Allow small gatherings in private homes
Ideally, gatherings of three household and eight people, with an exemption for children, but as an absolute minimum, two households and six people, with an exemption for children, must be allowed throughout the next six months.
Why the contribution is important
It is essential that we be allowed to have small gatherings in private homes - the mental health impact of banning these is already severe, and will become catastrophic as we get further into autumn and winter.
As the weather gets worse, a ban on socialising in private homes is a ban on all socialising, especially for young families and the elderly, for whom pubs and cafes are not suitable venues for relaxing interactions at this time.
This sort of isolation brings many terrible harms, perhaps even death in some cases. We need the support of our friends and family to get through this crisis, and such support will help us bear those other restrictions that are necessary.
To be clear, I do NOT mean social bubbles - these are too divisive, leaving people more isolated, forcing them to choose between family and friends, and between sides of the family.
Get back to the initial Phase 3 rule on this issue (three households, eight people), and keep it that way no matter what. Not allowing this will do far more harm than the virus.
As the weather gets worse, a ban on socialising in private homes is a ban on all socialising, especially for young families and the elderly, for whom pubs and cafes are not suitable venues for relaxing interactions at this time.
This sort of isolation brings many terrible harms, perhaps even death in some cases. We need the support of our friends and family to get through this crisis, and such support will help us bear those other restrictions that are necessary.
To be clear, I do NOT mean social bubbles - these are too divisive, leaving people more isolated, forcing them to choose between family and friends, and between sides of the family.
Get back to the initial Phase 3 rule on this issue (three households, eight people), and keep it that way no matter what. Not allowing this will do far more harm than the virus.
by gmb on October 05, 2020 at 07:05PM
Posted by jmfarrell92 October 05, 2020 at 19:31
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by mariannemca October 05, 2020 at 19:38
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Vickya1501 October 05, 2020 at 19:47
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Fionafrgsn October 05, 2020 at 19:47
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by gd1234 October 05, 2020 at 19:59
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Katz37 October 05, 2020 at 20:14
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by ACCarnall October 05, 2020 at 21:36
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Jmacv October 05, 2020 at 22:51
Allow small gatherings and hefty fines for those having excessive numbers.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Carolscat October 05, 2020 at 22:51
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by rebeccacv October 05, 2020 at 23:03
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Holidayg61 October 06, 2020 at 05:11
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Julie October 06, 2020 at 09:31
I would feel much safer in my own home than in any pub or restaurant. It is stupid that you can sit in a pub with lots of complete strangers Whom you know nothing about but not socially distance in your own (probably much cleaner) home with family.
If guidance is not reasonable people will not follow it, you are losing the country with these draconian measures. Most people have complied fully to date but the longer this goes on the more they will question rules that make no apparent sense.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Ideas81 October 06, 2020 at 09:58
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by rmk October 06, 2020 at 10:11
It is nonsensical that pubs and restaurants, especially those with forced air recirculation, have been shown in numerous case studies globally from China, to the USA, Norway, and Spain to name a few are often locations where so-called 'super-spreaders' cause mass infection and yet they remain encouraged over social visits.
I am NOT suggesting we allow house parties of 15 people, but there's a big difference between that and meeting your parents for a cup of tea in their own home, not surrounded by many others, the legislation has ceased to be proportionate.
If the government have overwhelming evidence that small gatherings of 4-5 people indoors are the primary cause of spread just now, share that with the public, and share it with the world so it can be reviewed and discussion can be had why we're seeing different patterns than everywhere else with peer-reviewed studies.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by tcchambers04 October 06, 2020 at 14:41
Families like my own who have been dealing with the grief of losing close family members need to have regular contact with other family members and in some cases very close friends. Most people I know have been sensible have been very careful and we are now being punished for doing as we have been asked. The mental health damage will last for years and will see the loss of life as a result of the rule of six (evidence shows we need close connections to deal with anxiety and depression).
Stop punishing us for Government mistakes in March in moving vulnerable into care homes without testing or PPE. Your guilt should not be imposed on the rest of us.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by CarolynM0607 October 06, 2020 at 15:53
The current rules do not work as they are detrimental to mental health, inconsistent (under 11’s don’t need to socially distance at school but can’t play together after school) but also because they not equitable.
Not all families will have the income to meet extended family members in hospitality venues which leads them to either feeing isolated or breaking the rules
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by fyfe1999 October 06, 2020 at 16:02
I'm struggling to meet with some of my friends because of this and it's dividing everyone.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by JeniaFinegan October 06, 2020 at 16:20
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by slimbofat October 07, 2020 at 11:46
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by gbsenior October 07, 2020 at 14:56
If households are more dangerous than these examples, PUBLISH the evidence. I feel that preventing parents from being visited in their own ( thoroughly disinfected ) home by their own children ( up to maximum 8 people and 3 households ) is condemning them and their families to an autumn/winter total lockdown , since meeting outdoors is hardly likely in Scottish winter weather, especially since meeting in restaurants/ coffee shops/ pubs involves expense which might be considerable and possibly weight gain for those who frequently do so in order to see their family members. Any offenders who break this proposed rule by larger family gatherings/parties should be heavily fined, as should any pubs/restaurants/coffee shops. ( And my wife and I were delighted when coffee shops were allowed to reopen. ) The likely impact on mental health is very likely to be high, protracted, and devastating for the people concerned and for already inadequate NHS mental .
health services. The Scottish government has successfully allowed churches to reopen.
Please revise the rules in order to allow families to meet in each others' homes ( maximum 3 households/eight people not counting children under 12 ).
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by rationalone October 10, 2020 at 11:09
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by APragmatist October 10, 2020 at 16:06
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Commonsensefirst October 11, 2020 at 16:16
I fear for everyone's mental health as the winter and the dark nights approach and feel it is the governments duty to bring in rules that allow social contact within homes. To continue with no contact allowed will contribute to more mental health and health problems.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Epilex October 11, 2020 at 16:30
Social interactions are essential, and (video) calling people doesn't necessarily make up for it. When I look at what's being done in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc., none of these countries have completely banned indoor gatherings, despite the number of cases going up.
As a foreigner living in Scotland (in the 'Central Belt'), I find following the rules on indoor gatherings quite difficult. I don't have any family around, and meeting one other person/household for a coffee outdoors is not convenient at all given the weather/temperatures, which is a point that's been raised many times. Most people would probably wish for some privacy, in a quiet and warm environment (home). Why not allow indoor gatherings of 2 households? Or at least extend the meaning of 'extended household' so that 2 households (whatever the number of people in each household) are allowed to meet?
I don't think resorting to continual (semi-)lockdowns is the solution. We need to tap into the testing capacity (which apparently currently stands between 30 and 40k a day according to Sturgeon) and allow people to live with the virus. Otherwise, I fear more and more people will start breaking the rules. It is possible to strike a better balance.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Lstewart October 11, 2020 at 17:18
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Suzie October 11, 2020 at 17:28
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by lpp1745 October 11, 2020 at 19:45
My partner is autistic and the thought of meeting with family in a potentially noisy cafe/outdoor space is not something they feel comfortable with at the best of times, so as a result it is incredibly difficult to see our families within these regulations, and as such a toll is being taken on our mental health.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by SpaceCadet October 11, 2020 at 19:47
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)