Who else isnt sending to daycamp even if they open?

amother

Blue

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 9:18 am

mommy3b2c wrote:

There are many things wrong with this comparison but I’ll start with pointing out one:

Covid 19 is not deadly for about 99.9% of people. If it was deadly, then all the people panicking would make a lot more sense.

It's not just about avoiding death. The full consequences are not understood yet. It appears that a number of the people who recover suffer permanent lung damage and other kinds of damage.

And even if one knew for sure that one would avoid permanent consequences, the temporary ones are nothing to sneeze at either. Some friends of ours, their whole family had it and nobody died and probably everyone is now "fine." Only one child was briefly hospitalized. But even without an ICU or ventilator, this is not pleasant. The adults were completely unable to function for several days each, and then recovered gradually. I have heard many people who recovered saying that they are still feeling somewhat unwell 4 or 6 or 8 weeks later.

My husband and I have small active children and full time jobs. Even apart from the long term health impacts, simply the short term logistical impacts of COVID running through our household would be disastrous, especially given that we wouldn't be able to have any paid help in our home during the entire time.

Finally, you never know what risk category you are in, especially when the concern is broader than just death vs. survival. I am generally young and healthy, but I smoked for nearly a decade in my teens and twenties. Two members of my family have Type A blood, which is being investigated as a risk factor for more serious COVID cases. My kids have no diagnosed conditions, but my youngest has had minor respiratory difficulties in the past when getting over regular colds, where he was given nebulizer treatments and issued inhalers for temporary use. It's not "asthma," but none of my other kids or me or my husband ever needed such things during a cold or sinus infection. So who really knows if we would all recover after a few days, or if one or more of us would be sick for weeks and require hospitalization.

I'm not sitting in a bubble, but we are definitely trying to limit our risks while more is being learned.

amother

Jetblack

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:09 am

I'm not sending. I don't think we're past the flattening the curve, preventing the spread phase. And neither does my husband who is a doctor or any of his peers.

Where I live in the midwest, we're still be told to SD and wear masks yet camps are now open (capped at 10 per group, kids don't wear masks, just the counselor). Makes no sense to me.

It's tempting to send because all our usual activities to keep busy aren't going to work with masks on (every place that opened requires masks but my young ones won't wear them for more than 15 min)

However, one harder summer won't be the end of the world for me or my children. They're already out of zoom school and bored but again, it's not going to kill them.

amother

Mustard

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:20 am

amother [ Aubergine ] wrote:

PPl trust their mothers friends uncle over their dr?
If you don’t trust your dr why use him?
Whose advise are you listening to?
Everyone has minimal experience

Mainly an emergency medicine doctor who is a family friend and a relative who is a doctor who consults for the cdc. I also follow the news, read the statistics and listen to (though not necessarily follow) yes, other people's opinions, as at this point, there are few facts on the ground.

amother

Aubergine

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:24 am

amother [ Mustard ] wrote:

tHAts funny becauae my brother in law is emergency room dr and stricter then my pediatrician.
He says the hospital staff is upset that ppl relying on antibodies. And Stopping SD. He is way stricter with his kids.
Also Spoke to dr from ny hospital who deals exclusively with covid now - who was furious about weddings happening now.
IF I would listen to hospital drs would be even stricter.

silverlining3

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:31 am

mommy3b2c wrote:

How risky? Risky for what? What is the chance that you or your children will get covid and be any sicker then with any typical virus?

Unless you are doing it because you want to protect others by flattening the curve and not overwhelming hospitals? (We did that already, the curve is flattened.)

I’m really trying to understand people’s perspective. What is everyone scared of?

I’m really trying to understand people’s perspective. What is everyone scared of?

I'm seemingly trying to understand as well.
-riots consisting of thousands of people, most, if any, no masks and no sd
-many chadarim are operating since after pesach, in basements
-many stores are open since pesach and many ppl have been going.
There has not been an increase in cases! Don't jump on me! There are still new cases, but not an increase, as many had predicted so-shall we stop sd and opening up.

If it's okay for essential to be open
If it's okay for frontline workers and now, for whoever went back to work, to have childcare
If it's okay to go back to work in first place
Then it's okay for everyone! If it's dangerous for anyone, it's dangerous for everyone! If it's contagious it's contagious, regardless of who you are or what you do. I'm so frustrated At wits end

little neshamala

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:44 am

silverlining3 wrote:

I’m really trying to understand people’s perspective. What is everyone scared of?

If it's okay for essential to be open
If it's okay for frontline workers and now, for whoever went back to work, to have childcare
If it's okay to go back to work in first place
Then it's okay for everyone! If it's dangerous for anyone, it's dangerous for everyone! If it's contagious it's contagious, regardless of who you are or what you do. I'm so frustrated At wits end

I think the point is, from the doctors' perspectives its not really ok. It isnt. But from the government's perspective there's a limit to how long they can lock down, they need to take in other factors such as the economy...

So just because on paper theyve decided to allow certain things, doesnt mean the virus isnt still a risk. And thats why many doctors are recommending not to mingle if you dont have to.

silverlining3

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:55 am

little neshamala wrote:

I understand that I can maybe even agree. Tho I'm not talking from a Drs perspective. So many who went back to work and would normally not send to back school and/or daycamp did and are sending back! Why is it less dangerous for their kids?? Just because they work????

amother

Wine

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 10:58 am

amother [ OP ] wrote:

Anyone else not sending to daycamp, regardless of whether or not they open and have a slot? Due to covid?

Our pediatrician (in monsey) recommended not to send unless we had absolutely no choice. Highly unlikely to truly distance the children the way you need to in order to reduce transmission, etc. Stop the spread...
So we arent sending our kids to daycamp. Will come up with an alternate solution.

