Allow infrequent socialisation between households
I suggest considering allowing households to meet with other households on an occasional basis.
For example, allow my household to visit another for a meal one week. Then the following week, we could host a different household for a meal.
I expect that this limited socialisation should have a controllable impact on transmission. Contact tracing would be a straightforward extension with this policy in place. The level of increase in transition could also be limited by adapting the frequency of such meeting (e.g. once a week/fortnight/month).
Special consideration would still need to be given to shielding households.
For example, allow my household to visit another for a meal one week. Then the following week, we could host a different household for a meal.
I expect that this limited socialisation should have a controllable impact on transmission. Contact tracing would be a straightforward extension with this policy in place. The level of increase in transition could also be limited by adapting the frequency of such meeting (e.g. once a week/fortnight/month).
Special consideration would still need to be given to shielding households.
Why the contribution is important
This would allow families to meet together, and for those without local blood relatives, allow meeting with the friendship families that exist.
Reinforcing personal connections is important in the coming months.
Reinforcing personal connections is important in the coming months.
by worstludditeever on May 05, 2020 at 01:03PM
Posted by ProtestTheHero May 05, 2020 at 13:07
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Garywall8787 May 05, 2020 at 13:08
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by ElaineKeay May 05, 2020 at 13:09
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by REB May 05, 2020 at 13:09
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Switchqueen May 05, 2020 at 13:10
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Newleaf11 May 05, 2020 at 13:12
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Garstard May 05, 2020 at 13:13
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by forest May 05, 2020 at 13:17
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Panjam May 05, 2020 at 13:17
The bubble idea doesn't work very well - in our close family we've got a household consisting of an elderly couple and one member of this may not have long to live anyway, a household with teenagers, a household with under 10s, and another household with teenagers, and another household with preschoolers. They all love varying distances away.
I'd rather spread meetings out than have a horrible choice of whether a 7 year old or a teenager gets to see his pals or whether whether grandparents get to see their grandchildren. I think the Government are going to have to give people autonomy to manage this - obviously nobody wants to risk elderly relatives but there is a balance to be struck between them having a bad quality of life and getting covid. Testing would help.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Mumandnan May 05, 2020 at 13:20
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Jennifer May 05, 2020 at 13:22
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by johnjj77 May 05, 2020 at 13:22
To ease the lockdown without allowing people to see a few family households AND non-family households wouldn't feel like much of an easing.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by GavinFalconer May 05, 2020 at 13:23
We need to treat people as adults, and ask them to be sensible with their social activities, limiting to a small group of friends and family, importantly keeping good records of any visits. That way, if someone did show symptoms they would have information readily available to pass to to potentially infected people, creating a chain of those needing to isolate.
Visits to elderly relatives or other vulnerable individuals, for example, would have to be managed by a period of isolation before hand.
The "stick" for this carrot is that clearly a higher level of social contact increases the possibility of having to isolate as a result of being part of an 'infection chain'.
I think people would understand this balance and would be responsible in their decisions.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Kim May 05, 2020 at 13:24
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by katecarter1505 May 05, 2020 at 13:36
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by alloha May 05, 2020 at 15:17
Very sensible for the reasons listed.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by ashlouise91 May 06, 2020 at 15:09
I think households would need to be paired. I would love to be able to socialise with many different people but I do worry it would have an impact on transmission and begin to increase the transmission rate.
For example you could have a single person household seeing their parents or sibling and then the risk would only be between those two households if you were social distancing in all other aspects of your life.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by worstludditeever May 07, 2020 at 06:49
There is always a risk of catching Covid-19 if leaving the household, and asympomatic cases could have this consequence. This is part of the reason I suggest the option of varying the frequency of meetings, if once per fortnight instead, that is essentially the recommended isolation period.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Dwilliams21 May 08, 2020 at 11:34
The principle is about social distancing to contain R. The idea of reducing the frequency of contact proposed here may be sensible rather than blanket restrictions on which people are contacted.
Has to rely on voluntary compliance like many if the likely restrictions
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Dodie20 May 11, 2020 at 21:32
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)