Anonymous wrote:WTOP is reporting that FCPS will drop the mask mandate on March 1st. So I guess it's in FCPSs court if they want to correct that or not.
https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/02/fairfax-co-to-drop-mask-mandate-march-1/

Wow? Bold interpretation by WTOP? Did they read the same letter I did?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WTOP is reporting that FCPS will drop the mask mandate on March 1st. So I guess it's in FCPSs court if they want to correct that or not.
https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/02/fairfax-co-to-drop-mask-mandate-march-1/

Why would they correct it. FCPS said the same in their notice.

Agree. WTOP read it the way most of us are reading it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I feel for your situation. But, you can't expect other people to adjust their lives or care about your vulnerable relative. It's too far removed.

I am the first quoted PP with the children who will take their masks off on 3/1. I do care about others' vulnerable family members. That is a large part of why my kids are vaccinated. They are not in particular danger from covid themselves, they got the vaccine for other people.

DP, and this.

I also advocated for upgraded ventilation at our school and if your child wanted a corsi rosenthal box (homemade air filter) in the classroom, I'd chip in.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

because it's a cult

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I feel for your situation. But, you can't expect other people to adjust their lives or care about your vulnerable relative. It's too far removed.

I am the first quoted PP with the children who will take their masks off on 3/1. I do care about others' vulnerable family members. That is a large part of why my kids are vaccinated. They are not in particular danger from covid themselves, they got the vaccine for other people.

Anonymous wrote:WTOP is reporting that FCPS will drop the mask mandate on March 1st. So I guess it's in FCPSs court if they want to correct that or not.
https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/02/fairfax-co-to-drop-mask-mandate-march-1/

Why would they correct it. FCPS said the same in their notice.

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.

I feel for your situation. But, you can't expect other people to adjust their lives or care about your vulnerable relative. It's too far removed.

WTOP is reporting that FCPS will drop the mask mandate on March 1st. So I guess it's in FCPSs court if they want to correct that or not.
https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/02/fairfax-co-to-drop-mask-mandate-march-1/

Did anyone notice that they changed the first paragraph after posting this initially? It initially referenced the right to opt out.

“Senate Bill 739 takes full effect March 1. We maintain our commitment to the health and safety of our students and staff while recognizing the requirements of this new law to allow parents to opt their child out of wearing a mask.”

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree. They are not saying they will fight it, but they want to keep up the scare tactics to kerp people masking.

Come on. Why is everyone acting like they have a vested interest in kids masking? It's not like Brabrand and the SB stands to benefit. They're just overly cautiuos.

I think it’s political for the school board. They don’t want to let the Rs get a win.
Let’s clean house in 2023 with the exception of McLaughlin.

The politics are going to catch up with them because they suck at it. I am as left leaning as possible but I only support McLaughlin. To me it's insulting to pretend to only care about equity through performative actions like renaming schools and revamping TJ when you shutter schools, make stupid calendars, cater to teachers over students. I don't see where the clever politics are in all of this. We have had a magnifying glass on the SB for the last two years and they suck!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Understand their legal obligation” to me means they understand they will have to comply. But they are hopeful that by March 1 transmission continues to decrease.

Finish the sentence “legal obligations to keep the community safe”. They will sue to use CDC metrics and to have the freedom to reimpose masks if there is another basis varient.

Nope, I agree with PP. The sentence finishes "legal obligations vis a vis legislation passed this week." Keeping the community safe is a public health obligation, and an ethical obligation, but not a legal obligation.

Anonymous wrote: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.

How do you know your school’s vaccination rate?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

i don't really know why people are so confused by this. They're trying to say stuff without saying it, but to me it's clear that the key points are...
- we know that if you want to stop sending your kid to school in a mask, you can do so on March 1 and there's nothing we can do about it
- we have a plan for rolling back masking and we would love it if you follow our plan instead of Youngkins
- transmission is still high so we hope that you continue to send your kid in a mask
- if your kid still wears a mask, please make sure he's not bullying kids that choose not to - and vice versa

They're saying that they'll go along with making masks option, because they have to, but they hope parents will continue to opt in to masks until their plan supports no longer masking.

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.

So wearing a mask is a life saving measure, because you are caring for an immune-compromised person. OK, makes sense. BUT you only want you child to wear a mask "unless it become weird and he feels like he's standing out." Um, maybe you should reassess your priorities. If your child wearing a mask protects your sick loved one, shouldn't he absolutely wear one until it is safe for the person you care for?

"Until it becomes weird" seems the very definition of careless.

Anonymous wrote:“Understand their legal obligation” to me means they understand they will have to comply. But they are hopeful that by March 1 transmission continues to decrease.

Finish the sentence “legal obligations to keep the community safe”. They will sue to use CDC metrics and to have the freedom to reimpose masks if there is another basis varient.