Bel Mooney

That made me cry
I wished I hadn't posted it because it made me cry too.

suziewoozie

My best and dearest friend of 63 years has terminal cancer. She lives 4 hours away and I haven’t seen her since October - our March visit had to be cancelled. I may never see her again and it breaks my heart - BM can just shut up.

That so sad for you. I do hope you manage to see her again.

sorry to read that suziewoozie. I do hope you manage to see her before too long

Thank you - I know many of us are experiencing things that make us cry and are ineffably sad - I know I’m not alone. BM and her selfish entitled behaviour was a bit of a trigger.

It's a tough time for all of us isn't it. In the past I've faced challenging, painful just plain difficult times. One of the positives that helped me through has been spending time with others, who weren't struggling in the same way. Great distraction and the possibility of relaxing or even laughing. During this weird time, we're all facing ordinary life events, along side the extraordinary things associated with this virus.

If the rule of 6 people is still in place at Christmas I expect the government is well aware that a lot of people will ignore it.

Alternatively folk could see some of the family Christmas day and some Boxing day or other days in the week, which is what a lot of people do anyway.

Quite how that would help prevent the spread of the virus though I don’t know.

BTW Bel Mooney is in her 70s and her parents are still alive in their late 90s. I can completely understand her feelings when she says that every family gathering at Christmas is especially precious given her parents’ great age.

Of course there is the argument that her parents are put at risk being in a large family gathering, but, hand on heart, how many of us wouldn’t say under those circumstances that we would be prepared to risk it?
I know I would, and so would many others if only they were honest enough to admit it.

Far easier though isn’t it to come on here and tear strips out of BM and to rubbish the Daily Mail - a paper no one ever claims to read!!

I think it would be fine to break or bend the rules, if all involved were prepared to isolate immediately afterwards.

If I had parents in their 90s, no I wouldn't risk it. I think it's totally irresponsible.
We can't see our families at all here I'm the Midlands. It's horrible but we are doing as we are told.

JE who claims not to read the DM? It’s an important influencer sadly and it helps to know their latest take on things. As for BM like all those defending her your post seems to demonstrate that you don’t understand that it’s thec fact she wrote about in a mass circulation rag, not what she’ll do or not on CD. Why is it so hard to understand the difference?

JE. It’s the way she did it. Fine if that’s how she wants to play it but she is a journalist in the widely read Mail and therefor something of an influencer. Not on.

Yes I can see that. I do admit it was irresponsible of her to set out her intentions in such a public way, but it got people talking and judging by the letters in the paper a few days later, a lot condemned her for stating her intentions in a paper with a very high readership.

If I should get to my late 90s I think I would be prepared to take a chance to enjoy a big family Christmas.

It is possible to argue the other way though.

I don't understand the rules.

Really - I don't.
If you live in a small flat it's ok to have six people crammed in on Christmas Day. Those six people could each go off to a different gathering on Boxing Day - is that right?

If you live in a mansion you can still have only six people to visit on Christmas Day, even though you may have 20 large rooms. What about the staff - are they counted in the six?

DH went to a funeral today. Although the huge church was only one quarter full, he and a few other people had to stand outside because they would have exceeded 30 in the church Those standing outside could have sat 10 metres apart in the church but were not allowed in.

But Call you do understand the rules - aren’t you really saying you don’t understand the rationale underpinning them? Of course what you posted is true but just think, you couldn’t possibly have a rule based on person per square metre could you? I’m the last person to be a govt apologist but if there is to be a limit on numbers at social gatherings, it will inevitably be broad brush and imperfect. Do you think that there should be no rules on this? I don’t

The Welsh rules are not that clear, suziewoozie

Perhaps English rules are clearer.

There are also some very limited circumstances where gatherings of over 30 people are permitted
Welsh law imposes restrictions on people gathering indoors with others without a reasonable excuse (certain of which are listed in the Regulations).
Other reasonable excuses for gathering indoors with people outside your extended household if needed include:
To attend a funeral if you are organising it, are invited by the person organising the funeral, or are the carer of a person attending the funeral (or also to attend an event marking someone’s life, such as a wake)

Is it Wales that has the concept of the ‘extended household’? Sorry i forgot you are in Wales. But my point still stands that it’s impossible to have something that is crystal clear and flexible and fair to everyone

Of course I understand the rationale.
But are English children more germ-ridden and infectious than Welsh or Scottish children?

My point is that it is not surprising that people question the rules.

Well it would help if Johnson treated W and S with some of the respect he lies about having for the union. There’s a sizeable number of the population who wilfully pretend not to understand the rules imo

I am just questioning the rules which allow six people plus as many children as you wish to gather in a small room in a house but do not allow more than 30 people into a building which can easily seat hundreds, leaving a dozen elderly people standing outside for an hour. The dozen could have sat inside distanced at least 5 metres apart.

I understand the need for rules but understand the need for exceptions and for sensible people in charge to be able to use discretion.

People ignore the rules because they are so complicated, frequently changing and seemingly irrational as Callistemon has pointed out.

If there was a clear framework with the governments of all the devolved areas working as 1. A nice flow chart showing how the controls would wax and wane with the advance and retreat of the incidence of COVID at a local and national level, so that people fully understood what was happening and could see ahead how the the trend in infection in an area was likely to affect controls, I think people would be much more prepared to obey the rules, but as things stand the rules are confusing and irrational. Is it surprising that people tend to interprete them as they fancy?

Imo many people who ignore the rules are lying when they say they don’t understand them - what they actually mean is I don’t like those rules and don’t want to follow them .

Suzie I think you are unduly cynical. I think there is real confusion among many people. I have not knowingly broken any of the rules, but I feel on edge all the time because I am worried I may be misinterpreting them.

I was fully expecting not to be able to go on holiday next month (remaining in the UK) as we are in local lockdown. However, on checking the rules I can.

If this is all about limiting social contact why are those who can work from home being encouraged to go to work? Why are masks not compulsory?

We seem no further forward than we were in March. At least then it was relative clear what was expected.

I agree with Suzie. Even if people say they don't understand the rule they must know the virus spreads from person to person. Do just limit your contact with other people. Distance.

Its not hard to understand and it hasn't changed.

But people just won't do it.

Illte that begs the issue that many people are trying to avoid all those people they shouldn't meet but between 'bubbles' , the 'rule of 6', when children count and when they do not, what do households of over 6 do if they want to go out for a meal. Even the most careful person can break a rule inadvertently.

I walk on eggshells juggling the various shutdowns or possible shutdowns with what we were planning to do. We have had four cautious plans for socially very contained activities cancelled in the last week, mainly by us because either we or the organisers were reducing what they were offering or what we were going to do because we were concerned that some aspect of the activity might inadvertently breach current rules or ones that may be brought in, in the next few days - fortnight.

You may be absolutely confident you know all the rules, but to me that smacks of over confidence.