Do you think states should open back up?

[Bootsie]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

And again, it must be stated that this virus doesn't just target senior citizens. And that those that don't die can have lifelong, serious complications. 

Going to be hard for those college kids to go to class if their teachers are in the hospital, on medical leave, or dead. 

Realistically, how many more of their teachers are going to be in the hospital, on medical leave, or dead if they go back to college this summer or fall relative to delaying until next year?  And, if they don't have much faith that a vaccine is on the horizon and think it is a matter of time before they get the virus, the consequence of lifelong serious complications are really no different if they have the virus next week or if things are slowed down and they have the virus in two months or six months.  

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

Realistically, how many more of their teachers are going to be in the hospital, on medical leave, or dead if they go back to college this summer or fall relative to delaying until next year?  And, if they don't have much faith that a vaccine is on the horizon and think it is a matter of time before they get the virus, the consequence of lifelong serious complications are really no different if they have the virus next week or if things are slowed down and they have the virus in two months or six months.  

Well, if we wait until things like masks, hand sanitizer, cleaning supplies, etc are fully in stock, that might sure help. 

[Bootsie]

6 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

Well, if we wait until things like masks, hand sanitizer, cleaning supplies, etc are fully in stock, that might sure help. 

Yes, we need to be able to clean thoroughly, and for more reasons than COVID-19  If we can't clean properly, we run the risk of many other health problems.  

I do think it is important that we listen to some of these young people and hear where they are coming from.  Some feel that they are accused of not caring about their grandparents whenever they voice concerns about where this is headed.  They are not all just selfish brats who want to party; some have really educated themselves (as much as possible given how little we know about COVID-19) and do ask questions like, if flattening the curve is about spreading the disease out over time, and I am in a state that is not anywhere near flooding the hospitals, isn't it just a matter of time before I probably get COVID-19 anyway, so does it make sense for me to take such extreme measures to decrease the probability I get it right now?  

Some of the young males do not see the logic of how to apply for financial aid they are required to register for a draft and could be called be called on to kill or to risk their life for the good of others in the country, but now that college education is being impacted because of a risk to others.  Some are studying chemistry, nursing, engineering--and they are eager to develop their knowledge and skills to help society.  Some do not like the fact that when they work they are forced to pay taxes that are used to buy bombs and other deadly weapons, but then the same government now says they can't work because some people may die.  They do not see the logic of a state government that will not allow them to go to school for fear someone might die because "every life is valuable", but that same government intentionally puts valuable life to death with the death penalty.   Some are seeing a bleak future where their generation will have to pay high taxes because of the huge government deficit, while at the same time facing week job prospects.

I do not necessarily agree with all of their opinions, but I do wish we would listen to their ideas and concerns more.  They are experiencing a great deal of grief and uncertainty in their lives.  We have had one within our university community commit suicide this week.  There are costs of keeping so many things locked down.

 

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Storygirl said:

I am an extreme introvert, and I'm not on social media platforms other than WTM. I'm guessing there are accusations of people being "afraid" flying around that I'm not seeing, and that is what people are reacting to.

But I'm not afraid to state that I am afraid.

I'm afraid that my mom in the nursing home that has positive cases is going to suffer and die.
I'm afraid that my father (both are in their 80s), who still works and is out and about daily, will contract it and die.
I'm afraid of contracting it myself, because I have some risk factors. And I don't want to end up in the hospital and/or end up very sick or dead, not only because I would like to have more life to live, but also because of the horrible impact that would have on my loved ones.
I'm afraid of the possibility of my husband and children becoming ill.
I'm especially afraid today -- even though we have taken many precautions --  because we have workers in our home, doing important repairs.

These are not irrational fears. I won't be shamed about feeling afraid or saying that I feel afraid. This idea that we can't admit to being afraid is mind-boggling to me, so I think it must be a reaction to comments that I am (thankfully) not seeing on social media. But I won't buy into it.

 

Those are absolutely not irrational fears, I agree. And I am afraid of those things, too, and also the scenario of both dh and myself getting very sick/hospitalized at the same time...I don’t know how that works out. 

The “afraid” accusation that annoys me is this false dichotomy that one is either seizing their liberties, laughing in the face of danger and acting like a facemask is tyranny or else they are cowering in their house, afraid to go get the mail and therefore being (in the accuser’s view) a useless member of society. 

I, personally, am not afraid of going to the store; I just don’t see any reason to take an unnecessary risk for something unimportant like cookies. 

I actually really like the facemask rule and feel it should be embraced by people who want to re-open. It is logical. 

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, Bootsie said:

Yes, we need to be able to clean thoroughly, and for more reasons than COVID-19  If we can't clean properly, we run the risk of many other health problems.  

I do think it is important that we listen to some of these young people and hear where they are coming from.  Some feel that they are accused of not caring about their grandparents whenever they voice concerns about where this is headed.  They are not all just selfish brats who want to party; some have really educated themselves (as much as possible given how little we know about COVID-19) and do ask questions like, if flattening the curve is about spreading the disease out over time, and I am in a state that is not anywhere near flooding the hospitals, isn't it just a matter of time before I probably get COVID-19 anyway, so does it make sense for me to take such extreme measures to decrease the probability I get it right now?  