Anyone else?

Yes, I wouldn’t send. Just curious which doctor told you that?

amother [ Purple ] wrote:

If my day camps refunds the 600$ deposit I gave them, then I would highly consider. Butt I doubt they will be refunding it so I will likely end up sendinng🤷‍♀️

So money makes the decision, not the risk?

amother [ Seashell ] wrote:

Since you’re anonymous can I ask if you or your kids have any underlying conditions? Why would your pediatrician be stricter than the law?
Don’t know anyone in monsey not sending that’s why I’m surprised your pediatrician said that. Wonder if it’s a blanket statement or for your personal situation.

Just don’t forget that the neighborhoods where social distancing wasn’t taken seriously from the beginning were among the hardest hit.

FUNMOM88 wrote:

Definitely sending !! Mental health and kids social life important and outweigh risks of covid right now

Says who?

amother

Wine

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 11:00 am

amother [ Chocolate ] wrote:

As things stand now will send if we are comfortable with the set up -- like small groups distanced outside no swim supervised cleaning of bathrooms and washing and sanitizing of hands no sharing food etc -- like controlled satellite camp groups -- our kids will thrive on the schedule and socialization and should be okay if done smartly with trustworthy people IY"H.

Seems for us the benefits outweigh the risks for us though I completely understand not sending.

So you actually believe the bathrooms and each kid’s hands will be washed well after each trip to the bathroom? That each child will be supervised and made sure that they don’t go near each other, hand each other something, share a food? Seriously?

Cheiny

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 11:05 am

Amarante wrote:

Because opening day camps is critical as a form of child care. Therefore a cost benefit analysis was made just as a lot of stuff is being opened even though it isn't necessarily safe.

A medical professional recommended the safest option. Unless there are strong reasons for camp, of course it is safer for the child and the family to continue to social distance. Some posters are lucky to have the option to NOT send their children to camp because they don't need to work during the summer.

I am a cynic and therefore I will assume that the recommendations for safety will be mostly ignored - either intentionally or because they are impossible to enforce. If you read the guidelines they are NOT mandated - every restriction is modified by "if possible"; take reasonable measures etc. This means that effectively it's the Wild West in terms of each camp owner determine what is "reasonable" and what is "possible.

And keep in mind that the restrictions cost a lot of money so a private camp is going to be tempted to cut corners and some of the cheap camps are not going to even attempt to have these kinds of costly restrictions because they don't have the budget.

Not to mention there’s no youth corps this year to pay counselors and staff, so that will have to be paid out of the camp’s pocket.

amother

Mint

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 11:06 am

behappy2 wrote:

Skip the 5 million dollars. What if you were in a dessert. At this point we are in the dessert and parched.

That is a ridiculous comparison. Are you honestly saying that majority of individuals are such selfish, incapable, unreasonable, unhealthy people that being at home with children who they decided to birth while experiencing some financial stress is equivalent to dying of thirst in the desert? I think it is time to open up, with restrictions that are legitimately followed, but I cannot understand how the majority of people are simply so weak that they are thrown off in such tremendous ways by minor inconveniences. I'm not referring to individuals who are legitimately different like parents of special needs children or parents with underlying mental health conditions, but it just does not make sense that people and their children are so at risk and if that is the case then our communities have much bigger problems than COVID19.

amother

Wine

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 11:13 am

amother [ Blue ] wrote:

Just to give you a little more comfort, they’re now saying that believe it or not, smokers are actually more protected from the virus.

amother

Burlywood

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 11:57 am

amother [ Taupe ] wrote:

Risky for my parents, who I very much want to be able to visit and spend time with.
And my sister, who has an underlying condition but absolutely loves to see my kids.
And my newborn baby.

Same here. If we maintain SD, as we have been doing so far, we can spend time with my parents. If the kids go to camp we probably can't spend time with my parents because of the risk at their age. Really tough decision.

amother

Burlywood

Thu, Jun 11 2020, 12:05 pm

amother [ Mustard ] wrote:

Firstly, pediatricians, as knowledgeable as they are, just don't know enough about covid 19 to advise appropriately. The information is constantly changing and they have minimal experience with it.

Secondly, unless one plans to SD until there is a vaccine, one has to ask themselves, what are the benefits of continuing to SD? What are the risks? How realistic? What are the gains? How important are they?
For some it can be bc they are high risk. But for others it can be fear. So people have to examine their goals.

Additionally, for those that are worried about others, if you are socially distancing from them to protect them, then wouldn't you just continue to do so and thus, they would still be protected? Unless of course, they have joined your "bubble", which in that case, I would understand the reasoning.

If someone would send to school in September than why wouldn't one send to camp now? What do you expect to change in September? Ostensibly, risk would be about the same. Though, weather would be cooler, schools spend time more inside....

In reference to the bolded. That is exactly the issue for us. Of course we could continue to SD from our elderly parents to protect them. But maybe we would rather join their bubble and maintain SD from others.

I am undecided about camp but would almost certainly send to school in September if it is open. You ask why. Firstly, I think school is a bigger necessity than camp (for us personally.....everyone's situation is different and needs to be weighed on an individual basis), so in a cost-benefit analysis in our particular situation school would probably outweigh the risks, but not so sure if that is true for camp. Secondly, I am hoping that by September they will have more data on whether antibodies are protective and how long they last. Third, there are already very minimal cases in our area. By September we will see whether it is eliminated (or at least almost eliminated) here and/or whether the relaxing of SD has caused a spike. There is still a good chance we will send to camp, but those are my reasons that it is different from school in September.