How close are you to your breaking point?

[leebee]

This was shared with me by a friend from school. I like it; it brought me peace, somehow.

I Have Known Unknowns Before
by: Morgan Harper Nichols

Perhaps, even here, I am growing.
When the days are long and I do
not feel as strong and when the
hours go by slower than they ever
have before, and sun is shining and
I am lost indoors, perhaps even here,
I am growing.

I cannot tell you how long this will last
or how long you will be here, but I
can tell you, in the waiting, you are
growing every day. You have learned
to carry on, even when you were afraid.

 

[hopemax]

And again, that's a significant moving of the bar - from not overwhelming medical resources to preventing all community spread, even though preventing community spread is a path without an end unless there is eventually a vaccine or treatment. The fear, before the election, was that letting (making) people vote in person would result in an outbreak that would overwhelm Milwaukee hospitals and lead to widespread deaths. It didn't happen, so now the revised standard is that even 40 cases is too many and we need to prevent all contagion. But if we do that, what is the long term plan? We don't have the public heath resources for a nationwide trace & isolate policy, nor do we have a clear-cut legal basis for forcible isolation of those unwilling to comply with that strategy. So if we set the bar at no community spread, where do we go from here?

I'm not minimizing the severity of the virus, but neither am I willing to exaggerate it. As pandemics go, this one is in many ways the best we could have hoped for - a relatively mild, relatively difficult to spread (compared to something like measles, with an R0 of 12-18 and a case fatality rate in the double-digits). The vast, overwhelming majority of people infected by this virus will recover. We need to take it seriously, of course, but without losing sight of that truth.

If that is what you took from my post, I'm sorry. The goal is not to prevent all community spread. The goal has always, and continues to be to keep it to a manageable level. No moving of the bar. I just don't see how the math works for it to STAY manageable, with that kind of number as a, "starting point in a less restrictive world." That's what I think will change, not the bar height, but how far the virus will "high jump." Especially, as you point out we don't have the infrastructure to track and trace, or the will to prevent. Or do people think that once a virus' spread has been suppressed, it stays that way when restrictions are loosened?

This takes us down the darker road than the one we have been walking so far, not the one with the light at the end of the tunnel. The numbers we have seen so far, will be the best wave because A. The virus had not penetrated and propagated as far as we feared. We can no longer say that, based on the daily numbers. The virus has penetrated to every state in a volume large enough to be "problematic." B. Less restrictions and less seriousness will mean more propagation. We will not be keeping the pace we have achieved and everything that happens as a result, which can still include overwhelmed hospital infrastructure. Especially, if this blood clotting thing is more widespread of a problem than we knew in March. Before we were leaving people at home with pulseox monitors, but if people have to be more closely monitored for clotting issues, that could mean more admissions (but maybe not ICU beds) for "healthier" patients than we did the first time around and/or longer stays.

Some people are aware of the implications of the darker path, and the logic of "it's only 1%." I am not confident that the emotional toll surrounding those we do lose, are incapacitated, and have potentially long lasting ramifications, will be as minimized as people think. Pearl Harbor, D-Day, 9/11 we mark these days, long after they have passed, and nobody tries to diminish them with it was only X% of the population that died those days. I am more confident that the number of people who continue to restrict their lives voluntarily will be enough to continue the economic damage, but not large enough to prevent the virus from doing its...thing.

 

[BlueStarryHat]

AWWW, HOW sweet is that! after being so sick you deserve them ❤
ooh Ativan, lately they are lifesavers
.

Thanks so much for answering my post, Mammasita. You are going through so much in your own life, you're a really good person. I'll pray for your husband...it's hard for those of us with Depression to get through something like this, the total isolation from everyday life. And for someone who doesn't usually get depressed to the point of no interest it's doubly hard because they themselves probably don't understand why everything is so difficult. The things that normally make you happy and occupy your time just don't hold any appeal in a depressive phase, and you don't understand it. I've had Depression most of my life, and even *I* don't get it, so your husband must be really confused and unhappy. And you are taking on his worry as well as your own as his loved one.

And yes, Ativan *is* a lifesaver. One chills me out, two can take me out of an Anxiety attack. Maybe some of it is a placebo effect, but it works. Take care of yourself, Sweetie.

