Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know. On one hand I recognize the concern and the chance that an illness could disrupt Christmas.

On the other hand I think white UMC women in particular have become crazy about illnesses and lost all perspective. If you posted this in 2018, people would have mostly thought you were crazy. First off, there’s a high chance your kids won’t even get sick. Secondly, even if your mom does get sick she will likely be okay. Even if your kids did get sick, could you reschedule your trip?

What stands out to me is that you’re speaking about the flu or Covid like it’s this extreme event. Except getting sick is part of life especially for kids. In my opinion you need some anxiety meds and a stiff drink when you visit your mom.

There are various schools of thought as to why our kids so sick this year. We do know that it has something to do with Covid. Common sense tells me that continuing to mask your kids and keep them home is just going to prolong this. Your kids have to get sick. It’s part of childhood.

OP here. I hear your point about general illness and if we weren’t going to visit my frail, 83 year old mom who has just recuperated from surgery I wouldn’t think twice about sending my kids to school. As I noted in my post at the very beginning, my kids and I are the only family my mom has visiting her this year. Sure, I could reschedule. Do I want my frail, elderly mom spending Christmas completely alone save the caregivers who help her? No. And I don’t know how many Christmases are ahead for her.

You’re also assuming I’m white and UMC and that I drink - none of these assumptions are true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know. On one hand I recognize the concern and the chance that an illness could disrupt Christmas.

On the other hand I think white UMC women in particular have become crazy about illnesses and lost all perspective. If you posted this in 2018, people would have mostly thought you were crazy. First off, there’s a high chance your kids won’t even get sick. Secondly, even if your mom does get sick she will likely be okay. Even if your kids did get sick, could you reschedule your trip?

What stands out to me is that you’re speaking about the flu or Covid like it’s this extreme event. Except getting sick is part of life especially for kids. In my opinion you need some anxiety meds and a stiff drink when you visit your mom.

There are various schools of thought as to why our kids so sick this year. We do know that it has something to do with Covid. Common sense tells me that continuing to mask your kids and keep them home is just going to prolong this. Your kids have to get sick. It’s part of childhood.

OP here. I hear your point about general illness and if we weren’t going to visit my frail, 83 year old mom who has just recuperated from surgery I wouldn’t think twice about sending my kids to school. As I noted in my post at the very beginning, my kids and I are the only family my mom has visiting her this year. Sure, I could reschedule. Do I want my frail, elderly mom spending Christmas completely alone save the caregivers who help her? No. And I don’t know how many Christmases are ahead for her.

You’re also assuming I’m white and UMC and that I drink - none of these assumptions are true.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know. On one hand I recognize the concern and the chance that an illness could disrupt Christmas.

On the other hand I think white UMC women in particular have become crazy about illnesses and lost all perspective. If you posted this in 2018, people would have mostly thought you were crazy. First off, there’s a high chance your kids won’t even get sick. Secondly, even if your mom does get sick she will likely be okay. Even if your kids did get sick, could you reschedule your trip?

What stands out to me is that you’re speaking about the flu or Covid like it’s this extreme event. Except getting sick is part of life especially for kids. In my opinion you need some anxiety meds and a stiff drink when you visit your mom.

There are various schools of thought as to why our kids so sick this year. We do know that it has something to do with Covid. Common sense tells me that continuing to mask your kids and keep them home is just going to prolong this. Your kids have to get sick. It’s part of childhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Covid is not generally harmful to school-aged children - but for some children it is. For example, children who get long covid. And for those children, "hardly affects" is just plain wrong.

Now, what are you talking about? The OP is not talking about sacrificing children's education. The OP is asking about keeping a third-grader and a seventh-grader home from school for the 4 days before winter break, to reduce the risk of them getting infected and in turn infecting their grandmother.

Because it’s not just four days. What about next year? What about subsequent years? What about before other trips to see grandma?

This behavior needs to stop because it’s making things worse. There’s an article today how the CDC is acknowledging that kids being distanced and wearing masks has resulted in strep A being a problem this year. We have to accept kids are going to get sick and not revolve our lives around not getting common illnesses.

Stop lying: masking and distancing has nothing to do with the rise in strep A

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/12/16/health/strep-a-infections-us/index.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the schools allow you just to decide they don't need to attend for a week? Serious question, this would have been reported to authorities when my DCs were young in public school.

The school doesn't care and not much will happen next week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Covid is not generally harmful to school-aged children - but for some children it is. For example, children who get long covid. And for those children, "hardly affects" is just plain wrong.

Now, what are you talking about? The OP is not talking about sacrificing children's education. The OP is asking about keeping a third-grader and a seventh-grader home from school for the 4 days before winter break, to reduce the risk of them getting infected and in turn infecting their grandmother.