Some of the young males do not see the logic of how to apply for financial aid they are required to register for a draft and could be called be called on to kill or to risk their life for the good of others in the country, but now that college education is being impacted because of a risk to others.  Some are studying chemistry, nursing, engineering--and they are eager to develop their knowledge and skills to help society.  Some do not like the fact that when they work they are forced to pay taxes that are used to buy bombs and other deadly weapons, but then the same government now says they can't work because some people may die.  They do not see the logic of a state government that will not allow them to go to school for fear someone might die because "every life is valuable", but that same government intentionally puts valuable life to death with the death penalty.   Some are seeing a bleak future where their generation will have to pay high taxes because of the huge government deficit, while at the same time facing week job prospects.

I do not necessarily agree with all of their opinions, but I do wish we would listen to their ideas and concerns more.  They are experiencing a great deal of grief and uncertainty in their lives.  We have had one within our university community commit suicide this week.  There are costs of keeping so many things locked down.

 

But it isn't just about "every life has value" it is also about the sheer logistics of losing instructors to illness, of the hit the economy would take if large numbers are ill/hospitalized/dead, etc. Not to mention, despite the narrative, young people DO get sick, and this could spread through the dorms like wildfire, likey meaning large numbers of students would be missing class anyway. 

As many have said, this is not an either/or scenario. What helps the economy is to keep people healthy and out of the hospital as much as we can. And yes, they are asked to sacrifice, but not MORE than others. It isn't like only young people are sacrificing, it is everyone. And although we have a draft in theory, we all know that isn't going to happen. This virus spreading through the dorms and classrooms, leaving many students unable to attend classes anyway, and professors sick or hospitalized or dead, is likely to happen. 

[Bootsie]

15 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

But it isn't just about "every life has value" it is also about the sheer logistics of losing instructors to illness, of the hit the economy would take if large numbers are ill/hospitalized/dead, etc. Not to mention, despite the narrative, young people DO get sick, and this could spread through the dorms like wildfire, likey meaning large numbers of students would be missing class anyway. 

As many have said, this is not an either/or scenario. What helps the economy is to keep people healthy and out of the hospital as much as we can. And yes, they are asked to sacrifice, but not MORE than others. It isn't like only young people are sacrificing, it is everyone. And although we have a draft in theory, we all know that isn't going to happen. This virus spreading through the dorms and classrooms, leaving many students unable to attend classes anyway, and professors sick or hospitalized or dead, is likely to happen. 

I think young people are probably sacrificing more.  They are putting training and careers on hold.  They have had to move out of their familiar surroundings.  They have had to move home and share space with other family members--often with many of their own items--books, clothing, games, hobbies in a dorm room some where across the country, and they don't know when they will get those items.  They are grieving missed opportunities of internships.  They are missing their friends, their support networks, their boyfriend or girlfriend, their independence, their activities in which they get exercise   I think their day-to-day life has been much more disrupted.  On top of that, they see a bleak future for their careers and a mounting national debt that they will sacrifice and bear the burden of MORE than older people.  

But, I think for them it goes beyond feeling like they are sacrificing.  Young people have a lot of energy and are at some of their peak years of productivity, physically and mentally.  Many are eager to use that talent and energy, not for selfish reasons.  One of these bright young minds could be a key to finding a treatment to COVID-19 or many other diseases.  Some of these young people will be our nurses in a year.  

From a practical standpoint, how would things really need to progress for there to be true logistically issues from a number of professors ill or dead?  If every professor in the US got this at the same time, would 20% be hospitalized?  Would 10% die?  Then, in a few months would you have 70-80% returning to the classroom?  Without a vaccine, are you just flattening the curve so that every professor gets it but spread out over the next 2 years?  So, then you have 70-80% returning to the classroom in two years?  We would have to have about 4 times as many deaths from COVID-19 this year to reach, on a per capita basis, the same level of deaths in the US from the pandemic of 1958 or the pandemic of 1968.  Asking college students from those years if they remember any disruption because of the logistics of professor being hospitalized or dying, they don't seem to remember any.  Many epidemiological studies have pointed to some, but minor, benefits to closing schools, versus taking other steps to reduce spread.  So, I think it is reasonable from them to be asking if the added benefit is worth the disruption.

 

[SKL]

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

But it isn't just about "every life has value" it is also about the sheer logistics of losing instructors to illness, of the hit the economy would take if large numbers are ill/hospitalized/dead, etc. Not to mention, despite the narrative, young people DO get sick, and this could spread through the dorms like wildfire, likey meaning large numbers of students would be missing class anyway. 

As many have said, this is not an either/or scenario. What helps the economy is to keep people healthy and out of the hospital as much as we can. And yes, they are asked to sacrifice, but not MORE than others. It isn't like only young people are sacrificing, it is everyone. And although we have a draft in theory, we all know that isn't going to happen. This virus spreading through the dorms and classrooms, leaving many students unable to attend classes anyway, and professors sick or hospitalized or dead, is likely to happen. 

Aren't pretty much all schools closed until at least August now?  If young, healthy people got the disease now, likely they would not be contagious come August.  Actually they would probably be more likely to spread it next fall if the do NOT get the disease now.  (Yes, I know we aren't 100% sure about lasting immunity, but it's not unreasonable to assume there is immunity for most -= that's how most diseases work.)

[ktgrok]

4 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I think young people are probably sacrificing more.  They are putting training and careers on hold.  They have had to move out of their familiar surroundings.  They have had to move home and share space with other family members--often with many of their own items--books, clothing, games, hobbies in a dorm room some where across the country, and they don't know when they will get those items.  They are grieving missed opportunities of internships.  They are missing their friends, their support networks, their boyfriend or girlfriend, their independence, their activities in which they get exercise   I think their day-to-day life has been much more disrupted.  On top of that, they see a bleak future for their careers and a mounting national debt that they will sacrifice and bear the burden of MORE than older people.  

