Anonymous wrote:We should open school in as soon as possible and allow students back in phases. Entire households need to be vaccinated.

I propose that schools go in this order -
- Teachers and staff - plus their households
- Transportation services, assigned LEOs to the schools, any childcare program staff - and their households
- Special Ed students and their households
- Single parents and foster parent households
- Rest of the students and their households.

We will fall in the last category but we must start doing this in phases. And let those who are vaccinated (along with their household) start back in the school.

Anonymous wrote:

+1. As a European, it's really interesting to watch American liberals make this "you are on your own, fend for yourselves" argument when it comes to kids and families during the pandemic, while on the other hand calling for a "we are all in this together" approach when it comes to virus containment. European societies take a much more holistic approach to public health and community solidarity, one that balances the well-being and education of kids and the ability of families to maintain jobs with the need to contain the spread to protect those vulnerable to the virus, and most importantly, keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed. That's why they are STILL keeping schools at least partially open in many places (misleading headlines notwithstanding), and will certainly not keep them closed for the rest of the year.

Thank you for this. I am an American but it is disturbing to me how much I hear liberal Americans espousing a view on the pandemic that is so focused on "personal responsibility" which is the same argument conservatives use to deny welfare benefits to single mothers or refuse asylum to immigrants.

The best possible response to a pandemic is communal. I think it can be hard to remember that in the US, where we have such an individualistic culture. Combine it with all the misinformation circulating (yes, I'm talking to you, PP who keeps posting links to a bunch of headlines in tweets to make your argument instead of engaging with what people are actually saying in the thread) and it's a recipe for disaster. If we leave families to just figure all of this out on their own, we will leave behind the vast majority of families.

Anonymous wrote:

+1. As a European, it's really interesting to watch American liberals make this "you are on your own, fend for yourselves" argument when it comes to kids and families during the pandemic, while on the other hand calling for a "we are all in this together" approach when it comes to virus containment. European societies take a much more holistic approach to public health and community solidarity, one that balances the well-being and education of kids and the ability of families to maintain jobs with the need to contain the spread to protect those vulnerable to the virus, and most importantly, keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed. That's why they are STILL keeping schools at least partially open in many places (misleading headlines notwithstanding), and will certainly not keep them closed for the rest of the year.

Thank you for this. I am an American but it is disturbing to me how much I hear liberal Americans espousing a view on the pandemic that is so focused on "personal responsibility" which is the same argument conservatives use to deny welfare benefits to single mothers or refuse asylum to immigrants.

The best possible response to a pandemic is communal. I think it can be hard to remember that in the US, where we have such an individualistic culture. Combine it with all the misinformation circulating (yes, I'm talking to you, PP who keeps posting links to a bunch of headlines in tweets to make your argument instead of engaging with what people are actually saying in the thread) and it's a recipe for disaster. If we leave families to just figure all of this out on their own, we will leave behind the vast majority of families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

DP, but a huge part of the problem is that parents are having to do it all with zero childcare. I mean, when are they supposed to work in between supervising remote learning and making sure their kids get their social/emotional needs met?

It’s not a personal criticism of teachers to note that schools provided care for children, which allowed parents to work. When that care was no longer provided, parents are left in the lurch of having to do it all and then accused of being lazy and awful if they’re struggling. It’s one of the practical reasons remote learning doesn’t work for the younger set.

+1. As a European, it's really interesting to watch American liberals make this "you are on your own, fend for yourselves" argument when it comes to kids and families during the pandemic, while on the other hand calling for a "we are all in this together" approach when it comes to virus containment. European societies take a much more holistic approach to public health and community solidarity, one that balances the well-being and education of kids and the ability of families to maintain jobs with the need to contain the spread to protect those vulnerable to the virus, and most importantly, keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed. That's why they are STILL keeping schools at least partially open in many places (misleading headlines notwithstanding), and will certainly not keep them closed for the rest of the year.

Anonymous wrote:The entire dialogue around Covid is insane.

Year to year - according to CDC - more folks die of heart disease and of cancer - not combined but in each of those categories.