Because it’s not just four days. What about next year? What about subsequent years? What about before other trips to see grandma?

This behavior needs to stop because it’s making things worse. There’s an article today how the CDC is acknowledging that kids being distanced and wearing masks has resulted in strep A being a problem this year. We have to accept kids are going to get sick and not revolve our lives around not getting common illnesses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Covid is not generally harmful to school-aged children - but for some children it is. For example, children who get long covid. And for those children, "hardly affects" is just plain wrong.

Now, what are you talking about? The OP is not talking about sacrificing children's education. The OP is asking about keeping a third-grader and a seventh-grader home from school for the 4 days before winter break, to reduce the risk of them getting infected and in turn infecting their grandmother.

Because it’s not just four days. What about next year? What about subsequent years? What about before other trips to see grandma?

This behavior needs to stop because it’s making things worse. There’s an article today how the CDC is acknowledging that kids being distanced and wearing masks has resulted in strep A being a problem this year. We have to accept kids are going to get sick and not revolve our lives around not getting common illnesses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Covid is not generally harmful to school-aged children - but for some children it is. For example, children who get long covid. And for those children, "hardly affects" is just plain wrong.

Now, what are you talking about? The OP is not talking about sacrificing children's education. The OP is asking about keeping a third-grader and a seventh-grader home from school for the 4 days before winter break, to reduce the risk of them getting infected and in turn infecting their grandmother.

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:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t keep them home but have them mask. That is my plan. Hoping the masks help reduce the chance of getting sick.

Yes masks worked extremely well at keeping Covid from spreading within the US. High mask places didn’t have nearly as much Covid as places like Florida. JUST KIDDING.

At this point if you really think the masking will accomplish anything then you’re dumb.

I think you are very wrong about that. I have yet to have covid and mask religiously in indoor public places. I’ve had several exposure notices on my phone after traveling but did not get covid likely because of n95 mask. Same for other masked interactions with friends who later tested positive. Masks definitely do help a lot.

That’s great. Too bad masking still couldn’t keep Covid from spreading.

Yeah, masks aren't very effective when people don't wear them.

Yes we should all just mask harder and then they will keep everyone from catching Covid!

No, you will not be protected from covid if I wear two masks instead of one, and you continue to wear zero masks.

Not sure what to tell you except that common sense should tell you that masking didn’t do a whole lot of good during Covid. I live in a city where people were masks everywhere or did and Covid still spread like wildfire. At this point I’d accept a new mitigation method but I’m unwilling to keep wearing a mask.

Then don't wear a mask. Don't wear a seat belt. Don't wash your hands. These are all evidence-based mitigation methods, but it's your decision.

No way. Hand washing is extremely important and easy to do. Same with wearing a seatbelt. Wearing a mask sucks and I never wore one before Covid. I don’t want to go around wearing a mask the rest of my life cause of white UMC moms with anxiety. I don’t want to wear a mask anymore than I want to wear a burqa.

Same here!

Great. You made your point that you don't care about humanity and are happy to spread a virus during a pandemic. Do you want a prize for hating your family and neighbors? A citation? A fruit basket?

How long are you going to use this line? 3 more years? 10?

DP. Until there's universal paid sick leave in the US, with no repercussions for employees who use it.

So...you will be judging people for not masking....for the entirety of your lifetime?

No, actually, I'm hoping that some day the US will have universal paid sick leave, like every other wealthy country in the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Covid is not generally harmful to school-aged children - but for some children it is. For example, children who get long covid. And for those children, "hardly affects" is just plain wrong.

Now, what are you talking about? The OP is not talking about sacrificing children's education. The OP is asking about keeping a third-grader and a seventh-grader home from school for the 4 days before winter break, to reduce the risk of them getting infected and in turn infecting their grandmother.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

DP - and one who agrees entirely with the need to prioritize kids’ education over “protecting” the elderly: RSV is not particularly harmful to school-aged kids. Nor is COVID (still). The flu can be, but the vaccine prevents most severe cases.

So, what are you talking about? Sacrificing kids’ educations has profound and long-lasting consequences. It also teaches them that education doesn’t matter. That’s not the message we want to send.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.

Posted from June 2020.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a bad habit to fall into to sacrifice the kids' education to "protect" older family members. If the family member were that vulnerable, we'd visit with masks or outside or arrange a visit when kids would already be home for a few days. Even shifting later to winter break if necessary.

+100000. Children have already given up so much for a virus that hardly affects them. Meanwhile most elderly people moved on years ago. We aren’t Covid cautious and back in 2011 when we went out to eat it was mostly retirees dining out.