All schools should offer an all-virtual option

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NO because virtual school is sh!t and it just made our entire family crazy.

Cool beans for you. Our kids did great. So?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO because virtual school is sh!t and it just made our entire family crazy.

Cool beans for you. Our kids did great. So?

great - then you’ll do great homeschooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's like she's just workshopping different arguments to see how they fly. Now we are onto "we should all be able to satisfy our own risk assessments and the school system should appeal to each individual's specific preferences."

I know this won’t fit your narrative of “one hysterical parent” so you can blindly send your kids into schools to get COVID, but this is multiple people posting.

Point taken.

It can be 100 hysterical parents and it doesn't matter. This isn't a democracy - we all have to follow DCPS and their policies.

That is hilarious coming from the parents who screamed themselves hoarse in temper tantrums about DL all last year.

I mean, yes? We were stuck with virtual learning all year despite raising hell about it. Your turn to suck it up, buttercup!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

Need to add domestic violence too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

See you in a month when multiple DC kids are dead from COVID, and we can revisit the cost/benefit of some UMC white kids being a little sad.

If you hadn’t destroyed public education for the past 1.5 years with your fearmongering we wouldn’t be in this position where the harms of keeping school closed longer far outweighs the harms of covid. Congrats!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

See you in a month when multiple DC kids are dead from COVID, and we can revisit the cost/benefit of some UMC white kids being a little sad.

If you hadn’t destroyed public education for the past 1.5 years with your fearmongering we wouldn’t be in this position where the harms of keeping school closed longer far outweighs the harms of covid. Congrats!

600,000+ dead Americans say hi.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand how we can be sure there are no long term effects for kids. The vaccine for under 12 should be out in a couple of months (wish Biden would speak to that/show urgency). Can't we be protective until then, and after that transition to school for all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how we can be sure there are no long term effects for kids. The vaccine for under 12 should be out in a couple of months (wish Biden would speak to that/show urgency). Can't we be protective until then, and after that transition to school for all?

You can't be sure that a drunk driver won't kill you later today, but still you leave your home...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

See you in a month when multiple DC kids are dead from COVID, and we can revisit the cost/benefit of some UMC white kids being a little sad.

If you hadn’t destroyed public education for the past 1.5 years with your fearmongering we wouldn’t be in this position where the harms of keeping school closed longer far outweighs the harms of covid. Congrats!

600,000+ dead Americans say hi.

what does this have to do with schools? yes covid is bad. no it does not follow that we cancel schools for two plus years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how we can be sure there are no long term effects for kids. The vaccine for under 12 should be out in a couple of months (wish Biden would speak to that/show urgency). Can't we be protective until then, and after that transition to school for all?

you can be protective if you want. homeschool is totally legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

See you in a month when multiple DC kids are dead from COVID, and we can revisit the cost/benefit of some UMC white kids being a little sad.

WTF is wrong with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason we need a virtual option this year is to allow parents to make their own risk assessments. Putting your child in a DCPS this year, given what we know about delta so far and what little effort DCPS is making to mitigate risk, is literally gambling with your child’s physical health, and perhaps the health of household members depending on their health status. I understand that virtual learning also poses other non-physical-health risks to children, and in some or many cases these risks win out. But for a school system to tell parents that the only way to receive a public education this year is by risking their kid’s health is unconscionable. Especially when dcps is large enough to offer a district-wide option.

And before someone says it, yes I have asked my school for specifics and gave been met with silence. Article after article written by public health experts advise us to weigh our individual risk factors carefully, and encourages parents of unvaccinated children to be particularly cautious. Yet we are told that in order to receive a public education in dc we need to subject our children to more covid exposure in one day than a lot of us probably experience in a month or more.

But it’s not a risk to under 12 kids’ lives, and 12+ can get vaccinated such that it’s not a risk to theirs either. And if you have a medical condition that does make it a risk to your under 12 life, then you can get approved for virtual. The risk to under 12 kids is less than the flu. We don’t close schools for the flu, we shouldn’t allow virtual for Covid. The risks of virtual are exponentially too high, including a much higher risk to their lives. First of, mental health is a very serious thing and the risk to mental health is huge with another year of virtual as seen from last year. Second, when looking at DC data in particular, virtual led to significant numbers of too young to care for themselves children left home all day and resulted in a lot of kids on dangerous streets all day doing drugs and getting involved in gun violence. Do you have any idea how much gun violence impacting kids skyrocketed last year. Schools keeps kids in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods safe

See you in a month when multiple DC kids are dead from COVID, and we can revisit the cost/benefit of some UMC white kids being a little sad.

WTF is wrong with you.

close schools from November to March in case of snow and ice!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how we can be sure there are no long term effects for kids. The vaccine for under 12 should be out in a couple of months (wish Biden would speak to that/show urgency). Can't we be protective until then, and after that transition to school for all?

We have A LOT more data on potential long term effects of Covid on kids than we do the vaccine. So by your logic, the vaccine is not a safe haven either

[Anonymous]

How much more data does DCPS need? Parents who prefer to keep their kids home - both because the risk of hospitalization for kids is around 1% - and also for families with a medically vulnerable family member at home. Dcps decision to force families into school is deeply concerning. If you feel good sending your kids by all means send them, but provide a solution for children whose parents read these very real risks and reach rational conclusions to be more risk averse.

I don’t want to force your kids to stay home, I know that was excruciating for some families. But I don’t want my kids forced into school with this much community spread.

https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%208.19%20FINAL.pdf

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/08/23/1029737143/breakthrough-covid-infections-add-even-more-chaos-to-schools-start-n-2021

Will I also be paying for the costs of the lawsuits from the families of the inevitable lawsuits stemming from families forced into in person who sue the city of their children are hospitalized or suffer worse and more tragic outcomes?

Get with it dcps. Virtual option now. Dcps won’t admit they were wrong. Just like they dchealth did with the bungled vaccine rollout.