Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1) MoCo DHHS gave an overly cautious directive to MCPS.
2) MCPS published it in all its glory, spelling out the ugly implications.
3) Firestorm ensues.
4) DHHS slams into reverse so fast they left the transmission in pieces, MCPS gets lots of testing.
Delightful little power play. Dr McKnight, for the win! You're on your way.
By making MCPS look spineless and incompetent?
By forcing DHHS's hand when DHHS had the cards.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So everyone who doesn't opt in now gets their kids sent hope with symptoms.![]()
Better opt in if you want your kid staying in school.
Surveillance testing != On-demand rapid testing after symptoms
Anonymous wrote:So everyone who doesn't opt in now gets their kids sent hope with symptoms.![]()
Better opt in if you want your kid staying in school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:1) MoCo DHHS gave an overly cautious directive to MCPS.
2) MCPS published it in all its glory, spelling out the ugly implications.
3) Firestorm ensues.
4) DHHS slams into reverse so fast they left the transmission in pieces, MCPS gets lots of testing.
Delightful little power play. Dr McKnight, for the win! You're on your way.
By making MCPS look spineless and incompetent?
Anonymous wrote:1) MoCo DHHS gave an overly cautious directive to MCPS.
2) MCPS published it in all its glory, spelling out the ugly implications.
3) Firestorm ensues.
4) DHHS slams into reverse so fast they left the transmission in pieces, MCPS gets lots of testing.
Delightful little power play. Dr McKnight, for the win! You're on your way.[/quote
By making MCPS look spineless and incompetent?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everything is good! There will be testing. Reason prevailed. Kids will not quarantine for “new onset headaches”. Gayles is leaving and Elrich is still well Elrich.
What happens when the family of the kid who has the symptom has not opted into testing? Your kids will still get sent home. So no, reason has not prevailed. They still need to rescind this guidance.
So will there be a different option in for the rapid tests vs. random surveillance testing? This is starting to get confusing, would have been nice if this had been ironed out before the school year started.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everything is good! There will be testing. Reason prevailed. Kids will not quarantine for “new onset headaches”. Gayles is leaving and Elrich is still well Elrich.
What happens when the family of the kid who has the symptom has not opted into testing? Your kids will still get sent home. So no, reason has not prevailed. They still need to rescind this guidance.
So will there be a different option in for the rapid tests vs. random surveillance testing? This is starting to get confusing, would have been nice if this had been ironed out before the school year started.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Oh my. So now I’m hearing the outdoor lunch people are advocating for opt-out surveillance testing to nip a symptomatic spread in the bud, the togetheragain people want to keep surveillance testing opt out (so they can opt out: don’t ask don’t tell), and everyone wants rapid testing for kids with a “symptom” so we can all avoid the whole class quarantine. And MCPS just wants to send everyone home to fend for themselves. Is that where we are, friends?
People behaving responsibly will be ok with testing as they know its the right thing to do. But those who want to live life as normal will refuse testing as they just don't care and if they kids get sick they will send them to school anyway as they don't want to parent their kids. Those are the kids we need targeted for testing.
The fend for yourself is one reason we choose VA. But, there is no other good way to do it as parents don't want hybrid/concurrent and wanted back to normal. Back to normal never gave any instructions or for us, even make up assignments.
I’ll opt in once MCPS gets their story straight. 18 months and they couldn’t figure any of this out sooner? Sounds like the new quarantine plan was cooked up by Gayles while vacationing in France, as a grenade to throw on his way out the door.
Don't opt in but don't complain about the quarantine and having to get your kids testing. Or, the lack of instruction during quarantine as its the fault of families like you who refuse to be careful. Gayles failed us and all public officials should think about their behavior but they aren't. Nor are the families/parents or teachers/staff so we'll have spread and quarantines.
Lots of assumptions in your post. Real sorry I have to work in person- is that what you mean by not being careful, that I didn’t think ahead to get a cushy telework job?![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everything is good! There will be testing. Reason prevailed. Kids will not quarantine for “new onset headaches”. Gayles is leaving and Elrich is still well Elrich.
What happens when the family of the kid who has the symptom has not opted into testing? Your kids will still get sent home. So no, reason has not prevailed. They still need to rescind this guidance.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.
Not a TogetherAgain person, but performing medical tests on a minor without the consent of the guardian is pretty sketchy.
I would hope people would opt-in. But we can't lose sight of our ethics and morality.
You definitely need consent.
Silence is not consent
They’ve done it in DC
That doesn't make it ethical or right.
It's wrong to conduct a test on a minor without the parent's consent.
These things matter, even in a pandemic
No, it’s actually the right thing to do in a pandemic where others are placed into contact with you via something other than their own free choice (which is the nature of public education generally, more so with no virtual option available).
No one is forcing you to send your kid in-person, you could have applied to the VA but most likely were one of the posters wringing their hands in July about how robust it was going to be and missed the extended deadline. Or you could choose to homeschool.
Well, if no one is forcing anyone to go to school, then opt-out testing shouldn’t be any kind of problem. If you don’t like it, don’t go to school. No one’s forcing you.
Anonymous wrote:Everything is good! There will be testing. Reason prevailed. Kids will not quarantine for “new onset headaches”. Gayles is leaving and Elrich is still well Elrich.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, typo. Together again people want opt-IN because they think no one will opt in.
Not a TogetherAgain person, but performing medical tests on a minor without the consent of the guardian is pretty sketchy.
I would hope people would opt-in. But we can't lose sight of our ethics and morality.
You definitely need consent.
Silence is not consent
They’ve done it in DC
That doesn't make it ethical or right.
It's wrong to conduct a test on a minor without the parent's consent.
These things matter, even in a pandemic
No, it’s actually the right thing to do in a pandemic where others are placed into contact with you via something other than their own free choice (which is the nature of public education generally, more so with no virtual option available).
No. It's never right to perform any type of medical test on a minor without the consent of the guardian. Never.