Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
They are and they have - because they are fortunate enough to have the support network, technological skills and- let's face it - money to do so comfortably. Not everyone has. Equally, they are a couple and so issues of isolation and loneliness are less pressing to them than they are to single vulnerable people.
This 'oh, they should just lock themselves away so the rest of us can get on with it' attitude is profoundly callous, heartless and unthinking. These are actual people you're talking about here, not mere inconveniences.
I also worry about the factors you mention, but I think there's something deeply wrong with thinking the way you do about people.
But I'm not suggesting we lock them or anyone else away, I'm suggesting we allow them to decide the risk they are prepared to take.

And your moral perspective excludes the issues faced by people in the non-vulnerable category. Why is it bad to think about people in the way you describe but it's ok to ignore the impact of lockdown on mental health, domestic abuse, cancer patients etc etc ?

My main issue with our approach to Covid is that we don't look at it holistically, we seem to care only about Covid statistics rather than the impact of lockdown generally.