I don’t think these days can literally be classed as peacetime myself. We are indeed at war
SM
Stephanie Munden
4 years ago
What a nasty article. Everyone in the same boat. All over the world people are dying. More older people but young people too. Divide people and turn people against each other why don’t you! The article more to do with hatred over Brexit? Simmering anger exposed. The solutions just secondary.
Stephanie with respect I think you need to read this article again. What a great idea – I was moved by the writers belief and passion. Brexit happened and we need to move onwards and upwards whatever your thoughts on the subject Brexit is history now; this is the present and we are now looking towards the future. What’s bad about young people mucking in, mobilising and helping out the hard pressed NHS instead of rotting their brains at home in front of a lap top?
SE
s.edenboro
4 years ago
There may be a need to expand the number of people supporting the NHS but there is a danger that you would be encouraging an almost religious belief in the institution. Yes we want the NHS to be there for us, but first and foremost it exists to support us, not the other way around.
MC
m.comber
4 years ago
What an opportunity for young people to experience life in many different forms. It could help decisions about career choice which could then count towards both practical and academic qualifications. A wonderful opening to the university of life.
AR
Adam Radford-Diaper
4 years ago
Thanks for this thought-provoking read. You make a very strong case for the non-material benefits of a national service programme – both for its youthful participants and for the future common life of the nation. However, I am concerned by some of the immediate, practical implications of such a scheme. Is there not a risk that, by mobilising so many more people in the public realm, we increase Covid-19’s rate of transmission ““ and, thus, rather than aiding the NHS, we place it under further, possibly intolerable strain?
The young, on the whole, may only suffer mild to moderate symptoms (though the death at the weekend of 21-year old Chloe Middleton suggests that this is far from the whole story); but they can just as effectively transmit the virus as anyone else. Even in the current lock-down, they do not all live completely secluded from older generations. The permanent addresses of the vast majority of the A-level and university students, to whom you refer, will still be the homes of their birth families. I may be rare as a 26 year-old who lives not only with his parents but also with his 95-year old grandmother, but lots of my peers still reside with relatives ““ many of whom will fall amongst those deemed most vulnerable to Coronavirus, whether on account of a pre-existing health condition or just simply by dint of their age. If thousands of young people start shuttling every day between their families and healthcare facilities awash with Covid-19, it isn’t hard to see how the numbers of both hospitalisations and, ultimately, deaths could skyrocket.
This might, of course, be averted if all young conscripts, who currently live with vulnerable individuals, were given their own accommodation. However, even the most ardent Boris fan could hardly expect the government to resolve the housing crisis in the midst of a pandemic.
Looking beyond just the most effective means to contain Covid-19, should young people be encouraged to cut themselves off from their older or vulnerable relatives in times of crisis? Whilst low on glory, roles on the home front remain of invaluable importance. Might not a possible silver lining to the cumulonimbus of this epidemic be the opportunities it offers, not only for ‘societal cohesion’, but for the strengthening of family ties and commitments?
I was just about to make the increased transmission point. I think the concern shouldn’t only be the possibility of young folk passing on the virus to vulnerable people – young people exposed to a high viral load (as I’d assume to be entirely possible in a hospital environment) may be at significant risk themselves, and, even if the death rate is low, the rate of those who’d be hospitalised is a significant factor in considering the net benefit of a scheme.
SH
sh
4 years ago
National service for anyone who is currently receiving 80% of their salary from the state. This could be NHS, food, farming, deliveries etc… Otherwise, there’s going to be alot of disconnect between people getting 100% of their salary for 100% wage, and those getting 80% wage for 0% work and having an extended summer holiday.
NS
natalie
4 years ago
This is a brilliant article.. which I will definitely be sharing with my kids, one who is graduating this year so may help her if other plans do not come off as hoped.. x
Report this comment
This site is registered on wpml.org as a development site. Switch to a production site key to remove this banner.
A great idea, though I doubt the practicality of it in peacetime.
I don’t think these days can literally be classed as peacetime myself. We are indeed at war
What a nasty article. Everyone in the same boat. All over the world people are dying. More older people but young people too. Divide people and turn people against each other why don’t you! The article more to do with hatred over Brexit? Simmering anger exposed. The solutions just secondary.
Stephanie with respect I think you need to read this article again. What a great idea – I was moved by the writers belief and passion. Brexit happened and we need to move onwards and upwards whatever your thoughts on the subject Brexit is history now; this is the present and we are now looking towards the future. What’s bad about young people mucking in, mobilising and helping out the hard pressed NHS instead of rotting their brains at home in front of a lap top?
There may be a need to expand the number of people supporting the NHS but there is a danger that you would be encouraging an almost religious belief in the institution. Yes we want the NHS to be there for us, but first and foremost it exists to support us, not the other way around.
What an opportunity for young people to experience life in many different forms. It could help decisions about career choice which could then count towards both practical and academic qualifications. A wonderful opening to the university of life.
Thanks for this thought-provoking read. You make a very strong case for the non-material benefits of a national service programme – both for its youthful participants and for the future common life of the nation. However, I am concerned by some of the immediate, practical implications of such a scheme. Is there not a risk that, by mobilising so many more people in the public realm, we increase Covid-19’s rate of transmission ““ and, thus, rather than aiding the NHS, we place it under further, possibly intolerable strain?
The young, on the whole, may only suffer mild to moderate symptoms (though the death at the weekend of 21-year old Chloe Middleton suggests that this is far from the whole story); but they can just as effectively transmit the virus as anyone else. Even in the current lock-down, they do not all live completely secluded from older generations. The permanent addresses of the vast majority of the A-level and university students, to whom you refer, will still be the homes of their birth families. I may be rare as a 26 year-old who lives not only with his parents but also with his 95-year old grandmother, but lots of my peers still reside with relatives ““ many of whom will fall amongst those deemed most vulnerable to Coronavirus, whether on account of a pre-existing health condition or just simply by dint of their age. If thousands of young people start shuttling every day between their families and healthcare facilities awash with Covid-19, it isn’t hard to see how the numbers of both hospitalisations and, ultimately, deaths could skyrocket.
This might, of course, be averted if all young conscripts, who currently live with vulnerable individuals, were given their own accommodation. However, even the most ardent Boris fan could hardly expect the government to resolve the housing crisis in the midst of a pandemic.
Looking beyond just the most effective means to contain Covid-19, should young people be encouraged to cut themselves off from their older or vulnerable relatives in times of crisis? Whilst low on glory, roles on the home front remain of invaluable importance. Might not a possible silver lining to the cumulonimbus of this epidemic be the opportunities it offers, not only for ‘societal cohesion’, but for the strengthening of family ties and commitments?
I was just about to make the increased transmission point. I think the concern shouldn’t only be the possibility of young folk passing on the virus to vulnerable people – young people exposed to a high viral load (as I’d assume to be entirely possible in a hospital environment) may be at significant risk themselves, and, even if the death rate is low, the rate of those who’d be hospitalised is a significant factor in considering the net benefit of a scheme.
National service for anyone who is currently receiving 80% of their salary from the state. This could be NHS, food, farming, deliveries etc… Otherwise, there’s going to be alot of disconnect between people getting 100% of their salary for 100% wage, and those getting 80% wage for 0% work and having an extended summer holiday.
This is a brilliant article.. which I will definitely be sharing with my kids, one who is graduating this year so may help her if other plans do not come off as hoped.. x