The call by the Irish National Teachers Organisation for the re-introduction of testing and contact tracing for primary school children attracted little attention when they first proposed it eleven days ago. The teachers’ body had previously said they were opposed to the halt to contact tracing which was part of the Government’s further easing of restrictions.
The government’s decision had been based on the opinion of the health authorities that only a very small number of tests on schoolchildren were coming back as positive. In the past week, however, there has been a noticeable highlighting of reported higher positivity for Covid-19 among children, with the announcement by Dr. Ronan Glynn of NPHET on Wednesday that the rate of infection among 5 to 12 year olds is now the highest of all cohorts.
This would indicate that a significant number of parents are bringing their young children to be tested even though they show no signs of being ill from Covid. Ronan’s promise to “focus on that age group” – despite both the negligible health impact on children and also his recognition that infected children are much less likely than infected adults to transmit the virus – has obviously prompted the calls by the INTO and also perhaps raised the prospects of children under the age of 12 being vaccinated. To date, it should be pointed out, neither NPHET nor the INTO has publicly suggested that this be done.
INTO President Joe McKeown told RTÉ’s Morning Ireland today that “the safety and well-being of pupils in our schools trumps everything else.” Well, as the late lamented Canadian comedian Norm McDonald might have said “Now, I’m no Professor of Logic, but …”
The ‘But’ part being, given the pretty comprehensive evidence on the minimal impact of Covid-19 on young children, that perhaps the issue here is not actually the health and well-being of the children, but that of the adults who are in contact with them? If this is the case, then perhaps teachers’ union representatives and others ought just to say that.
Another observation on all of this from a philosophical or even ethical perspective is that many people appear to have slipped into a mode of thought that in previous eras would have been considered odd. Perhaps even unthinkable or certainly unsayable: namely, that children who are not sick ought to carry a responsibility for ensuring that adults with whom they are in contact – and indeed who are entrusted with their care – are not “put at risk.”
I think I know what the unsophisticated women with whom I grew up with, most of whom now sadly left us, would have thought of that.