrictions anywhere. They know they don't have a legitimate medical basis for their kids to take off their masks. Kids I know with legitimate issues with masks also have some other challenges, so their parents are all too familiar with the world not being as available to them as it is to everyone else. I'm not saying that is right. I'm simply saying in my limited experience these are NOT the families throwing tantrums demanding they be allowed to take masks off just because they feel like it. I don't know how to solve this, I'm simply pointing out that two groups with a lot in common (parents with at risk under 5s and parents with kids who have legit issues with masks) are getting wedged apart by a very loud and selfish group of people.

In my experience the parents of kids who have legitimate issues with masks are highly favorable of simply mask optional for everyone, which is also what parents of kids who are simply mask haters want. Nobody is asking for a return to 2019 where masks are illegal to wear in Virginia and schools also prohibit them.

I suspect that is the case because there isn't a clear way to define who has legitimate issues with masks and parents fear their kid will be left out. A child development or medical professional could probably come up with one. I just think parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks and parents of at risk kids under 5 have a lot in common. We have kids with "extra" needs and its our job to protect them. We're not trying to hurt other kids. I think we gravitate to the all or nothing extremes because there are so many people in the middle who are acting selfishly.

Not in my experience. We'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

As far as legitimate need, I know at least one parent with a child with a medical exemption in my school district. I don't know how easy they are to get, but they are an option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In my experience the parents of kids who have legitimate issues with masks are highly favorable of simply mask optional for everyone, which is also what parents of kids who are simply mask haters want. Nobody is asking for a return to 2019 where masks are illegal to wear in Virginia and schools also prohibit them.

I suspect that is the case because there isn't a clear way to define who has legitimate issues with masks and parents fear their kid will be left out. A child development or medical professional could probably come up with one. I just think parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks and parents of at risk kids under 5 have a lot in common. We have kids with "extra" needs and its our job to protect them. We're not trying to hurt other kids. I think we gravitate to the all or nothing extremes because there are so many people in the middle who are acting selfishly.

Data shows that the number of truly at-risk kids under age 5 is incredibly low, but somehow everyone on the internet has one. Weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In my experience the parents of kids who have legitimate issues with masks are highly favorable of simply mask optional for everyone, which is also what parents of kids who are simply mask haters want. Nobody is asking for a return to 2019 where masks are illegal to wear in Virginia and schools also prohibit them.

I suspect that is the case because there isn't a clear way to define who has legitimate issues with masks and parents fear their kid will be left out. A child development or medical professional could probably come up with one. I just think parents of kids with legitimate issues with masks and parents of at risk kids under 5 have a lot in common. We have kids with "extra" needs and its our job to protect them. We're not trying to hurt other kids. I think we gravitate to the all or nothing extremes because there are so many people in the middle who are acting selfishly.

Data shows that the number of truly at-risk kids under age 5 is incredibly low, but somehow everyone on the internet has one. Weird.

Similarly, you can't swing a dead cat around DCUM without hitting at least three "immunocompromised" people.