But, I think for them it goes beyond feeling like they are sacrificing.  Young people have a lot of energy and are at some of their peak years of productivity, physically and mentally.  Many are eager to use that talent and energy, not for selfish reasons.  One of these bright young minds could be a key to finding a treatment to COVID-19 or many other diseases.  Some of these young people will be our nurses in a year.  

From a practical standpoint, how would things really need to progress for there to be true logistically issues from a number of professors ill or dead?  If every professor in the US got this at the same time, would 20% be hospitalized?  Would 10% die?  Then, in a few months would you have 70-80% returning to the classroom?  Without a vaccine, are you just flattening the curve so that every professor gets it but spread out over the next 2 years?  So, then you have 70-80% returning to the classroom in two years?  We would have to have about 4 times as many deaths from COVID-19 this year to reach, on a per capita basis, the same level of deaths in the US from the pandemic of 1958 or the pandemic of 1968.  Asking college students from those years if they remember any disruption because of the logistics of professor being hospitalized or dying, they don't seem to remember any.  Many epidemiological studies have pointed to some, but minor, benefits to closing schools, versus taking other steps to reduce spread.  So, I think it is reasonable from them to be asking if the added benefit is worth the disruption.

 

Are those past college age not missing their friends, boyfrinds, girlfriends, activities, exercise, etc? All while trying to support those younger people, perhaps with limited or no income of their own but with bills to pay and debts to deal with? 

And I'm sorry, when I see my friends who are in their 40s looking at losing the small businesses they have invested all their time and money into, and having to fire employees, and worried about keeping their family fed and safe and figuring out how on earth they will pay for health care, I have little to no sympathy for a 20 yr old who is upset they left their favorite books, clothing and games in the dorm room. I mean, seriously? 

It sucks for young people. I'm not denying that. But it sucks for everyone! 

Waiting to re-open classrooms and dorms until we have a better understanding of transmission and have the resources to keep things as safe as possible (my business owning friends are having trouble just sourcing disinfectant supplies), yeah, that's not fun. But it's not forever. 

 

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, SKL said:

Aren't pretty much all schools closed until at least August now?  If young, healthy people got the disease now, likely they would not be contagious come August.  Actually they would probably be more likely to spread it next fall if the do NOT get the disease now.  (Yes, I know we aren't 100% sure about lasting immunity, but it's not unreasonable to assume there is immunity for most -= that's how most diseases work.)

We need to be clear that we don't understand fully yet what the impacts of Covid19 are on "young, healthy people". We know they probably survive. We dont' know what long term damage they may have. And given that we know one of the signs being seen in Covid patients are elevated cardiac enzymes, there are cardiologists worried that those that recover may be looking at cardiomyopathy years from now. We don't have enough hearts for the people that need transplants now, let alone if those numbers significantly increase due to something like that. 

A few months from now we will likely know more. Right now, if you are not bad enough to be hospitalized you aren't getting an ECG, or having your cardiac enzymes checked. Knowing if mild cases are also having elevated cardiac and kidney enzymes, and the damage associated with those, seems important to know before we just assume it isn't a big deal for most young people. 

[Bootsie]

14 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Are those past college age not missing their friends, boyfrinds, girlfriends, activities, exercise, etc? All while trying to support those younger people, perhaps with limited or no income of their own but with bills to pay and debts to deal with? 

And I'm sorry, when I see my friends who are in their 40s looking at losing the small businesses they have invested all their time and money into, and having to fire employees, and worried about keeping their family fed and safe and figuring out how on earth they will pay for health care, I have little to no sympathy for a 20 yr old who is upset they left their favorite books, clothing and games in the dorm room. I mean, seriously? 

It sucks for young people. I'm not denying that. But it sucks for everyone! 

Waiting to re-open classrooms and dorms until we have a better understanding of transmission and have the resources to keep things as safe as possible (my business owning friends are having trouble just sourcing disinfectant supplies), yeah, that's not fun. But it's not forever. 

 

Yes, some past college age are missing friends and activities.  But, most adults that I know, are living with people that they have chosen to live with.  It is much different to be living with my husband in the house I have chosen, surrounded by things I have chosen than it would be to have to suddenly be moving in with my mom, sharing a room with my sister, having my mom tell me it is time to get up or time to be quiet, etc.  Some of the young people have just rented apartments, looking forward to their first job that was supposed to start next month, but now have now income, bills to pay, and student loans.  Some are just starting graduate programs in new places and are isolated alone in apartments where they do not know any of their professors or classmates.  

It is not simply being upset that they left their favorite books, clothing, and games.  The school books are in their dorms. Their weather-appropriate clothing is in their dorms.   They have no idea when they will be able to get to these items.  For some even their computers are in their dorms. They have been moving into adulthood and building their own support networks that no longer exist.  

[SKL]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

We need to be clear that we don't understand fully yet what the impacts of Covid19 are on "young, healthy people". We know they probably survive. We dont' know what long term damage they may have. And given that we know one of the signs being seen in Covid patients are elevated cardiac enzymes, there are cardiologists worried that those that recover may be looking at cardiomyopathy years from now. We don't have enough hearts for the people that need transplants now, let alone if those numbers significantly increase due to something like that. 