 

[Colleen27]

If that is what you took from my post, I'm sorry. The goal is not to prevent all community spread. The goal has always, and continues to be to keep it to a manageable level. No moving of the bar. I just don't see how the math works for it to STAY manageable, with that kind of number as a, "starting point in a less restrictive world." That's what I think will change, not the bar height, but how far the virus will "high jump." Especially, as you point out we don't have the infrastructure to track and trace, or the will to prevent. Or do people think that once a virus' spread has been suppressed, it stays that way when restrictions are loosened?

This takes us down the darker road than the one we have been walking so far, not the one with the light at the end of the tunnel. The numbers we have seen so far, will be the best wave because A. The virus had not penetrated and propagated as far as we feared. We can no longer say that, based on the daily numbers. The virus has penetrated to every state in a volume large enough to be "problematic." B. Less restrictions and less seriousness will mean more propagation. We will not be keeping the pace we have achieved and everything that happens as a result, which can still include overwhelmed hospital infrastructure. Especially, if this blood clotting thing is more widespread of a problem than we knew in March. Before we were leaving people at home with pulseox monitors, but if people have to be more closely monitored for clotting issues, that could mean more admissions (but maybe not ICU beds) for "healthier" patients than we did the first time around and/or longer stays.

Some people are aware of the implications of the darker path, and the logic of "it's only 1%." I am not confident that the emotional toll surrounding those we do lose, are incapacitated, and have potentially long lasting ramifications, will be as minimized as people think. Pearl Harbor, D-Day, 9/11 we mark these days, long after they have passed, and nobody tries to diminish them with it was only X% of the population that died those days. I am more confident that the number of people who continue to restrict their lives voluntarily will be enough to continue the economic damage, but not large enough to prevent the virus from doing its...thing.

I think the way it stays manageable is slow easing of restrictions with enough time between changes to assess their impact. I don't think any reasonable person is saying just to open everything up. What I'm saying, and what I hear others saying, is that we've flattened the curve to well below our medical capacity so the time is right for some trial balloons to see what we can reopen and what needs to stay closed to keep new cases to a level that our health care system can handle.

We don't have the resources for widespread testing. Neither do we have the resources or the legal foundations for contact tracing and isolation. That isn't going to change.

We don't know that a second wave will be more severe, because we have no idea how far the virus has in fact spread. Nor do we know if it will be worse. That isn't going to change either.

With those doors closed and that uncertainty remaining, all that is left is trial and error: relaxing some restrictions, watching to see how that effects case counts, and adjusting accordingly. And if there's a silver lining to the lack of federal response, it is that the 50 states will act as laboratories, of a sort, as they each take their own unique paths on what to reopen, when, and what to keep closed, so other states will be able to draw on those lessons as they adjust and readjust their approaches.

I don't think the emotional toll of those we lose will be minimized at all. I expect it will be quite the opposite - people who die in remarkable world events tend to be mourned more widely and more intensely than those who die in "ordinary" ways. And I agree that the changes in behavior will have their own, lasting economic and social impact that persists even after the shut down orders are history. But I think there are enough people who need/want to get back to work to support a gradual reopening, and that as we once again come to terms with the reality of disease death that mankind has lived with since the dawn of time, more and more people will become accustomed enough to the risks to resume some degree of normalcy.

At this point, I just don't see what the other alternative is. Sit tight and hope there is a vaccine eventually? Attempt to implement trace & isolate using volunteers and/or software and trust that the courts will sort out the forced-quarantine piece of the plan quickly? Hope that after November (January, really) we start seeing a more effective response?

 

[hopemax]

I think the way it stays manageable is slow easing of restrictions with enough time between changes to assess their impact. I don't think any reasonable person is saying just to open everything up. What I'm saying, and what I hear others saying, is that we've flattened the curve to well below our medical capacity so the time is right for some trial balloons to see what we can reopen and what needs to stay closed to keep new cases to a level that our health care system can handle.

Speaking from the "lockdown" side, I don't think people are asking for nothing to open. I have seen very little push back on health offices and elective procedures, provided PPE supply to hospitals treating COVID-19 patients and testing supplies, is adequate. That's the hangup there. Are you confident the supply is adequate? I have seen limited push back for additional curbside retail, or even really more big box stores being like the grocery store. Places where people can pop in and out of. What I have seen is a lot of push back towards about are the bowling alleys, gyms, theaters, beauty care and shopping malls and the idea of people being in spaces for extended period of time, when we know that these are the conditions under which the virus is likely to spread. I have seen caution that reopening restaurants and retail when they can only serve a fraction of their customers is putting them in a position to fail. But the concern is primarily economic. The virus concerns is how are they really going to manage spacing to ensure safety, and who is going to enforce it, because enforcement so far has been limited. Trial balloons are fine, but I get the impression from the re-open crowd, that you are the exception that sees them as trial balloons.

