Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I told my kids that they could take their masks off on 3/1. This update agrees with that. If something changes next week, cases drop significantly or rise significantly, the CDC announces that hospitalization rates are the new metric, something else, then maybe my kids will be able to take their masks off sooner or maybe they'll have to keep them on longer. But as of right now, that's the plan for our family.

I told mine to keep his on for as long as possible, unless it become weird and he feels like he's standing out. I'm caring for an immune-compromised person right now who needs life-saving treatments that he won't be able to get if he contracts covid. So "your choice" is the kind of thing that puts the life of my loved one at risk. I hope other parents decide to be a bit less careless than you.

Why are you so convinced that other children’s cloth/surgical masks - which is the vast majority of masks being worn at least in ES - are doing so much to prevent Covid? My goodness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nowhere did they say masking will be optional March 1. I read this as they are preparing a lawsuit.

See, I read it as the opposite, that they recognize the law allows parents to opt out and they will not fight that.

Right but they will guilt your kids into masking.

They will try to protect your children and other children. How horrible.

It is horrible when they don’t acknowledge there are downsides to masks and vaccines available for those who want them now.

My teens are vaccinated as are most of their school. Upwards of 90% which is greater than our community and county which makes using arbitrary regional transmission rates as guidance for their "plan" ridiculous.

They also had Covid over the break and so did most of their classmates.

There is no science that backs the need for them to continue masking. Either vaccines work or they don't. Either a high percentage of the population being vaxxed matters, or it doesn't.

Anonymous wrote:I told my kids that they could take their masks off on 3/1. This update agrees with that. If something changes next week, cases drop significantly or rise significantly, the CDC announces that hospitalization rates are the new metric, something else, then maybe my kids will be able to take their masks off sooner or maybe they'll have to keep them on longer. But as of right now, that's the plan for our family.

I told mine to keep his on for as long as possible, unless it become weird and he feels like he's standing out. I'm caring for an immune-compromised person right now who needs life-saving treatments that he won't be able to get if he contracts covid. So "your choice" is the kind of thing that puts the life of my loved one at risk. I hope other parents decide to be a bit less careless than you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nowhere did they say masking will be optional March 1. I read this as they are preparing a lawsuit.

See, I read it as the opposite, that they recognize the law allows parents to opt out and they will not fight that.

Right but they will guilt your kids into masking.

They will try to protect your children and other children. How horrible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If students can opt out of wearing masks I think staff should be able to make the same choice.

Parent here who agrees, but who is supposed to be advocating for that? I sorta doubt FEA and FCFT are going to switch from "N95s for all!" to "mask choice!" but that would be fun.

Teacher here. I would like the option. I’m also a member of FCFT and I haven’t seen them take this position in bold.

Anonymous wrote:I am confused by the “update.”

It's not the clearest email, but I think FCPS felt they needed to send something out to remind folks to keep masking until March 1st because other NOVA school districts announced this week masks were optional. I'm fine with FCPS staying masked until the 1st since that'll give the numbers even more time to drop.

Anonymous wrote:If students can opt out of wearing masks I think staff should be able to make the same choice.

Parent here who agrees, but who is supposed to be advocating for that? I sorta doubt FEA and FCFT are going to switch from "N95s for all!" to "mask choice!" but that would be fun.

I told my kids that they could take their masks off on 3/1. This update agrees with that. If something changes next week, cases drop significantly or rise significantly, the CDC announces that hospitalization rates are the new metric, something else, then maybe my kids will be able to take their masks off sooner or maybe they'll have to keep them on longer. But as of right now, that's the plan for our family.

If students can opt out of wearing masks I think staff should be able to make the same choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I called FCPS. The woman made it very clear that the email means children are to remain masked until the School Board tells us they can unmask sometime in the future.

Really? Who did you speak to. I totally read it like the PPs who said it means that their legal obligation is to let kids whose parents opt them out unmask, but they don't really want to out-and-out say so.

+1 that’s how I read it and pretty much what I expected. They don’t want kids to go without masks, they aren’t going to promote the fact that kids can go without masks as of 3/1 (or maybe now? But I personally wouldn’t try it until 3/1), but they are legally required to allow an opt-out as of 3/1.

Braband is a piece of work. Cancels school for rain before even seeing how weather turns out. But has time to carefully craft message after message on this useless mask mandate.

I figure we'll get the clarification in WTOP, Inside NOVA, or the like when they publish an article, as they have on all the other districts.

So yes, FCPS would want...

Anonymous wrote:I called FCPS. The woman made it very clear that the email means children are to remain masked until the School Board tells us they can unmask sometime in the future.

Really? Who did you speak to. I totally read it like the PPs who said it means that their legal obligation is to let kids whose parents opt them out unmask, but they don't really want to out-and-out say so.