A few months from now we will likely know more. Right now, if you are not bad enough to be hospitalized you aren't getting an ECG, or having your cardiac enzymes checked. Knowing if mild cases are also having elevated cardiac and kidney enzymes, and the damage associated with those, seems important to know before we just assume it isn't a big deal for most young people. 

When you argue like this, it seems like you don't think most people are going to get this disease one way or the other.  The question is when, not if, for people who are ever going to be circulating in public.

[regentrude]

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

Are those past college age not missing their friends, boyfrinds, girlfriends, activities, exercise, etc? All while trying to support those younger people, perhaps with limited or no income of their own but with bills to pay and debts to deal with? 

And I'm sorry, when I see my friends who are in their 40s looking at losing the small businesses they have invested all their time and money into, and having to fire employees, and worried about keeping their family fed and safe and figuring out how on earth they will pay for health care, I have little to no sympathy for a 20 yr old who is upset they left their favorite books, clothing and games in the dorm room. I mean, seriously? 

I have a lot of sympathy for my students. 

It's not just that they left their belongings in their dorm room. That was their home. They got kicked out of their home, with the clothes they had on their back and a little day pack, to move back home with their little siblings or to sleep on the couch. IF they even have space and are welcome at their parents' home. They left their lives and their support networks. Their lovers. (I have done long distance relationship and it sucks so bad)

They left the tools behind they need to do their work, which is their college studies. Many of my students left campus believing it was for a long weekend, and took as much. They don't have their notes or their textbooks, but are expected to do their work. 

You and I, we are still in our own homes, with our husbands and, some of us, kids. We have the things we need to conduct our lives. And we have maybe more perspective.

I have a lot of sympathy for a 20 y/o whose beginning adult life got uprooted, whose education is disrupted, who does not know whether his family will be able to pay for college next year, who had plans for the future like 20 y/olds do and has none of the perspective we, at middle age, may have acquired. 

As I recently posted: suffering is not a competition. Just because it's bad for other people does not negate these kids' struggles.

Edited April 23, 2020 by regentrude

[MEmama]

2 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

It's not fun but it's not forever is what I've been saying to my 16yr old and my 20yr old. 

It's a good reframe to have at hand.

It is. I agree. As long as we with our adult perspective acknowledge that this is HUGE for our teens and young adults, that we understand that to them it probably feels like forever and that’s okay, totally valid. 
Yes, this is experience provides a life lesson in resiliency, but it’s also a huge ask of our young people. It can be both. 
My heart breaks for them every day. 😞 

[regentrude]

16 minutes ago, StellaM said:

It's not fun but it's not forever is what I've been saying to my 16yr old and my 20yr old. 

It's a good reframe to have at hand.

But it only works if you brain isn't telling you convincingly that this is, indeed, forever.

[BeachGal]

On 4/22/2020 at 7:48 AM, Ausmumof3 said:

There’s a couple of other remote possibilities.  One is that it continues mutating to a milder form we can live with.  The other is some set of circumstances external to/outside of human control kick in to destroy or eliminate the virus - maybe temperature or something.

given that immunity to coronaviruses in general seems to be somewhat short term I feel like the first possibility may have already happened in the past with other coronaviruses.  or something like this would have taken us out already.  
 

there was a report today from sky news that Chinese researchers have now identified 33 different strains.

 

A big deletion in one of the genes was discovered in an Arizona strain that might make it difficult for the virus to replicate well. It's not known but it is a possibility. As the virus moves through the population, it will probably become less virulent. That's what they tend to do.

[Bronze]

I remember things feeling REALLY BIG when I was young--every experience was more intense because I didn't have a large store of experiences to put things in perspective.

I've thought about that often with regards to the current situation. It feels big enough and disruptive enough and scary enough to mature adults, I imagine those feelings are many times magnified for many adolescents and young adults.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Bronze

[MEmama]

6 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

I just....I must be a cold hearted b*tch, because my heart doesn't break for anyone right now, except for people who have lost loved ones, and the HCP's working in a very scary situation. Other people I feel really angry on their behalf - the grocery worker friend we have who gets abuse in the store, or the casuals who can't access any kind of government benefit etc.

I can acknowledge (and do, explicitly, to him) that it's really tough for a teen to be confined to home with his two parents, without my heart breaking over it. 

I cannot break my heart over kids having to leave dorms behind.

Maybe that's because I've had to move so often in my adult life.

You have to move, sometimes, it's outside your control, and it's sad, and you cry, and then you get on with it. 

I mean...this is just life? Good things happen, sh*t things happen, every now and then something really major happens...we feel bad, we feel its unfair, and then in the end, we adapt to the new. 

Isn't this just the way life works? It's tough, it's really hard, I'm making sure my kids have access to mental health support as they need it, and easing up on expectations on the one at home, and changing things up to help him have things to look forward to (yes, you can order a new pair of jeans), adapting the home environment as much as possible to help him - but I can't get behind the heart breaking narrative. 

I honestly can't remember any adults breaking their hearts over me graduating into a recession back in the 90's, actually. It was more a case of 'suck it up, buttercup, and next time, don't study the wrong degree'. Is there anything substantially different betweeen my generation and this generation? Idk. 