I do not get the impression from some Governors, nor the people supportive of the protests (leaving out the protesters themselves, as part of the reasonable people), that they are willing to tighten restrictions back up if numbers deteriorate. I don't think that they will accept gradual. Whatever the next steps are, they will be a swift return to normalcy, from this point forward. People want schools and churches back open...yesterday, especially. So I don't see the same silver lining that you do, regarding the state's different paths. I just see future pain and suffering.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

churches back open...yesterday,

That's unfortunately a touchy subject one that can't be delved into on this board much..religious freedom and state's constitutions. What I do think is something that can be heavily suggested without interferring with that is encouraging religious leaders, who many of them already have, to embrace ways to still have worship for their congregation that puts the risk level lower but again it's a touchy subject.

So I don't see the same silver lining that you do, regarding the state's different paths.

I think there's pros and cons to it. Part of what we usually embrace is the different ways people think. A public safety issue that affects us all is one that causes us to balance that out but I don't think it's all necessarily bad to have a differing approach.

 

[ronandannette]

With all of the finger pointing taking place by the elected officials in Washington, DC, why aren't voters more concerned about the lack of planning by long time elected officials? I find it to be insulting how daily news interviews ignore asking these officials why they never thought of planning for an event like this.

Elected officials come and go and unless it's just a stroke of dumb luck, few of them have the expertise needed. Authority yes - actual expertise, no. That's where bureaucrats come in and since most countries have legions of experts permanently employed in executive departments/ministries such as health, justice, national security or whatever, any lack is on them. Insight and planning for something like we're experiencing now transcends any particular Administration - managing a pandemic has been/should have been on-going for literally generations.

I don't mean to make it sound like it was all fun and games. I'm just pointing out that hardship tends to be easier to bear when it is collective, and that coming together - as extended families and as communities - was a big part of what helped people to bear the hardships of WWII.

But there was probably also an element of what people were used to - organ meat was normal for poorer and farming families back then (my grandparents enjoyed liver and tongue their whole lives, much to the disgust of us grandkids!), and with the country just coming out of the depression when the war began, a certain amount of deprivation was probably habit for many as well. What we're being asked to do is a starker break from "normal" for most - going from being constantly on the go to basically being confined to the house.

So much talk about how we come up short compared to previous, more stoic, generations. I've though about it a lot. My beloved mother was born in 1917, and was the hardest-working, most forbearing person I've ever known. She was born in a cabin and lived her whole life in a rural farming community; including spending several years alone with her first-born while her husband was at war. She was resourceful and tireless by necessity; she lived alone on that same farm until the age of 95.

I often feel guilty that I, with all my privilege, am not what she was, but the other side of the coin is this: Her life was hard, but simple. Mine is easier, but infinitely more complex. Previous generations that persevered though war, epidemic and disaster lived much "smaller lives in a smaller world". They didn't have near the number of balls to keep in the air as we do or (for the most part) the same pressures/demands, expectations and broad accountabilities. God bless and keep them - they may well have been the Greatest Generation, but their situations and ours are simply not an apples-to-apples comparison.

 

[Colleen27]

Speaking from the "lockdown" side, I don't think people are asking for nothing to open. I have seen very little push back on health offices and elective procedures, provided PPE supply to hospitals treating COVID-19 patients and testing supplies, is adequate. That's the hangup there. Are you confident the supply is adequate? I have seen limited push back for additional curbside retail, or even really more big box stores being like the grocery store. Places where people can pop in and out of. What I have seen is a lot of push back towards about are the bowling alleys, gyms, theaters, beauty care and shopping malls and the idea of people being in spaces for extended period of time, when we know that these are the conditions under which the virus is likely to spread. I have seen caution that reopening restaurants and retail when they can only serve a fraction of their customers is putting them in a position to fail. But the concern is primarily economic. The virus concerns is how are they really going to manage spacing to ensure safety, and who is going to enforce it, because enforcement so far has been limited. Trial balloons are fine, but I get the impression from the re-open crowd, that you are the exception that sees them as trial balloons.

