This was a false choice that was put on people.
Different areas handled it differently. In my area they were very sensitive to the community needs outside of education. They offered childcare and hot meals this whole time. They also tried to reach out to fill any other needs. When they first closed the schools they said 30-40% of their support staff (bus drivers, janitors, meal prep) were over 65 or had comorbidities. So they couldn’t operate the school.
This is why so many of us have trust issues with the government. Because at some level we believe that the government officials who are supposed to be there helping the public don’t care about the public and see the public as a nuisance.
And in some cases we’re right.
I reserve the right to look at the data that the CDC is basing that judgement on. I have a background in clinical study design and implementation. The dates from the data they are citing comes from before the UK and SA variants were widely spread in the US.
So, again, with all due respect, it’s too fucking soon.
Right. If they were paying people to stay home, especially people with families, then it would be easy to take the side of the teachers on this. As things are, everything sucks in this situation for most communities in the US.
I know anti-vaxxers who say the exact same thing (pretty much verbatim) regarding vaccine safety. Just sayin’.
Who provided the childcare? Were they less at risk than teachers would have been?
They are trying to apply it to vaccines in general. That’s bullshit. The data proves vaccine efficacy.
There are miles of difference between what I’m saying compared to anti-vaxxers, and it’s shitty to make that comparison.
Just sayin’.
Officials then buried actual evidence and facts to convince people that there was no risk - and people put themselves at risk based on lies. As a result, we’ve had a lot of unnecessary deaths and cases that could’ve been prevented. Officials now are providing evidence and facts - and people are deciding not to put themselves at risk. That’s not the same thing. People have agency, and should be allowed to decide for themselves.
ETA: As long as they are not putting others at risk.
What you are saying, as far as I can tell, is that your own personal reading of the data brings you to a different conclusion than the CDC, Dr Fauchi, and majority of epidemiologists who have weighed in on the subject. That’s fine, as far as it goes, and like I said you may be right. But even if you are, you’re still saying that your own personal judgement is superior to that of experts in the field.
When did this turn into a discussion about taking people’s body autonomy away from them? Everyone should have a choice to decide for themselves. We’re not a bunch of automatons who have to do whatever “experts” say. For every group of experts, a determined person could find others who say the complete opposite. You found some who think they have the answer for opening schools.
You do you. I’ll make decisions for my family based on the experts who are still learning about this, and agree they don’t have all the answers yet.
I don’t know the details but it was the school district. I know a lot of local daycares shifted staff to support first responders that needed childcare (most people had already voluntarily pulled their kids). Daycares also opened months ago and when the facility did close they made it clear there were options if needed. I’m not sure the relative risk matters because it was a much smaller pool of people—testing, spacing people out, staffing, and other measures would be much easier than reopening all of the schools.
That seems like a disingenuous characterization of the situation. I wasn’t cherry picking any sources here. I pointed out that all the experts and entities that goverment agencies would normally be expected to look to for guidance (and specifically the CDC and Dr. Fauchi) are putting forward a clear message that they think it’s safe to open the schools. And I asked a straightforward, simple question: if they aren’t the right ones to make this call, who, specifically, would be?
I never said a damn thing about forcing either teachers or students back into schools if they didn’t personally want to go, so accusing me of wanting to take away people’s agency is weird. It’s perfectly possible to open schools without requiring everyone to return to in person schooling right away.
That part, right there.
Agreed. Most of us have never seen this so obviously demonstrated as it was during the past year. That is why people are hesitant, even with leaders who are more trusted by the public. When we know those telling us something is safe cannot be 100% sure, and that they’ve been mistaken in the past, people consider that.
I repeat - people should decide for themselves. Districts around the country have made the call to reopen, yet teachers and parents disagreed and stayed home. There is no magical, all-knowing expert for me to recommend to you. We must all consider that those giving guidance would not be the ones to bear the risk.
Let’s say they’re certain in 90% of the situations described, if everyone follows the guidelines, there won’t be any problems. Those of us who’ve seen illness and death among those who’ve already followed the guidelines have a different response. They don’t want to part of the unlucky 10%. What is an expert going to do or say if they’re wrong? Apologize? That won’t cure the sick, or bring back the dead. So, people can do as they like, but I understand if they don’t want to take the risk. In the end, each one of us must choose the level of risk we are willing to accept, and whose advice or guidance we decide to follow. We are the ones who bear the consequences.
They are basing that judgement on data, which is great. That data happens to be out-of-date for the situation. If it was a question of my child going to in-person school, or myself returning to in-person classrooms as a teacher, I would ask them, point blank, if that call is based on data for the new variants. And I don’t think it could possibly be the case; it barely scraped the edge of when those variants were around.
To quote their own guidance document for reopening schools from Feb 12:
This operational strategy presents recommendations based on the best-available evidence at the time of release. As science and data on COVID-19 continue to evolve, guidance and recommendations will be updated to reflect new evidence.
Also:
Hispanic ethnicity and Black race are associated with increased risks for hospitalization and ICU admission among children.
And finally, their own guidance says that the data only shows that schools haven’t been the source of outbreaks of COVID, but that there is evidence that spread through schools is at the same rate as in the community at large. When, right now, they aren’t in the community. They are doing remote school in many places. And the entire premise is based on children 10 and under following strict COVID protocols. Obviously, they didn’t talk to teachers about that. Not gonna happen.
I’m going to reiterate the two points that are absolutely key:
I’ve already seen several people (willfully?) misconstruing that comment to mean that the school board thinks of teachers as “babysitters” when it’s clear from the context that she thinks it’s the parents who treat teachers like a free babysitting service.
Individual people do have the right to decide for themselves based on whatever criteria or evidence they want. But I believe that when it comes to a government entity such as a school district making an important and consequential decision about reopening, they have no choice but to rely on expert guidance from agencies such as the CDC whose job it is to make public health policy. Or if they don’t, the school district should at least have a clear answer when asked what guidance they do base their decisions on.
No, it’s really based much more on real, epidemiological data from what’s actually been going on in the many, many schools that have already reopened around the country and the world. At this point in time the guidance is based far more on data than on abstract theory. Obviously no school will be able to maintain perfect mitigation efforts, and none of the schools that are already open have maintained perfect mask wearing, etc. The epidemiologists are convinced by the real-world data that the opening guidelines are still defensible.
Besides, this discussion thread is about a school district in California. Outdoor schooling should be an option most of the time, which is orders of magnitude safer than indoor settings.
We will see how it plays out. As far as I’m concerned, opening schools before all teachers and students are vaccinated will be killing teachers. And I take offense to that.
California is a big state. What works in LA is very different than in other parts of the state. Mornings in Shasta are still in the low 40s. Pretty chilly for kindergarteners.