 

Oh my parents didn’t as much as consider that challenge for a moment, no. I’m right there with you and I imagine most of our generation is. I do hazily recall a general, wider concern, though. Idk. I’ve pretty much modelled my family life as the opposite as my parents, which I think many of us Gen Xers did. 
I do think this is different, though. This is an ask—a reality—we didn’t have. We did have our stuff to be sure: the very real threat of nuclear war, the awakening to climate change, the continuing pains and struggles of the civil rights and feminist movements (riots, gangs, rampant divorce), labor issues and so on. To our parents—the world war generation— maybe it didn’t look like so much? My mother grew up in Germany during the war. She had American soldiers take over her house, and delighted in bread and cheese crumbs they left behind. Crumbs. She was so weak from hunger as an elementary school student her mother had to push her to school in a stroller. Did my privileged American teenage worries look like much to her? I wouldn’t think so. But it’s not a contest. This is HARD, and it’s okay that it’s hard. It’s okay to struggle and that our kids are struggling. Their world just got upended in the same way a war might affect not just daily life, but ones future and everything they thought they might know. 

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, SKL said:

When you argue like this, it seems like you don't think most people are going to get this disease one way or the other.  The question is when, not if, for people who are ever going to be circulating in public.

Well, personally, yeah, I'd like to get vaccinated and then not get it or get a more mild form. I'd like that for as many people as possible, and I'd REALLY like most people to be able to hold out until we know a bit more about this virus - how to treat it, how to minimize long term damage, how it is spreading, etc. 

43 minutes ago, StellaM said:

Here's what my young people have 'sacrificed'.

22yr old - seeing friends and family for a so-far short period of time, but she doesn't really mind, because she's working at LOT and is exhausted and happy to chill at home on her days off.

20 yr old - can't attend campus for a so-far short period of time, can complete her studies online, otherwise she's all loved up and living the domestic goddess life with her g/friend.

16 yr old - can't socialise in person. Has to hang out online or with his mother. Also for a so-far short period of time.

~

It's a long way from being sent off to die for Empire on the Western Front, ya know?

Ds - the 16 yr old - knows why he is staying home, and it's not to 'protect old people who've had their day'. It's to protect community health, as well as his own health, as well as the health of his loved ones, including his HCP sister.  Idk. My kids are not complaining. They may not like it, but they're not working themselves up, in a fake narrative, against 'the oldies'. They are being as resilient as they can, adapting, using mental health care to cope, two of them are working hard, one is working hard on maintaining an even keel...their challenges post this partial lock down they're experiencing will be different to the millenials, or Gen X'ers, or Boomers, but that doesn't mean they are in a never-ending dire situation of suffering for the next 70 years of life, while the rest of us have never-ending parties.

 

 

 

Honestly? It isn't the young people I hear of complaining. it is the parents, who hate to see their kids suffer. Which I get. But the kids themselves are mostly doing okay. It is more a challenge/adventure than the end of the world. 

[ktgrok]

2 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Oh my parents didn’t as much as consider that challenge for a moment, no. I’m right there with you and I imagine most of our generation is. I do hazily recall a general, wider concern, though. Idk. I’ve pretty much modelled my family life as the opposite as my parents, which I think many of us Gen Xers did. 
I do think this is different, though. This is an ask—a reality—we didn’t have. We did have our stuff to be sure: the very real threat of nuclear war, the awakening to climate change, the continuing pains and struggles of the civil rights and feminist movements (riots, gangs, rampant divorce), labor issues and so on. To our parents—the world war generation— maybe it didn’t look like so much? My mother grew up in Germany during the war. She had American soldiers take over her house, and delighted in bread and cheese crumbs they left behind. Crumbs. She was so weak from hunger as an elementary school student her mother had to push her to school in a stroller. Did my privileged American teenage worries look like much to her? I wouldn’t think so. But it’s not a contest. This is HARD, and it’s okay that it’s hard. It’s okay to struggle and that our kids are struggling. Their world just got upended in the same way a war might affect not just daily life, but ones future and everything they thought they might know. 

It absolutely is hard. But I just don't think it is HARDER on the young people than on anyone else. It is hard for everyone, in different ways. Hard for kids who don't really get why they can't go see Grandma and get a hug. Hard for parents trying to keep their kids safe and fed and housed. Hard for those who are still working, but trying to do it in new ways, working even more hours, in more stressful situtations. Hard for those out of a job, trying to figure out how to pay the bills. Hard for the elderly who no longer can have visitors. Etc etc. 

The idea that the young people are having the hardest time, in some special way, doesn't resonate with me. 

[Bootsie]

26 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

I just....I must be a cold hearted b*tch, because my heart doesn't break for anyone right now, except for people who have lost loved ones, and the HCP's working in a very scary situation. Other people I feel really angry on their behalf - the grocery worker friend we have who gets abuse in the store, or the casuals who can't access any kind of government benefit etc.

I can acknowledge (and do, explicitly, to him) that it's really tough for a teen to be confined to home with his two parents, without my heart breaking over it. 

I cannot break my heart over kids having to leave dorms behind.

Maybe that's because I've had to move so often in my adult life.

You have to move, sometimes, it's outside your control, and it's sad, and you cry, and then you get on with it. 

I mean...this is just life? Good things happen, sh*t things happen, every now and then something really major happens...we feel bad, we feel its unfair, and then in the end, we adapt to the new. 

Isn't this just the way life works? It's tough, it's really hard, I'm making sure my kids have access to mental health support as they need it, and easing up on expectations on the one at home, and changing things up to help him have things to look forward to (yes, you can order a new pair of jeans), adapting the home environment as much as possible to help him - but I can't get behind the heart breaking narrative. 