I do not get the impression from some Governors, nor the people supportive of the protests (leaving out the protesters themselves, as part of the reasonable people), that they are willing to tighten restrictions back up if numbers deteriorate. I don't think that they will accept gradual. Whatever the next steps are, they will be a swift return to normalcy, from this point forward. People want schools and churches back open...yesterday, especially. So I don't see the same silver lining that you do, regarding the state's different paths. I just see future pain and suffering.

I suppose it depends on where you're at and what your social circles are like. I know a lot of people who are upset that our state parks are open, for example, and I have heard a lot of pushback on the retailers that have been allowed to remain open. An opinion piece from a grocery workers union official calling for groceries and other essential stores to ban in-person shopping entirely, for example, got a TON of shares in my social media circles and a lot of entirely uncritical "This is a great idea!" reactions. Many of my friends are upset that big stores haven't roped off their books and craft supplies and clothing and toys to limit people to only buying groceries and toiletries, most are upset that our governor is among those who declined to close the churches on 1st Amendment grounds, and some even support the idea of Italy or New Zealand level lockdowns where walking down the street is a violation. But I think they're probably a vocal fringe just like the open-everything protesters, and that the majority of the country lies somewhere in the middle in understanding that small steps are the only way back from this.

I think a lot of governors are open to back-and-forth. Mine has gone so far as to say it is likely, citing some of the expert opinions that suggest varying levels of lockdown for years as we deal with this (though she didn't actually put that time frame on it - no politician would, I don't think). We're also being told, at the K-8 school where I'm on the steering committee, to be prepared to have next year partially or fully online, so that doesn't sound like the signals from the bureaucracy are a swift return to normalcy. But I do agree there are some, on both ends, who are very invested in one extreme or the other or who perceive their relection prospects as tied to voters who have embraced the extremes and who aren't going to be open to changing course regardless.

As far as elective medical needs, I think the PPE *supply* is adequate. I think we have a distribution failure that is unlikely to be resolved any time soon, but we really can't talk much about that without getting into territory that is forbidden on the DIS. And I agree that's a problem... but so is people not being able to get needed treatment (and I'm admittedly biased on this because I'm one of them; I had a teledoc consultation with my eye doctor over a relapsing chronic issue I have and he's unwilling to call in the drops that are my standard treatment because I have a history of a bad reaction to them and need monitoring throughout the course of treatment, which can't be provided right now. So all he could do was tell me to avoid activities that strain my eyes, which, during a lockdown, leaves me feeling a bit like that fellow that broke his glasses in the post-apocalyptic library in The Twilight Zone.)

 

[TLSnell1981]

I don't really know. Too many in our family are at higher risk. So, no, as restrictions are eased, we are not going to rush back to gathering together in a hurry. I think for us we need to see a sharp and sustained decline in the number of cases before we feel like we can be together.

If you quarantined and tested negative would you feel safe visiting?

 

[OhMari]

Sort of OT but your kids may want to have a conversation with their child care centers. They need to find out the cleaning policies and procedures, when or if they wear gloves ever and those procedures.

While colds are going to be constant during pre-school years, strep throat and other contagious illnesses shouldn’t be as prevalent as you are suggesting. Ear infections aren’t contagious but some kids get them with every cold and it’s more the age than it is the center.

Anyway, when we had the center we were able to keep down contagious illnesses running through the center by following our health dept’s cleaning procedures to a “T”. It’s a lot of work and constant cleaning but it does help. We used just simple bleach water on everything. It also takes them investing in enough toys and activities that they can be switched out a few times a day to be cleaned. And airing the building out every day.

As for gloves, we used them for changing babies and helping little ones in the bathroom. But one kid=one pair of gloves. And you can’t touch anything with the gloves on that you don’t clean afterwards.

I know sorry OT. 4 different Daycares and it does make you wonder. I myself have gone to the daycare to pick up my grandchildren and on the window doors it would say 2 strep, one pink eye. I picked up my grandson and the daycare worker was rocking one vetry sick little boy. He was sleeping and I made the comment how feverish he looked. The Daycare worker looked up at me and said they called the parents 3 times. I asked my daughter what happens if you can’t get off work to go get your child and she said they give you warnings and eventually you can get kicked out.

 

[hopemax]

At this point, I just don't see what the other alternative is. Sit tight and hope there is a vaccine eventually? Attempt to implement trace & isolate using volunteers and/or software and trust that the courts will sort out the forced-quarantine piece of the plan quickly? Hope that after November (January, really) we start seeing a more effective response?

