Tag: covid-19

Youth and the Covid Crisis

I enjoy postings and news items on youth because I learn from them and like commenting on them. Youth is fascinating to me, not for some particularistic concern, but because it illuminates so much about wider society. The sociology of young people reveals our most formative stage of life.

People who don’t care about youth usually dismiss all stages of the life course. In this superficial view, children are relegated to mere dependents, and all adults are regarded as independent grown ups. What this misses is the sociology that creates each new generation. In youth we can witness how individuals connect into relationships, and how these combine into one, shared society.

So when a single topic Tweet or blog describes youth, it opens a door into wider subject matter however narrowly it starts. For example, do university students involved in sex destroy the Covid lockdown? This seems like a narrow concern of the sexologist. But correctly understood, this question opens wider and wider circles of sociological events. For example, have present governments underestimated the significance of courtship for youth? Do the needs of teens necessarily destroy the interpersonal separation intended by lockdown? Does increasing evidence from the United States of partying at universities, and from the United Kingdom of raves involving thousands of people, show that, for young people, lockdown is unsustainable?

This health related policy of government isn’t being undermined by a simple ‘need for sex.’ The reasons are much wider. Government policy is facing the gravitational mass of large numbers of people in one phase of life, a time when sex is only one piece of involvement in relationships and learning about society. These formative years of youth present an entire demographic whose purpose is to meet and discover self and others. Is it reasonable to block these critical years of their essential purpose? Consider the long term consequences. An entire age cohort is being damaged during its formative years, and society is losing its potential future progress by damaging this generation. Do advisors to governments understand how they have failed particular sections of the community? Have they actually factored in the cost of injuring an entire demographic?

It is becoming increasingly clear that lockdown is unsustainable. One reason for this is clearly youth. How sad that policy discussions have not included the sociology of relationships. Countries that have locked-down their populations reveal ignorance of the needs of youth. Simultaneously, other sections of the community, such as the poor, have been ignored too. It is sad that sociological information has not been able to point the way to a better public policy in a crisis.

Health Care versus Society

The present corona virus crisis gives us lots to think about. Lessons will be learned when it is all over. But right now, why is there no discussion of the “lockdown” policy now used by most countries, including the ones I know best, the US and the UK?

What happens when we ask people to give up their ordinary lives? And is this really the best approach? In hindsight we may know the answer, but shouldn’t we be asking right now if this is really the way we want to go?

Different countries show us alternatives. Ordinary life is still going on in the streets of Singapore; the only people quarantined are those who test positive for the virus. The Netherlands keeps life’s sociology going by letting this virus run its course just as the seasonal flu does. Here are two countries that preserve the precious relationships that wrap around private life and make possible modern society.

So why have so many countries sacrificed social activities in the name of health? And why has questioning of this policy been unreported? Lockdown means putting everybody’s needs beneath those of hospitals. This is a truly weird reversal. The usual purpose of health care is to put people first and ask health care providers to help the sick. Lockdown reverses this logic. It asks all people, healthy and potentially sick alike, to give up their normal lives and rescue hospitals from an embarrassing flood of patients, who in reality need only minimal care.

How did the medical professionals around hospitals, win the policy battle? The university medical reports that turned Prime Minister Johnson around give us a clue. The medical profession’s own sense of prestige, I suggest, is opposed to turning the pinnacle of scientific medicine, the hospital, into what is essentially a medieval fever house. Waiting for patients’ fevers to pass, with a little oxygen to help breathing, adds nothing to a hospital in terms of science, research, grants, publications, professional prestige, and its reputation with the public. It seems to me that the corona virus threatens the hospitals with a return to medieval medicine – before there was science, pharmaceuticals, and technology.

Did America, the UK, and other countries throw their sociological lives into lockdown for this reason? And has the cost of suppressing every single person actually been measured? Let’s look at what is being destroyed here. Stripped away from everybody are their birthdays, weddings, funerals, entertainments, travel, education, examinations, admission to careers, working lives, businesses, the national economy and world trade. From this list of ill effects, those that are economic may be recognized first. But underlying these, and carrying their own hazards and losses, are what we should understand as the living web of sociology – people’s careers, creativity, physical and mental health, life plans, intimate relationships, and happiness in the long term. In a weird reversal, our nations prioritized the prestige of high tech medicine over the needs of ordinary people. And, in the end, will this lockdown prove to have been really necessary? Let’s hope that critical thinkers will look back at this moment in history and find ways for future societies to value their collective sociology.