I honestly can't remember any adults breaking their hearts over me graduating into a recession back in the 90's, actually. It was more a case of 'suck it up, buttercup, and next time, don't study the wrong degree'. Is there anything substantially different betweeen my generation and this generation? Idk. 

 

I think this is one of the difficulties that young people are having.  This is a situation in which they are having a difficult time of "get on with it."  They can't get on with their schoolwork when they don't have their materials. They can't get on with their career prep when their internship is cancelled.  They can't get on with practicing their sport.  

[ktgrok]

4 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

I'd really like a vaccination that was at least as effective as the flu shot, and I'd like it combined with social distancing measures becoming common place in society.

People are suffering, including young people, but...I guess the question is, what do you do with the suffering? After you've had a chance to be supported in expressing it? Do you magnify it? Do you use it as a prompt to take some sort of action in your lives or the lives of others? Do you let it ebb and flow as it is, neither denying it nor clinging to it? I mean, I don't have the answer to this question, of what we do with our suffering, and how we make use of it in our lives, but I do know I could inadvertently add to my children's suffering by joining in the catastrophic thinking, and the sense of live ruined. 

Don't our kids need (and deserve) parents who are more empathetic than their own parents, while still retaining and communicating a sense of perpective that age and maturity can bring?

Yup. We do them a grave disservice if we agree that missing prom and waiting a year to go to college or having to change majors is the end of the world. We can understand and share their pain, but we should be providing perspective (that's the whole point of elders, right?) and helping them find new options, and give them the life skills they will need to pivot and adjust. Because crap happens. It does. Spouses die, businesses fail, political forces shift, etc and it is good to learn that you have to shift with the change and look for new opportunities, that you can do that and find happiness again. 

[ktgrok]

3 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I think this is one of the difficulties that young people are having.  This is a situation in which they are having a difficult time of "get on with it."  They can't get on with their schoolwork when they don't have their materials. They can't get on with their career prep when their internship is cancelled.  They can't get on with practicing their sport.  

Right. But those things are not life itself. They may feel like it, but they aren't. Anymore than someone losing their sight loses their life, etc. It sucks, but it isn't the end. 

They can take an online class, or learn a new skill, or cross train and learn yoga (plenty of athletes do yoga) or running, they can read up on their field of study, listen to a dozen podcasts, start a blog or vlog and look for online conferences in their field. It's not the same. it's not as good. But learning to adapt to reality and find a new path is a huge life skill. 

[kiwik]

I actually think it is hardest for the old people.  They are more likely to die, more likely to be isolated and no longer have that long horizon.  If you are 95 a vaccine in a year or two isn't very comforting.  And perhaps never getting to see that new great grandchild is upsetting.  Plus they are less likely to be able to use technology and to be honest have already lived through enough $%$© in their lives and deserved to relax.

A lost few months or a year won't hurt my kids and they may find a new interest.  There are some career plans that will be scattered but new doors will open.

[MEmama]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

It absolutely is hard. But I just don't think it is HARDER on the young people than on anyone else. It is hard for everyone, in different ways. Hard for kids who don't really get why they can't go see Grandma and get a hug. Hard for parents trying to keep their kids safe and fed and housed. Hard for those who are still working, but trying to do it in new ways, working even more hours, in more stressful situtations. Hard for those out of a job, trying to figure out how to pay the bills. Hard for the elderly who no longer can have visitors. Etc etc. 

The idea that the young people are having the hardest time, in some special way, doesn't resonate with me. 

I didn’t say it’s hardest on them? I just believe in acknowledging that’s it’s hard on them in a way that is different than it is on adults. Not a contest, not better or less than or worse or more so. 

[mommyoffive]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-he-may-extend-coronavirus-social-distancing-guidelines-to-early-summer/ar-BB136VUl?ocid=spartandhp

If he does extend this, how does that effect states opening back up?   The social distancing guidelines are not the same as stay at home orders are they?

[hopeallgoeswell]

If the NY antibody testing numbers that were released today are echoed by other hard-hit areas, and the death rate is closer to 0.5% or lower and not 6% or higher, what should states do with that?

[Corraleno]

34 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-he-may-extend-coronavirus-social-distancing-guidelines-to-early-summer/ar-BB136VUl?ocid=spartandhp

If he does extend this, how does that effect states opening back up?   The social distancing guidelines are not the same as stay at home orders are they?

They are "guidelines" not orders, so states can do what they want. In fact, the states that are planning to reopen in the next couple of weeks will already be removing many of the restrictions in the federal guidelines, whether Trump extends them or not.

I think Trump is trying to play both sides — on the one hand he's tweeting encouragement to protestors, telling them to "liberate" states with stay at home orders, and both he and Pence are reported to have called Kemp and expressed their support for his reopening plans. But then he comes out publicly and says he disagrees with Kemp's plan and he may extend federal guidelines on restrictions. That way, if states that reopen don't have a big increase in cases, he can say he was always in favor of that and that governors with stricter requirements are the ones who damaged the economy, and if there is a new spike in cases, then he can say he was always against it, he knew it would cause more cases, etc. No matter what happens, he can claim he was "right all along."

[Terabith]

I think with college aged kids, the big issue that I see is that while I'm sheltering at home, they are force to shelter somewhere that is no longer their "home."  This would have been devastating when I was in college, because my relationship with my family of origin was....fraught and difficult, and my emotional home was with my boyfriend (now husband) and other friends.  

