“School is not childcare”

[Anonymous]

I can only assume the weirdos hung on up on this issue (OP is not included, her issues are separate) are people who feel some sort of guilt over not working? I'm not sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s what I think people are really saying with “school is not childcare”:

I as a teacher should not be forced into a dangerous environment just because you have to go to work, when we can still accomplish learning online instead.

This argument is so insulting to teachers. Learning online is not the same as being in a classroom with a professional. People think they're defending teachers, but they're really disrespecting them.

Well I’m the one who wrote it and in a teacher so I certainly didn’t mean to insult myself. My point is that I personally feel that going back to work will be a health risk to me and my family and I don’t want to be forced to do it just because parents need to get back to work and I provide their child care.

I mean, school is a societal construct. I'm a big fan of teachers, but you do understand that society is constructed in such a way that parents work while their kids are in school. Guess it depends how you define 'child care.'

[Anonymous]

Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

Then teachers need a major pay hike on par with IT consultants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

I wasn’t looking for any particular answer, but it was bothering me that no one was considering teachers’ health. Going back to work is a big plus for people now at home and a big minus in some ways for teachers. We will need to come to some sort of compromise that gets the country started, educates kids, and protects teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

I wasn’t looking for any particular answer, but it was bothering me that no one was considering teachers’ health. Going back to work is a big plus for people now at home and a big minus in some ways for teachers. We will need to come to some sort of compromise that gets the country started, educates kids, and protects teachers.

Do you care equally about the health of grocery store workers? Daycare workers? Healthcare workers? Why only teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

I wasn’t looking for any particular answer, but it was bothering me that no one was considering teachers’ health. Going back to work is a big plus for people now at home and a big minus in some ways for teachers. We will need to come to some sort of compromise that gets the country started, educates kids, and protects teachers.

I don't know that "no one" was considering teacher's health -- I've seen many discussions of just that. But it's not just teachers -- lots of workers are already bearing the health risks of their jobs -- meatpackers, warehouse workers, FedEx/UPS/USPS workers, nursing home workers, restaurant and delivery staff, etc. And we have to figure out ways to protect the health of people who can't work from home, and teachers and students shouldn't just be thrown to the wolves.

But that's different from the use of "school isn't childcare" to shame and silence parents who need childcare to work, which was already a thing I saw a lot on these boards pre-pandemic, and am seeing now, and it's just a way to discount their real issues by suggesting that they don't care about their kids (or their kids' teachers) or whatever.

[Anonymous]

School is child care. However, when school is not in session parents need to figure it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But for older kids, it is. Parents rely on school hours in order to go to work. I work nights and rely on DS being occupied at school between 8am (leave for bus) and 330pm (meet him at bus).

DH and I are managing with homeschooling. We are lucky that DH can work from home and DS is fairly independent. But if DH had a job where he couldn't work from home, we would be in trouble. As it is, DH is a bit grumpy because his work is interrupted by DS and I'm grumpy because I don't sleep as much.

There are many, many people who can't work right now because their kids are home 24/7 and they can't afford childcare/don't want to risk it.

That's obviously not your sisters situation but the whole "school is not childcare" notion is ridiculous.

You’re crisis schooling, not home schooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. However, when school is not in session parents need to figure it out.

For that matter, if you have ever had a young child hospitalized, the hospital staff is providing childcare when you can’t be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

I wasn’t looking for any particular answer, but it was bothering me that no one was considering teachers’ health. Going back to work is a big plus for people now at home and a big minus in some ways for teachers. We will need to come to some sort of compromise that gets the country started, educates kids, and protects teachers.

Do you care equally about the health of grocery store workers? Daycare workers? Healthcare workers? Why only teachers?

Well this discussion is about teachers so that’s why I’m talking about teachers. Sure, I get it, but if grocery stores had been closed for 6 months and we were considering reopening them, we would take into account the health of grocery store workers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers aren't nannies and schools aren't daycares, but millions of working parents structured their work and family planning and lots of other aspects of their lives around the fact that we have mandatory education and that children go to school during the day. And they aren't calling for the schools to reopen because they hate their kids, or because they see teachers as nannies, but because they work to pay their bills and they are worried about being able to keep the jobs that feed and house and clothe their children.

And none of this has anything to do with OP's situation anyway.

Thank you. The whole discussion is madness.

Here’s the crux of it for me: do you think teachers should have to bear the health risks of being around large groups of children if it means getting the rest of society back to work?

I mean... sort of? Society going back to work will mean a lot of things. People in recirculated air, people on public transportation, kids going back to school then coming home to families, etc. There's no evidence that school buildings are any more risky than any other public space - in fact, they may be less so since kids rarely have symptoms and often have a lower viral load, as well. If you are a teacher and immunocompromised, by all means, take leave. But I'm not sure what response you're looking for here.

I wasn’t looking for any particular answer, but it was bothering me that no one was considering teachers’ health. Going back to work is a big plus for people now at home and a big minus in some ways for teachers. We will need to come to some sort of compromise that gets the country started, educates kids, and protects teachers.

It's not really a big plus for everyone who has the ability to Wfh to go back to crowded offices, as far as risk. It means we are all taking that risk together if that's what happens