It is unclear why children are being sacrificed. Yes - they can spread it but can we do an intelligent cost/benefit analysis on this?

In the DMV during this whole almost year now, nobody has focused on children or their needs. Its all about the teachers and their rights, darn it!

But great news, obese folks are priority for vaccines.

It's absurd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

DP, but a huge part of the problem is that parents are having to do it all with zero childcare. I mean, when are they supposed to work in between supervising remote learning and making sure their kids get their social/emotional needs met?

It’s not a personal criticism of teachers to note that schools provided care for children, which allowed parents to work. When that care was no longer provided, parents are left in the lurch of having to do it all and then accused of being lazy and awful if they’re struggling. It’s one of the practical reasons remote learning doesn’t work for the younger set.

Can I just say after nearly a year -- if you don't get this, let me spell it out for you.

Your kid's social engagement schedule is not the country's or the state's problem during a pandemic. Their job is to protect the community's public health and with nearly half a million Americans dead -- get ready for more stringent lockdowns, not less.

If you don’t get this, let me spell it out for you:

A generation of depressed, angry children is a public health crisis.

A generation of overwhelmed women stepping back from the workplace is an economic and social crisis.

Conflicting issues need to be balanced.

+1. As a European, it's really interesting to watch American liberals make this "you are on your own, fend for yourselves" argument when it comes to kids and families during the pandemic, while on the other hand calling for a "we are all in this together" approach when it comes to virus containment. European societies take a much more holistic approach to public health and community solidarity, one that balances the well-being and education of kids and the ability of families to maintain jobs with the need to contain the spread to protect those vulnerable to the virus, and most importantly, keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed. That's why they are STILL keeping schools at least partially open in many places (misleading headlines notwithstanding), and will certainly not keep them closed for the rest of the year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

DP, but a huge part of the problem is that parents are having to do it all with zero childcare. I mean, when are they supposed to work in between supervising remote learning and making sure their kids get their social/emotional needs met?

It’s not a personal criticism of teachers to note that schools provided care for children, which allowed parents to work. When that care was no longer provided, parents are left in the lurch of having to do it all and then accused of being lazy and awful if they’re struggling. It’s one of the practical reasons remote learning doesn’t work for the younger set.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

DP, but a huge part of the problem is that parents are having to do it all with zero childcare. I mean, when are they supposed to work in between supervising remote learning and making sure their kids get their social/emotional needs met?

It’s not a personal criticism of teachers to note that schools provided care for children, which allowed parents to work. When that care was no longer provided, parents are left in the lurch of having to do it all and then accused of being lazy and awful if they’re struggling. It’s one of the practical reasons remote learning doesn’t work for the younger set.

Can I just say after nearly a year -- if you don't get this, let me spell it out for you.

Your kid's social engagement schedule is not the country's or the state's problem during a pandemic. Their job is to protect the community's public health and with nearly half a million Americans dead -- get ready for more stringent lockdowns, not less.

If you don’t get this, let me spell it out for you:

A generation of depressed, angry children is a public health crisis.

A generation of overwhelmed women stepping back from the workplace is an economic and social crisis.

Conflicting issues need to be balanced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

DP, but a huge part of the problem is that parents are having to do it all with zero childcare. I mean, when are they supposed to work in between supervising remote learning and making sure their kids get their social/emotional needs met?

It’s not a personal criticism of teachers to note that schools provided care for children, which allowed parents to work. When that care was no longer provided, parents are left in the lurch of having to do it all and then accused of being lazy and awful if they’re struggling. It’s one of the practical reasons remote learning doesn’t work for the younger set.

Can I just say after nearly a year -- if you don't get this, let me spell it out for you.

Your kid's social engagement schedule is not the country's or the state's problem during a pandemic. Their job is to protect the community's public health and with nearly half a million Americans dead -- get ready for more stringent lockdowns, not less.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

DP, but a huge part of the problem is that parents are having to do it all with zero childcare. I mean, when are they supposed to work in between supervising remote learning and making sure their kids get their social/emotional needs met?

