AIBU about other peoples visitors

M0nica

Well, when we hear almost daily about MPs of all parties, ministers and their advisors, all breaching all the rules in one way or another, on what basis do they expect other people to obey the rules?

Because some of us ( most?) are not as self entitled as some of them are.

Well, when we hear almost daily about MPs of all parties, ministers and their advisors, all breaching all the rules in one way or another, on what basis do they expect other people to obey the rules?

maddy in a tier 2 area, households cannot visit another household inside. In your case, if one of the brothers were single, he could form a support bubble with your in laws and go in as much as he wants. But otherwise legally they cannot visit inside. They could meet outside ( public or private space with the rule of 6 ) and of course leave shopping. I think the difficulties faced in this type of situation are a real issue and also illustrate how difficult it would be to implement the protect the vulnerable / let everyone else live normally scenario. If it were me and I felt I had no alternative, bearing in mind the need to minimise risk, , I’d do a rota - one week on, two weeks off. Still illegal but would be less risky.

Why don't people abide by the advice. The evidence has shown that the rise in infections have come from mixing households, less so from pubs and restaurants. Having just come home for a shower and a rest before returning to sit with my mother who is now dying after contracting Covid, I feel justified in saying that these people flouting the rules are totally selfish. I wouldn't care if someone reported them and the authorities made an example of them.

Yes I think you are. I cannot believe how this rotten situation we are all in has automatically engineered a willingness to snitch so readily on neighbours, and people who normally are our friends and get along, are turning on one another without a second thought. We never know when we may need the support of our neighbours in the future and I would be loathe to report anyone for continuing with their lives the best way that they can. The diary of Ann Frank comes to mind...and how we all abhorred what happened there. In my mind there is little difference to the path we are on now. Where on earth will this end.

My husband and I are not involved at all as we live over two hundred miles away, but my 93 year old parents in law have both had serious falls this year and consequently had hospital admittances. Now they’re both home, there is a carer going in either twice or three times a day (not sure which.) Anyway, my husband’s brothers, three of them are also going in to cook meals in rotation through the week, and to take the shopping to them. I thought because it’s caring for the elderly parents who cannot care for themselves, that it was allowed, but reading this thread I think I’m wrong. The parents in law live in a Tier Two area. I’m rather glad we don’t live nearby as my husband would be involved too and that would increase risk a lot. Am I correct in thinking it should only be one brother going in? That puts an awful lot of extra work on the one brother by having to go in to make lunch and then later to make dinner every day. Any clarification or advice anyone?

Whist I totally agree we need to take personal responsibility for our choices they do have to be made within a context.
The context, at the moment is a pandemic where the government advice is to minimise contact with others to try to slow the infection rate.

There are different factions e.g. those that believe the pandemic is some sinister conspiracy, those who are rather petulant and don't like to be told what to do, those that are very lonely and afraid etc etc.

All will respond with their own version of 'common sense'

The bottom line is, that as a citizen you have not got the right to endanger the well being of any other citizens & should therefore at accordingly and within the various laws and rules that keep us safe..e.g we all drive on the correct side of the road to avoid accidents....

If the people are flouting the guidelines about visiting/visitors and they caused a super spreader situation how responsible would you feel if someone they caused to be ill was hospitalised or died? That might be what would make be act or not.

.Lisa Im sorry about your father but you’re wrong to deliberately break the rules for a baby shower. Paying a fine ( which I’m sure won’t arise but each individual would be liable ) is not the issue - it’s about increasing risk to all those there ; including the pregnant mother). You say 8 is OK, then someone says 10 and so on.

Most of us are trying to do the right thing. As frustrating as it is, try not to concentrate and worry about how other people are getting through this. We lost our dad to Covid in April and had a socially distanced funeral for very few people. We now have a baby coming into the world with a baby shower for eight of us in a tier 1 area. I’d like to think my neighbours would be more understanding than to expose the two extra people walking through my front door. If there is a fine in this situation, I’ll happy to pay it.

Oh right. Sorry if I've confused anyone ?

No Illte that’s still not correct if in Tier 2 or 3 , the only legal way OP’s family could provide care themselves is if one of them formed an exclusive support bubble with the mother. Honestly I’m sure. In tier 1 of course, up to 5 people could visit at any one time inside the house.

Whoops. I stand corrected. Really hard times for all at the moment.

I expressed myself badly. I meant people could carry on with a necessary caring responsibility not that any old thoughtless arrangement was just fine and could be exempt ?

Illte caring responsibilities are not exempt I’m sure. You are right though about the huge increase in risk - which is why the situation described is against the law.

Of course you have to care for your mother and caring responsibilitues we're always exempt, even during total lockdown.

But.. Four different people going in on four different days one after the other. Obviously you multiply the risk not just fourfold, but - well my maths isn't that good- but logically

Person A has virus passes it on 1+1
B goes in next and catches virus. 1+1+1Goes home and infects family.
1+1+1+3?
C goes in and repeats. 1+1+1+3+3
D goes in 1+1+1+3+3+2
Thats 11 and of course the families have then been mixing with other people.

Viral spread.

The support bubble allows care to be given but only one person could form the support bubble- not all 4.

I think it’s only child caring responsibilities or if the care is given by a professional. It’s about risk.

Jules if you’re not in tier 1 then you are breaking the law. You are exposing your mother to more risk than if only one of you were in a support bubble with her ( which would be allowed).

I think AGAA4 is right, Jules. You could check on Gov.UK.

I think caring responsibilities is exempt from the rules but correct me if I am wrong.

I'm in a difficult position 93 old mum needs looking after, we share the responsibility between 4 of us on different day's, I suppose that is against the rules but we don't have any choice.

Nothing in life is risk free. What we have to do is consider what the risk is and make our own judgments.

I gave up pilates about a month before the March lockdown because it was done in an internal a/c room with people from 20 to 80, most from the big hi-tech business estate that surrounded the gym and where people travelled a lot on busniness.

I have just returned home from my Tai Chi course done in the village hall, with the big outside doors open and everyone attending not working and over 60.

It is very annoying to see people flouting the rules. I know someone who is in a bubble with each of her three children, ie three separate bubbles. She seems to think that's ok. What I really don't understand is people who think that just because the government says something is ok to do, then it must be an activity with no risk attached to it. Don't people have minds of their own? I'm thinking of visits to the cinema and to the gym, both of which are currently ok in this area but which surely still have risks attached however much they are promoted as 'risk free'. To my way of thinking, nowhere is risk free at the moment.

Illte - you're post on the first page, comparing careless drivers etc is brilliant. I don't stress at all about my neighbours because the other half of my semi is empty and up for sale and the "other side" neighbours both have COPD and have pretty much barricaded everyone out except the Tesco delivery man!

But those across the road are a different story, but that's their choice. I'd hate for anything to happen to them, but have no power to stop them so have to let it happen.

I have 2 daughters within 5 minutes drive of me, but they both work in a school and won't come near me in case they bring Covid to me. I love them dearly for their thought and care, but I also miss them and DGs.

Lilyflower

My DH and I (and the rest of our immediate family) are obeying rules to the letter. Others are not.

That is their decision. Their behaviour affects them.

We need to take care that concern at others' behaviour does not deteriorate into zealous condemnation.

No no no - their behaviour has the potential to affect all of us by pushing up infection rates, meaning we are more restricted and our NHS becomes more closed to us. Do you think driving too fast or drunk only affects the driver?
I condemn absolutely those breaking the rules and flouting the guidance and not being responsible grown up members of society. I wonder if some of those on here who criticise those of us who are bothered by the flouters are actually flouters themselves?