I just wanted to also say, I think when it comes down to it, you and I are mostly in the same place regarding the question of are we "at the beginning of the end" vs the "end of the beginning." And then trying to fit around our county's "idiosyncrasies" into what should and will happen.

We both know the end game is immunity or vaccine, and which one is more likely. I am also sure we both have a good estimate on how long it will take for that end game to arrive, either one. On another Disney forum, I mention that there is no short cut. I've also have started referring to the re-opening steps as "boarding groups." We can't send everyone to the infection queue at once, we have to do it slowly and deliberately, and hopefully when we get to the remainder of the vulnerable population, option 2 is a reality and we've learned a lot more about effective treatment protocols along the way. I expect elementary schools to get earlier boarding group than perhaps most expect. Because it solves some of our serious problems, when younger kids can be in school, and have gone through the process of immunity. But that requires a more restrictive environment, as they will need to stay away from the vulnerable. Parents shouldn't be in the habit of going to restaurants and gyms, and a low level of active infections before we intentionally raise them, which sending the kids back to school would do.

But the emotional pull, that we are at the "beginning of the end" is so strong. This would be so much easier, if that were true. You mention "the response" in November and January. There are many who can't even wrap their heads around the idea that this will BE an issue in November or January. IMO, this is an unfortunately large group, and we are doing a huge disservice to them by having our politicians and health officials walk the line of presenting the reality of our situation and indulging the needs of our President. I think the cautious states are having to be less cautious then they want, because they need to secure funding and supplies. So what will happen is that people, will see their actions and those of even less cautious states, and it will give them a the false sense of the timeline, and ultimately their safety.

I'm afraid of taking this thread too far off the topic of breaking points than I already have, but I don't think this path is because of trial balloons, but for other reasons that are ultimately going to do nothing to help people move away from their breaking point.

 

[luvsJack]

I know sorry OT. 4 different Daycares and it does make you wonder. I myself have gone to the daycare to pick up my grandchildren and on the window doors it would say 2 strep, one pink eye. I picked up my grandson and the daycare worker was rocking one vetry sick little boy. He was sleeping and I made the comment how feverish he looked. The Daycare worker looked up at me and said they called the parents 3 times. I asked my daughter what happens if you can’t get off work to go get your child and she said they give you warnings and eventually you can get kicked out.

Oh yeah, that part too. And parents sometimes can’t come get them but there are always the few that flat out just won’t. Frustrating! I always felt so bad for those that really couldn’t leave work easily but those that just wouldn’t come get their sick baby infuriated me.

We did try to keep extra scrub tops on site for when someone had to hold or rock a sick child. Honestly that is probably one of the quickest ways for things to spread. It is a constant battle.

 

[Flight]

Elected officials come and go and unless it's just a stroke of dumb luck, few of them have the expertise needed. Authority yes - actual expertise, no. That's where bureaucrats come in and since most countries have legions of experts permanently employed in executive departments/ministries such as health, justice, national security or whatever, any lack is on them. Insight and planning for something like we're experiencing now transcends any particular Administration - managing a pandemic has been/should have been on-going for literally generations.

So much talk about how we come up short compared to previous, more stoic, generations. I've though about it a lot. My beloved mother was born in 1917, and was the hardest-working, most forbearing person I've ever known. She was born in a cabin and lived her whole life in a rural farming community; including spending several years alone with her first-born while her husband was at war. She was resourceful and tireless by necessity; she lived alone on that same farm until the age of 95.

I often feel guilty that I, with all my privilege, am not what she was, but the other side of the coin is this: Her life was hard, but simple. Mine is easier, but infinitely more complex. Previous generations that persevered though war, epidemic and disaster lived much "smaller lives in a smaller world". They didn't have near the number of balls to keep in the air as we do or (for the most part) the same pressures/demands, expectations and broad accountabilities. God bless and keep them - they may well have been the Greatest Generation, but their situations and ours are simply not an apples-to-apples comparison.

Your post was measured, thoughtful, and something we should all take time to consider.

Thank you.

 

[Heather07438]

I think the way it stays manageable is slow easing of restrictions with enough time between changes to assess their impact. I don't think any reasonable person is saying just to open everything up. What I'm saying, and what I hear others saying, is that we've flattened the curve to well below our medical capacity so the time is right for some trial balloons to see what we can reopen and what needs to stay closed to keep new cases to a level that our health care system can handle.