[Terabith]

1 minute ago, StellaM said:

 

Kids could have moved in with b/friend, g/friend families or with friends?

College kids are adults, yeah?

If that was an option.  It's complicated, all the way around.  Mostly, college kids are sort of adults but also not financially self supporting, so they are short on options and control, at a time in their lives when control is important to them.  

I'm not saying their suffering is more than anyone else's.  It sucks all the way around.  I do often think how that would have been pretty much the worst time in MY life for this to have happened.  

[regentrude]

10 minutes ago, StellaM said:

Kids could have moved in with b/friend, g/friend families or with friends?

College kids are adults, yeah?

For many students, moving back home is hard even for themselves and often not convenient for the family. Inviting their boyfriend to stay with them and their family and share a bedroom with little sister? Nah, maybe not happening. 

My DS is lucky and lives off campus with his gf, and we can afford to pay their rent.
But if both partners live in a  dorm and have nowhere to go but to their respective childhood homes? 

ETA: There is a thread on the high school board about continuing to pay rent for the college student apartment now in times of the pandemic

Edited April 24, 2020 by regentrude

[ktgrok]

3 hours ago, hopeallgoeswell said:

If the NY antibody testing numbers that were released today are echoed by other hard-hit areas, and the death rate is closer to 0.5% or lower and not 6% or higher, what should states do with that?

Well, that partly depends on how fast it is spreading. If it has a lower fatality rate, and same spread rate, good news. If it has a lower fatality rate, but is way more contagious than thought, that may end up being the same numbers of dead in the end. We need more than just fatality rate. We need to know how it is spreading, how fast, and what the long term health implications are. We don't have that yet. 

4 hours ago, MEmama said:

I didn’t say it’s hardest on them? I just believe in acknowledging that’s it’s hard on them in a way that is different than it is on adults. Not a contest, not better or less than or worse or more so. 

Some seemed to be implying it. 

2 hours ago, regentrude said:

For many students, moving back home is hard even for themselves and often not convenient for the family. Inviting their boyfriend to stay with them and their family and share a bedroom with little sister? Nah, maybe not happening. 

My DS is lucky and lives off campus with his gf, and we can afford to pay their rent.
But if both partners live in a  dorm and have nowhere to go but to their respective childhood homes? 

ETA: There is a thread on the high school board about continuing to pay rent for the college student apartment now in times of the pandemic

Ok, but the other way to look at that is hey, they have a place to go! Plenty of  people who have lost jobs don't have a family to move in with, and have to support their own children. 

As for not convenient? None of this is convenient. For anyone. It's a huge PIA for everyone. But that is life, right? My husband lived on a couch for a year at a friend's house. I had to move back in with my parents when I got divorced. Stuff happens. 

And really, plenty of 18-25 yr olds never go to college at all, or do go and live at home, so it isn't as if having to live at home at that age is a tragedy. It might be disappointing, but it isn't the end of the world Inconvenient, annoying, sure. 

[Melissa in Australia]

8 hours ago, regentrude said:

I have a lot of sympathy for my students. 

It's not just that they left their belongings in their dorm room. That was their home. They got kicked out of their home, with the clothes they had on their back and a little day pack, to move back home with their little siblings or to sleep on the couch. IF they even have space and are welcome at their parents' home. They left their lives and their support networks. Their lovers. (I have done long distance relationship and it sucks so bad)

They left the tools behind they need to do their work, which is their college studies. Many of my students left campus believing it was for a long weekend, and took as much. They don't have their notes or their textbooks, but are expected to do their work. 

You and I, we are still in our own homes, with our husbands and, some of us, kids. We have the things we need to conduct our lives. And we have maybe more perspective.

I have a lot of sympathy for a 20 y/o whose beginning adult life got uprooted, whose education is disrupted, who does not know whether his family will be able to pay for college next year, who had plans for the future like 20 y/olds do and has none of the perspective we, at middle age, may have acquired. 

As I recently posted: suffering is not a competition. Just because it's bad for other people does not negate these kids' struggles.

Thank you. 

I have 2 children going through similar right now. Life is hard for many right now. I especially feel for the late teen - early 20s. 

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

Ok, but the other way to look at that is hey, they have a place to go! Plenty of  people who have lost jobs don't have a family to move in with, and have to support their own children. 

As for not convenient? None of this is convenient. For anyone. It's a huge PIA for everyone. But that is life, right? My husband lived on a couch for a year at a friend's house. I had to move back in with my parents when I got divorced. Stuff happens. 

And really, plenty of 18-25 yr olds never go to college at all, or do go and live at home, so it isn't as if having to live at home at that age is a tragedy. It might be disappointing, but it isn't the end of the world Inconvenient, annoying, sure. 

Please see the context of my post that you quoted. It was specifically in reply to a poster who said the students should simply move in with their boyfriend/girlfriend.
The point was not that it's inconvenient for the college student to move back home. The point was that moving the partner into their parents' home wasn't a realistic expectation.

[Bootsie]

11 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

It absolutely is hard. But I just don't think it is HARDER on the young people than on anyone else. It is hard for everyone, in different ways. Hard for kids who don't really get why they can't go see Grandma and get a hug. Hard for parents trying to keep their kids safe and fed and housed. Hard for those who are still working, but trying to do it in new ways, working even more hours, in more stressful situtations. Hard for those out of a job, trying to figure out how to pay the bills. Hard for the elderly who no longer can have visitors. Etc etc. 

