Looby
Well-Known Member
I know, which is why I made that clear.
Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
wtfftw
melting like a toastie
It's entirely fair to assume that people saying support bubbles could be dispensed with are people who don't actually need them.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Yeah, I think it needed to be much clearer and probably more regulated from the start tbh and then it could have stayed in throughout, it's much too vague (like lots of the rules and guidance) and this has caused confusion and conscious bending of the rules.
wemakeyousoundb
hopefully not gimboid
If the incompetent in charge actually closed non essential business for a start then support bubbles probably could stay.
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
I would really have struggled without human contact up to about 15 years ago when I hit 50 and lost the desire to go out every few days to meet people. Even so, early last year I got a phone call from someone in the NHS (possibly one of the volunteers) who phoned me out of the blue to check how I was. Was really nice feeling - shame that's not been carried on.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
I don't think anyone on here has suggested stopping support bubbles as a isolated measure to take, if they have I missed it.
It was being discussed as part of a stricter stay at home measure where pretty much everything is stopped. If the modelling showed allowing meeting up with one other person outside your household was doable then fine, but currently it seems like the only thing we can do is an immediate stricter short lockdown to get through the next few weeks.
Anyway, that's me off talking about support bubbles, it's all a bit deckchair re-arranging on the Titanic.
wemakeyousoundb
hopefully not gimboid
It's not all of them though, some also do Deliveroo home deliveries.
Spandex
A crazy bulbous punchbag of sound
I think saying 'no support bubbles' is attractive for the government as it's easy for them. They just have to say it and it's done - no bureaucracy, no economic impact, just people who rely on them to get by losing their support.
There's a whole world of business going on that could be done without for a few weeks, but that would mean the government taking the unpopular step of introducing a legal duty to consider whether their work is essential and stop doing it if it's not. That'd be no messier than sorting out what is an essential support bubble and what is just an excuse for friends to hang out. Building sites could be paused for a few weeks. There's no reason for the aromatherapy shop down the road to be open. Are florists really garden centres? Are coffee shops really essential?
Again, it's the government putting business before people. They can put financial support packages in place, suspend some legal deadlines for a few weeks, if they want to reduce the amount of work related contact going on. But no, that's too hard. The isolated and vulnerable will have to suffer because theyre an easy target. It's not like businesses aren't stretching the rules as much as old Mary seeing both her son and her next door neighbor.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
It might be fair to assume that, but it would be a mistake.
Flavour
hang the bankers
Nobody is enforcing any of this stuff anyway which is why people flout the rules so massively. Urban is a bubble where people are pretty conscientious and stuff but come on who the fuck cares what the government say if nobody checks what you actually do? People don't give a shit unless there's the real threat of consequences.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Yeah, just saw it in passing and started idly wondering.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
This kind of thing is what's going on, limiting oxygen supplies.
www.theguardian.com
Southend hospital’s oxygen supply reaches ‘critical situation’
PM says oxygen supplies low in some places and vaccine rollout is ‘race against time’
wtfftw
melting like a toastie
I don't think the gov have said support bubbles should go either. 
But the idea that people who are vulnerable (be it suicidal, care needs that aren't enough for documented stuff) should be thrown on the pile of stuff that can be sacrificed (even at the bottom of the list with everything else first). Come on. Who are we? It's one extra person glomming on to another household. If there was space for them to move in under one roof we wouldn't even be discussing it.
But the idea that people who are vulnerable (be it suicidal, care needs that aren't enough for documented stuff) should be thrown on the pile of stuff that can be sacrificed (even at the bottom of the list with everything else first). Come on. Who are we? It's one extra person glomming on to another household. If there was space for them to move in under one roof we wouldn't even be discussing it.
Cid
Proper break this time
I do wonder, though, whether something (perhaps along the lines of the French attestation) where someone fills in a form which says "X is my support bubble" might, along with some clear statements on the form, emphasise to people that this is a Thing, not just a bit of a get-out clause.
Sure, you're never going to be able to lock it down tight without some seriously oppressive State interference, which might be hard to justify, but we could do a lot more - at least, with a Government that also appeared to respect the rules- to make it abundantly clear what support bubbles are for, and how they work.
Yeah I suggested something like that upthread... Could even link an app/QR code printout. Problem is the Tories would outsource it to Serco and you'd end up with a massive data breach.
This is what I keep coming back to through this. The process of crisis management in this country, and much of the west, is fundamentally and clearly broken. It is profoundly disturbing. We're almost a year in... Arguably already a year in. But fuck all has changed... If anything communication etc has actually got worse.
I agree with Lynn that a short, sharp period is needed. But it will be done badly, and coming out of it will be mismanaged. It's such a shit situation.
This mostly isn't true either. It's estimated around 90% of peple are sticking to the restrictions. The raves and parties are a rarity. Large sections of the media are creaming themselves reporting on one hand, the rule flouters and on the others, ridiculous police over reaction and inaccurate enforcement.
