Face covering exemption question

Parabellum9 wrote: »

Sorry but if there are 100 children present and 1 can't wear a mask due to whatever reason, then the 99 need to and deserve to be protected. An exemption is just for the 1 child - it doesn't mean they get to get freely mingle and potentially infect the other 99 regardless of your emotions on it. The school are spot on with what they have done here.

If there are 99/100 children wearing a mask the risk is greatly reduced for everyone. That’s the point

I’m an enthusiastic mask wearer since long before most but people are completely losing all sense and perspective in this.

Parabellum9 wrote: »

The other students need to be protected and exemption or not, if you can’t wear a mask then stay at home or be prepared for some level of exclusion. That’s the way it works in the real world and is rightly the way it is working in schools as well.

Nonsense. None of the children in most primary schools are wearing masks. Should they stay at home also? The mask wearing is to reduce risk not eliminate risk. If someone cannot wear a mask for legitimate reasons then this only marginally increases the risk.

Multiple people have said that treating a child with differently due to a medical issue is a form of bullying.
I'm just wondering if they consider accessible bathrooms for children with difficulty a form of bullying also?
Making them use separate bathrooms like a leper as it were described.

fits wrote: »

Presumably if you do wear a mask, you can wear a mask. Some kids with sensory issues can’t. They should not be marginalised because of it. For goodness sake this is a 13 year old starting secondary school. The teacher should have at least consulted before taking this action. I’m appalled.

I really don't see how the child is being marginalised.

From reading the op I presume that the screen is at the top of the class where the teacher sits. So the child is still receiving full class time, full education which is the purpose of school. OK they are sitting a few feet away from their peers but in a classroom their focus should be on school work. The child was behind the screen for their own protection.

Now if the child was sitting in a room on their own, maybe the library, with only a teacher popping in sporadically and just getting left with coursework to work through on their own, I would say that the child is being marginalised.

The school is providing the exact same education to this child as any other child.

It was day one, I'm sure the school and teacher thought they were making the best of a bad situation. As others have suggested maybe talking to the school and asking for a screen to be put around the child's own desk might be a solution.

I assume that the op wants their child to sit among their classmates freely, but you also have to respect that other parents won't want an unmasked child sitting beside their child. An average class is what between 40-60 mins which is close to 4 times the guidelines (15 mins beside an infected person)

We're all adjusting. We are all dealing with situations that we're not happy with. Until we have the virus under control /vaccine we have to muddle along as best we can.

Mellor wrote: »

Multiple people have said that treating a child with differently due to a medical issue is a form of bullying.
I'm just wondering if they consider accessible bathrooms for children with difficult a form of bullying also.
Making them use separate bathrooms like a leper as it were described.

Thats ridiculous, nobody makes a person with a physical disability use an accessible bathroom. They are given the option. They are not excluded from using a standard bathroom. But may choose to use the supports offered in an accessible one.

If a person with a disability and a disability includes medical conditions, is treated differently or excluded from school then that is discrimination covered under the equal status act.

Ireland has an awful history of treating people with disabilities appallingly. This is just another example.

The poor lad should just be let sit in class same as the others, end of.

calfmuscle wrote: »

Thats ridiculous, nobody makes a person with a physical disability use an accessible bathroom. They are given the option. They are not excluded from using a standard bathroom. But may choose to use the supports offered in an accessible one.

You are correct that nobody is forced to use anything.

But saying it is an option not correct. A person is a wheelchair does not have the option of using most standard bathrooms. Very often they won't even get through the airlock as it is not designed to achieve the clearances required for a wheelchair user. Sometimes the door isn't even wide enough.
And even if they did enter, cubicles are not big enough for side transfer on to the pan, sinks are not accessible, hand dryer mounted high up on the wall.
I can understand a layperson might think its just about the handrail supports, but there are actually many other design considerations.

It would be possible to integrate all those requirements into the main bathroom, but we almost never do that. And the reason I ask the question is because Ireland in particular has pretty terrible standards when it comes to accessible facilities.

If a person with a disability and a disability includes medical conditions, is treated differently or excluded from school then that is discrimination covered under the equal status act.

Being excluded is of course discrimination.
But sometimes disabilities require preferential or specific treatment. The goal should be integrate it as much s possible and maintain the standard of service.

The poor lad should just be let sit in class same as the others, end of.

I agee. I don't see how placing him at the top of the class with a screen offers any more protection that in the class with a screen.

hots wrote: »

Even if that treatment is to keep them (and their classmates) safer?

That tiny mitigation of risk is far outweighed by the marginalisation of the student. Remember masks are only one aspect of the measures. Social distancing and hand washing are still at play. Both possible to implement without exclusion.

Professor Philip Nolan's thread about how the virus transmits is worth reading, and maybe puts this issue into perspective

https://twitter.com/President_MU/status/1299417080597565441

Neyite wrote: »

Isn't that what the school did - Socially distanced the child because the other measure of masks wasn't an option?

If the child was a year younger, he could sit beside his peers with no mask. Child is obviously unhappy with the situation which implies it could have been done better. But without seeing the classroom in question I suppose none of us know.

Neyite wrote: »

I do see that some of the rules during this pandemic have been a bit arbitrary. I get that. I was also bullied in school so I do understand where the mother is coming from not wanting her child singled out.

But while the child might be unhappy with the situation, there could equally be several classmates who would feel scared/ anxious being forced to sit beside a child who isn't wearing a mask. The feelings of one child don't trump the feelings of another in this instance. Everyone's feelings matter, as does everyone's health.

Have you actually seen what happens outside the schools? I get that some kids are anxious but it seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

hots wrote: »

Even if that treatment is to keep them (and their classmates) safer?

Yes, the school doesn't get to treat them differently. They have to make reasonable allowances to support the child.