The idea that the young people are having the hardest time, in some special way, doesn't resonate with me. 

Many people are having a hard time, and those hard times look different for different people.  Some people are having a hard time because they are isolated and haven't been near another human in weeks.  Others are having a hard time because they are now thrown into a situation where they are living and working with people they would prefer not to be around in a tiny space.  Some are having a difficult time because their work hours are cut; some are having a difficult time because their work load increased tremendously.  

Because of these very different situations and because of different tolerances for various types of risk, some young people have different opinions about the costs and benefits of different lock down measures.  I think it is helpful to listen to where some of the young people are coming from.  I may not agree with them, but when they say that they view the health risk to them is low, so they would like to be able to do things to help others, or when they say that without a vaccine in sight it is a matter of time before they are infected so they might as well get it over with, or when they say that they are concerned about an enormous government deficit, they are not simply being self-centered, selfish, or reckless, 

[Bootsie]

10 hours ago, StellaM said:

 

Then it's just a bad thing that happens and I have no answers, just as no-one has any answers for me when bad things happen. 

It's just bad, and you have to get through it the best way you can, or give up and die, because what choice is there?

The irony is, some of the young people I know have this opinion, it just plays out differently.  Yes, bad things happen; people get sick; it isn't fun; unfortunately, some people die.  It's just bad and we have to get through it the best we can.  I can wash my hands and take other measures to reduce my risk; I can exercise and eat nutritiously; I can take my chances, because, without a vaccine on the horizon, what choice is there?  Giving up, just sitting around waiting for the inevitable of being infected?  Not living the day that I know I do have?    

[Kanin]

So if states are (theoretically) supposed to wait for 14 days of declining cases before opening up more, how does it work with states testing more? As testing ramps up, I'm sure we're going to see huge increases in cases. Are we going to judge declining cases by the rate of increase going down, or something? 

And the studies of random people that are happening in various states... do those numbers show up in daily case totals?

[ktgrok]

12 hours ago, Bootsie said:

Many people are having a hard time, and those hard times look different for different people.  Some people are having a hard time because they are isolated and haven't been near another human in weeks.  Others are having a hard time because they are now thrown into a situation where they are living and working with people they would prefer not to be around in a tiny space.  Some are having a difficult time because their work hours are cut; some are having a difficult time because their work load increased tremendously.  

Because of these very different situations and because of different tolerances for various types of risk, some young people have different opinions about the costs and benefits of different lock down measures.  I think it is helpful to listen to where some of the young people are coming from.  I may not agree with them, but when they say that they view the health risk to them is low, so they would like to be able to do things to help others, or when they say that without a vaccine in sight it is a matter of time before they are infected so they might as well get it over with, or when they say that they are concerned about an enormous government deficit, they are not simply being self-centered, selfish, or reckless, 

Oh, I don't think they are self centered or reckless! I think at worst, they are not seeing as big a picture, and dealing with limited perspective. But I think that conversations about those things are totally warranted, and my reply would be that I'd rather they wait and see if we get better treatments, etc, and that by increasing the percentage of people with the virus, they increase the chances of someone high risk getting it. But truly, I don't think badly of them at all. In fact, I don't think for the most part they are the ones complaining! I see young people coming up with alternatives, having virtual graduations, and adapting pretty darned well, given the circumstances. Sure they are annoyed and get sad and just sick of it, but so does everyone. 

In all this I was responding to the idea being raised in the thread, that the young people have it the worst. I think young people get the short end of the stick in many things, not least of which is climate change, but in this I think it just flat out sucks for everyone, of every age. 

11 hours ago, Bootsie said:

The irony is, some of the young people I know have this opinion, it just plays out differently.  Yes, bad things happen; people get sick; it isn't fun; unfortunately, some people die.  It's just bad and we have to get through it the best we can.  I can wash my hands and take other measures to reduce my risk; I can exercise and eat nutritiously; I can take my chances, because, without a vaccine on the horizon, what choice is there?  Giving up, just sitting around waiting for the inevitable of being infected?  Not living the day that I know I do have?    

Other options are things like reducing exposure until we have better treatments, better understanding of the disease's effects on the body, etc. And we do have vaccines in human trials already, so I think it is unfair to say there is nothing on the horizon. Too soon to know if they will work, but it isn't as if there are not unprecedented attempts to find one, moving faster we even imagined. 

Edited April 24, 2020 by Ktgrok

[Matryoshka]

2 hours ago, Mainer said:

So if states are (theoretically) supposed to wait for 14 days of declining cases before opening up more, how does it work with states testing more? As testing ramps up, I'm sure we're going to see huge increases in cases. Are we going to judge declining cases by the rate of increase going down, or something? 

And the studies of random people that are happening in various states... do those numbers show up in daily case totals?

My governor today was saying he'd look for a steady, consistent decline in hospitalizations - those wouldn't be dependent on testing more and finding more mild cases.

[Lady Florida.]

On 4/22/2020 at 9:19 AM, Ktgrok said:

 

Wait, what? As long as you don't get the live flumist version of the flu vaccine, you can't get the flu from it. It's not possible. The actual shot is made with a killed virus. It can't give you the flu anymore than a fur coat can bite you and give you rabies. It's dead.

 

Yes. Correlation is not causation.

This is a myth that just won't die. The shot does take a few days to work so if you were exposed to the flu before getting the vaccine you very well might get the flu after having the shot, but it will usually be milder. And you didn't get it from the shot. It simply is not possible.