I'm not playing.
This attitude IS dismissive though.
You forget that support bubbles were brought in for a reason. I am very lucky to have support of my gp, intensive therapy, and calls from a mental health support service sometimes 3 a week to check I'm alive. Even with all of that support I was going under. The direct result of putting me back in that position is I die at home and nobody realises or finds my body for weeks. Or I end up in A & E, using resources.
Me and my support bubble do not socialise with anyone or make any trips other than for essentials, and thats rare as usually we use click and collect or delivery.
Meanwhile businesses are able to play fast and loose with who should be allowed to work from home. I am currently job hunting and am shocked at the amount of jobs now office based rather than remote. What's shocking is there seem to be less remote jobs now than before Xmas.
Support bubbles are really important, and it is fair to want tighter control but to remove them and willingly push people over the edge, and causing personal injury and death on a large scale would be absolutely criminal at this point. Also would not be enforceable as you would have people like me forced to break the rules, and for me that would involve bubbling with a new person closer to home so my usual bubble couldn't be picked up for driving. That would increase the risk profile as that person would need to use public transport.
My point is that I'm not unusual. Just because the government is shit at communicating and enforcing measures doesn't mean they should be thrown out completely, and at some point you have to consider what you want to be left with when/ if this is all over.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I really don't think ANYONE here is making a case for eliminating them. But there is DEFINITELY a case for not giving people the idea that they can just fuck around with exemptions like support bubbles to "game" the regulations. And the definitions a lot of people seem to be using for having a support bubble do seem to be remarkably elastic, sometimes, and not a little self-serving.I don't think the gov have said support bubbles should go either.
But the idea that people who are vulnerable (be it suicidal, care needs that aren't enough for documented stuff) should be thrown on the pile of stuff that can be sacrificed (even at the bottom of the list with everything else first). Come on. Who are we? It's one extra person glomming on to another household. If there was space for them to move in under one roof we wouldn't even be discussing it.
yeah, this BMJ article is a worthwhile read
Pandemic fatigue? How adherence to covid-19 regulations has been misrepresented and why it matters - The BMJ
As England and Scotland start another period of lockdown, we all have to come to terms with following stricter covid-19 restrictions, most likely for a relatively long period of time. [...]More...
blogs.bmj.com
wtfftw
melting like a toastie
See the people I know who aren't sticking properly to restrictions aren't bothering to pretend a flexible support bubble or whatever. At most they're claiming not to understand.
I'm getting whiffs of benefit fraud tbh.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Also Whitty earlier:
From 7:58 entry at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-55614993/page/2
But then he also went on about how important it was for nurseries to remain open so people could go to work.
From 7:58 entry at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-55614993/page/2
But then he also went on about how important it was for nurseries to remain open so people could go to work.
Cid
Proper break this time
yeah, this BMJ article is a worthwhile read
Pandemic fatigue? How adherence to covid-19 regulations has been misrepresented and why it matters - The BMJ
As England and Scotland start another period of lockdown, we all have to come to terms with following stricter covid-19 restrictions, most likely for a relatively long period of time. [...]More...blogs.bmj.com
The data cited for compliance in that article is from April. And the question posed is 'following lockdown rules completely, or nearly all the time'. Also assumes full understanding of rules, and honest reporting (though presumably there is some weighting).
And assumes measures are sufficient. Google mobility data suggests workplaces are down 50% from the baseline. With a huge public sector, construction sector etc that is probably 95% legit. But sufficient?
This is the thought that's been with me all morning. Everyone is so burnt out from the difficulties in their lives and the lack of contact (or in some cases indeed excess of contact, being scooped up with their families for such a long time) and being unable to fully self-regulate or co-regulate according to their individual needs for such a long time, that empathy is lowered.
It seems to me like suddenly since this dire turn of events in December/January, all the unmet needs that people have been gamely trying to compensate for over the past year are coming to a head in an almighty collective internal scream.
Last edited:
elbows
Well-Known Member
Lets puncture the Westminster bubble instead.
Cid
Proper break this time
Yep, you're all wonderful really and this place has been great throughout.
There's other sources for November further down the article showing high compliance with that lockdown. I don't think they're arguing that the measures are sufficient (and I'm certainly not), only that there is wide compliance with what measures there are (self isolation excepted, for reasons gone into ad infinitum) and blaming non-compliance for continuing spread of infections is a mistake.
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
While I think this is unnecessary in terms of preventing spread I do think it would help in ensuring people wear masks when going into places where the spread is occurring. Most people who come into the shop where I work wear a mask now but there's still enough of a noticeable minority who don't. It's just arrogance at this point in proceedings.
I understand people forget at times and you can tell because they put their t shirt over their mouths and are in and out quickly, but to have that extra weight and extra support from government in actually being able to enforce it would be helpful. I'll be interested to hear what's announced tonight regarding supermarkets.
Similar threads