It’s not a personal criticism of teachers to note that schools provided care for children, which allowed parents to work. When that care was no longer provided, parents are left in the lurch of having to do it all and then accused of being lazy and awful if they’re struggling. It’s one of the practical reasons remote learning doesn’t work for the younger set.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are struggling for a variety of reasons but they need adult support. Kids will struggle if they don't have someone to monitor and support them when they have questions and make sure assignments is done. Likewise, if your kid is struggling at home you need to look at what is going on and change your home structure to make it work for your child. You cannot expect schools to be everything to everyone, especially in terms of mental health. If your child is struggling, use your insurance and get your child and you support.

But it's reasonable to expect parenrs to be able to fulfill 100% of their kids' social, emotional, academic, and physical and mental health needs, without ever interacting in person with another human? I just don't think that's realistic. Parents aren't all amazing at everything and other relationships outside the nuclear family do play important roles in child development too. This is so so much pressure and it's not realistic.

No. But it's reasonable for parents to understand that school buildings are not the only way for their kids to have social contact and to arrange that if their kids need it, not to repeatedly demand that schools open in enclosed prolonged indoor contact during a pandemic. If your kids need socialixation, or their needs met, step up and arrange it. You don't need schools to parent for you. That's not their job. Education is their job and yes, is being provided, whether you like it or not, approve or not or agree or not.

THIS!

If you really think 6.5 hours in a classroom with 12 other kids is safe, then you are good to host a 2 hour play date for one kid at your house.

That said, a friend has tried this repeatedly and is finding that other parents don’t want to do the play dates. I think that’s a good signal that either they don’t think it’s safe or their kids are not having meltdowns like her son is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
WaPo’s reporting on this, and anything to do with schools and childhood development, is subpar.

Take with a grain of salt.

How so? Why is it subpar?

They just meant they don't want schools open, and WaPo has heroically IMO been taking a pro-children stance on this since the beginning, with a lot of reporting on damage to kids and learning, and also a pro-science stance, with a lot of reporting on the consensus that schools are safe for kids.

Pro science is pro children... all the data shows kids should be in school.

Except not anymore. https://www.wsj.com/articles/europes-schools-are-closing-again-on-concerns-they-spread-covid-19-11610805601

I’m not posting this to say schools shouldn’t open. But can we please stop with the “all the data says” nonsense? Because the data on children and Covid is rapidly changing, most especially with the new strain.

The data on Covid is changing and we should be worried about the new strains.

The data on kids and DL is not changing.

If anything, the new strains and some of this concerning data about spread in schools should be lighting a fire under us to figure out a real solution. Indefinite distant learning is not a real solution. Here are some actual solutions that would actually help us address all of our problems (both mitigating spread as much as humanly possible while also getting children what they need, particularly at the elementary level):

-- Outdoor school. Why is there not a plan in place? We need tents, we need jackets and cold weather gear, we need to change curriculums to accommodate it. We need to rework the school calendar. Why is this not even on the table? It is a obvious solution to several problems at once.

-- Open the damn windows. Same idea. Why did we sit around discussing air purifiers for months on end when we could have opened windows. And I know not all schools in DC have windows that open. Are we changing that? We should.

-- Half day school. This one is harder because it doesn't address the childcare issue for some people. But it solves a bunch of other stuff and the childcare piece could be addressed in other ways. Half day school with open windows, then outdoor aftercare, for instance. If DL has taught me anything, it's that kids really don't need to be sitting in chairs focused on learning for 8 hours a day or even close to it. But in-person instruction during those few hours would be light years more effective than staring at a screen. Light years. And not just from an academic standpoint. I honestly think that interacting with a teacher via a screen has been detrimental to my child's mental well-being.

What else? I am tired of people saying "Well, Covid so we can't do anything." No. Covid, so we need to do something else. We have tried DL. It is not a longterm solution, not for most kids. They deserve better.

Hear hear!!! I don’t understand why we aren’t doing things either. It’s shocking beyond belief. Where is the innovation?