We don't have the resources for widespread testing. Neither do we have the resources or the legal foundations for contact tracing and isolation. That isn't going to change.

We don't know that a second wave will be more severe, because we have no idea how far the virus has in fact spread. Nor do we know if it will be worse. That isn't going to change either.

With those doors closed and that uncertainty remaining, all that is left is trial and error: relaxing some restrictions, watching to see how that effects case counts, and adjusting accordingly. And if there's a silver lining to the lack of federal response, it is that the 50 states will act as laboratories, of a sort, as they each take their own unique paths on what to reopen, when, and what to keep closed, so other states will be able to draw on those lessons as they adjust and readjust their approaches.

I don't think the emotional toll of those we lose will be minimized at all. I expect it will be quite the opposite - people who die in remarkable world events tend to be mourned more widely and more intensely than those who die in "ordinary" ways. And I agree that the changes in behavior will have their own, lasting economic and social impact that persists even after the shut down orders are history. But I think there are enough people who need/want to get back to work to support a gradual reopening, and that as we once again come to terms with the reality of disease death that mankind has lived with since the dawn of time, more and more people will become accustomed enough to the risks to resume some degree of normalcy.

At this point, I just don't see what the other alternative is. Sit tight and hope there is a vaccine eventually? Attempt to implement trace & isolate using volunteers and/or software and trust that the courts will sort out the forced-quarantine piece of the plan quickly? Hope that after November (January, really) we start seeing a more effective response?

I agree with trial balloons but not confident with all the approaches. Some don't seem laid out methodically. We need to move forward. What's the best way to do that?

If it continues to prove true that NYC is already 25% exposed, it's great news for all. That puts our ability to manage in better perspective, both individually and publicly. Regionally the antibody results suggest:

• 24.7% positive in New York City
• 15.1% positive in Westchester/Rockland
• 14.4% positive on Long Island
• 3.2% positive in the rest of the state

On one hand, it's very possible we're more resilient than what was feared. The finer details around antibody testing, immunity and side effects will bring clarity to that. On the other hand, most areas haven't really had significant exposure. Either way we still need caution to proceed. Take advantage of all the work it took to bring the cases back down.

My understanding is tracing and isolation will be on a voluntary basis in my state. The majority of people will likely participate and provide enough data to inform decisions and warn against potential hotspots. Isolation wards are being considered to give the option of recuperating while lessening exposure to family and neighbors. I don't know exactly how that is being planned or resourced, but not by force.

These could help us return the highest amount of normality by keeping a maintainable pace of spread. They also give the local economy a better fighting chance because if people see most areas under control and know about the hotspots, the more people will be willing to go about life somewhat normally again. Businesses need that confidence to survive the long game.

And we may have much better treatment capability as time goes. Average outcomes could be significantly different between now and October.

 

[cabanafrau]

I don't mean to make it sound like it was all fun and games. I'm just pointing out that hardship tends to be easier to bear when it is collective, and that coming together - as extended families and as communities - was a big part of what helped people to bear the hardships of WWII.

But there was probably also an element of what people were used to - organ meat was normal for poorer and farming families back then (my grandparents enjoyed liver and tongue their whole lives, much to the disgust of us grandkids!), and with the country just coming out of the depression when the war began, a certain amount of deprivation was probably habit for many as well. What we're being asked to do is a starker break from "normal" for most - going from being constantly on the go to basically being confined to the house.

It's definitely not a walk in the park. But it's nowhere near years long, we're not dealing with a great many households separated from a son, husband, father, brother by the threat of battle far away. We have many options of being able to communicate with loved ones we cannot be with.

Is the isolation aspect of today's situation difficult? Absolutely. I know of more than one family who've gone through the loss of a family member and are mourning that family member with support only from a distance, none of the normal rituals. I'm aware people have given birth without their spouse and been unable to share their new bundle with loved ones in person. Many of the sick who have died did so without family at their side. All of this stuff is rough, incredibly so.

Where I think the real disconnect in today's situation from WWII and other crises is starkly and drastically different is that there is not a prevailing sense of everyone being in this together. People are comfortable to trumpet their unwillingness to cooperate with efforts to stem the tide and aren't at all shamed to suggest who is expendable;, that political gamesmanship is appropriate and should be celebrated; and that their lives are going on undisturbed so there's no reason in the world they should hesitate to indulge any and every whim, hopefully sticking their thumb in as many eyes as possible along the way. In WWII many of those isolated from family were still part of their community and felt a shared sense of purpose and sacrifice. Today it's in large part superficial.

 

[Owlpost23]

I know sorry OT. 4 different Daycares and it does make you wonder. I myself have gone to the daycare to pick up my grandchildren and on the window doors it would say 2 strep, one pink eye. I picked up my grandson and the daycare worker was rocking one vetry sick little boy. He was sleeping and I made the comment how feverish he looked. The Daycare worker looked up at me and said they called the parents 3 times. I asked my daughter what happens if you can’t get off work to go get your child and she said they give you warnings and eventually you can get kicked out.

And that is the fault of the PARENTS.I work in a center,and you wouldn't believe the number of children who come in ill.The parents pooh pooh it,saying "they were up late",or we were at Grandma's yesterday.Many of them won't take a child to the Dr. when needed.The women I work with have dealt with hundreds of children over the years.If a child is fussy and digging in their ears,it's a good indication of an ear infection.Parents dose kids with Tylenol,and you can tell when it wears off.These parents' priorities are WORK and heaven forbid their children get in the way of that.It's really a shame.

 

[ronandannette]

And that is the fault of the PARENTS.I work in a center,and you wouldn't believe the number of children who come in ill.The parents pooh pooh it,saying "they were up late",or we were at Grandma's yesterday.Many of them won't take a child to the Dr. when needed.The women I work with have dealt with hundreds of children over the years.If a child is fussy and digging in their ears,it's a good indication of an ear infection.Parents dose kids with Tylenol,and you can tell when it wears off.These parents' priorities are WORK and heaven forbid their children get in the way of that.It's really a shame.

That's a unduly harsh way of characterizing what is a complex set of conflicting priorities for some parents. Lots of people - and I mean lots - have employment situations that don't allow flexibility for the routine needs of a family and no safety-net. Also many that to whom losing paid hours means being unable to cover basic expenses. I'm sure many mothers that dose their sick babies with Tylenol and drop them off, cry all the way to work and feel worried, guilty and shameful at having done so. When the alternative is job-loss, what would you do? I don't believe for a minute that anybody would choose to put their kids in peril.

 

[cabanafrau]

This was shared with me by a friend from school. I like it; it brought me peace, somehow.

I Have Known Unknowns Before
by: Morgan Harper Nichols

Perhaps, even here, I am growing.
When the days are long and I do
not feel as strong and when the
hours go by slower than they ever
have before, and sun is shining and
I am lost indoors, perhaps even here,
I am growing.

I cannot tell you how long this will last
or how long you will be here, but I
can tell you, in the waiting, you are
growing every day. You have learned
to carry on, even when you were afraid.

This is lovely. Thank you for sharing.

 

[cabanafrau]

That's a unduly harsh way of characterizing what is a complex set of conflicting priorities for some parents. Lots of people - and I mean lots - have employment situations that don't allow flexibility for the routine needs of a family and no safety-net. Also many that to whom losing paid hours means being unable to cover basic expenses. I'm sure many mothers that dose their sick babies with Tylenol and drop them off, cry all the way to work and feel worried, guilty and shameful at having done so. When the alternative is job-loss, what would you do? I don't believe for a minute that anybody would choose to put their kids in peril.

If that isn't a modern day example of being caught between the Scylla and Charybdis I don't know what is.

 

[Owlpost23]

That's a unduly harsh way of characterizing what is a complex set of conflicting priorities for some parents. Lots of people - and I mean lots - have employment situations that don't allow flexibility for the routine needs of a family and no safety-net. Also many that to whom losing paid hours means being unable to cover basic expenses. I'm sure many mothers that dose their sick babies with Tylenol and drop them off, cry all the way to work and feel worried, guilty and shameful at having done so. When the alternative is job-loss, what would you do? I don't believe for a minute that anybody would choose to put their kids in peril.

Not harsh at all,just reality.I am talking about the center I am at.We have parents who both work from home have a nanny AND still bring their children for a full day.We have children who are there the entire time we're open and that's 6:30-6:30-longer than the staff is there.This is a very well off community.Parents that have the summer off have their children in camp full time.I can tell you that the second we open back up,we'll be full.Just the way it is here.