Do Lockdowns Work?
Jan. 5th, 2021 12:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blogcutterMaybe. Maybe not. The greyer I get, the more I see issues in shades of grey, not black and white. Or, for that matter, red, orange, yellow or green.
I hear that the Quebec government is considering not only extending the lockdown, but also imposing a curfew. Meanwhile, Ottawa's Covid numbers have been trending sharply upwards since Ontario included the city in its (minimum) 4-week lockdown.
Clearly that doesn't prove that the lockdown CAUSED the uptick in numbers, but I do think that in some respects, Lockdown Ottawa may have done more harm than good, particularly when it comes to teens and young adults who would normally be just starting to venture out and make their way in the grown up world. People for whom the peer group, their circle of friends, classmates, work colleagues, acquaintances and contemporaries, tends to be of pretty great importance.
Until lockdown took effect on December 26, Ottawa was in the "orange" zone, verging on yellow. There were still some opportunities for young people to socialize. They could go skiing. They could go shopping. They could go to a restaurant or a bar. All under controlled conditions, of course - and probably pretty safe conditions too, if the numbers were any indication.
Now they are allowed to do none of those things. Technically they're not allowed to host or attend private gatherings either. But "technically" is the operative word here. Many, perhaps most people, are following the rules; others are bending them a little; a few are no doubt flouting them entirely and organizing anti-mask rallies at which they confidently proclaim that the virus is one big hoax.
Here's the thing, though: it's much easier to enforce the law at a commercial establishment than in a private home. Police and by-law types can't be everywhere at once. The scofflaws who do get caught are most likely those who live in the student ghetto, those who have darker skin, those that some neighbour or other holds a grudge against, whether or not it's for a valid reason. Meanwhile, people who live in affluent, neighbourhoods, especially if they are personable and generally well-liked, can get away with even the most serious and blatant flouting of rules. Those five vehicles in the laneway plus any hiding in the 3-car garage? Well, that family does own a lot of cars, you know. I really wouldn't like to get on their bad side - they're salt of the earth sorts, pillars of the community!
Law enforcement is just one tool, and not necessarily a particularly powerful one at that. Far better in most cases, I think, is to make it easy to do the right thing. To be socially conscious and socially considerate, which for now may mean being a bit anti-social when it comes to in-person contact.
Consider how society has evolved in terms of other issues unrelated to the pandemic. We no longer have capital punishment in this country. Or corporal punishment in schools. In most communities, non-judgemental sex education and birth control, including access to abortion, are now reasonably available to most young people who want or need them, including those below the age of majority. These are just some of the changes I've seen in my lifetime.
In a number of other areas, we still have quite a way to go. For example: do we really think that putting gory pictures and dire warnings on cigarette packages will deter young people from smoking? Or using plain packaging, hiding them behind the counter or outlawing cheaper, fruit-flavoured or candy-flavoured varieties?
With alcohol, we no longer have to skulk into the liquor store and fill out a little form to get our beverage of choice; we've lowered the drinking age below 21 in most (all?) provinces while still warning against drunk driving or alcohol abuse during pregnancy. That's some progress, I think.
Still, I think the "forbidden fruit" aspect of tobacco or alcohol or cannabis or any other kind of potentially addictive substance is very often the main driver of serious substance abuse issues in young people. If they had grown up having the occasional civilized glass of wine with mum and dad at dinner, would they still feel compelled to go get hammered when work or classes ended for the weekend? Not so much, I suspect. And our children's generation was if anything subjected to more in the way of "helicopter parenting" than we ever were, which might have further strengthened the Gen X and Millennials' need to rebel.
Anyway, back to the matter of lockdowns. I don't think there's any going back now and I don't see Ottawa, or any of Ontario or Quebec getting out of lockdown any time soon. I hope things turn around sooner rather than later. And I hope we are filing away a few "lessons learned" to apply to the next public health emergency!
I hear that the Quebec government is considering not only extending the lockdown, but also imposing a curfew. Meanwhile, Ottawa's Covid numbers have been trending sharply upwards since Ontario included the city in its (minimum) 4-week lockdown.
Clearly that doesn't prove that the lockdown CAUSED the uptick in numbers, but I do think that in some respects, Lockdown Ottawa may have done more harm than good, particularly when it comes to teens and young adults who would normally be just starting to venture out and make their way in the grown up world. People for whom the peer group, their circle of friends, classmates, work colleagues, acquaintances and contemporaries, tends to be of pretty great importance.
Until lockdown took effect on December 26, Ottawa was in the "orange" zone, verging on yellow. There were still some opportunities for young people to socialize. They could go skiing. They could go shopping. They could go to a restaurant or a bar. All under controlled conditions, of course - and probably pretty safe conditions too, if the numbers were any indication.
Now they are allowed to do none of those things. Technically they're not allowed to host or attend private gatherings either. But "technically" is the operative word here. Many, perhaps most people, are following the rules; others are bending them a little; a few are no doubt flouting them entirely and organizing anti-mask rallies at which they confidently proclaim that the virus is one big hoax.
Here's the thing, though: it's much easier to enforce the law at a commercial establishment than in a private home. Police and by-law types can't be everywhere at once. The scofflaws who do get caught are most likely those who live in the student ghetto, those who have darker skin, those that some neighbour or other holds a grudge against, whether or not it's for a valid reason. Meanwhile, people who live in affluent, neighbourhoods, especially if they are personable and generally well-liked, can get away with even the most serious and blatant flouting of rules. Those five vehicles in the laneway plus any hiding in the 3-car garage? Well, that family does own a lot of cars, you know. I really wouldn't like to get on their bad side - they're salt of the earth sorts, pillars of the community!
Law enforcement is just one tool, and not necessarily a particularly powerful one at that. Far better in most cases, I think, is to make it easy to do the right thing. To be socially conscious and socially considerate, which for now may mean being a bit anti-social when it comes to in-person contact.
Consider how society has evolved in terms of other issues unrelated to the pandemic. We no longer have capital punishment in this country. Or corporal punishment in schools. In most communities, non-judgemental sex education and birth control, including access to abortion, are now reasonably available to most young people who want or need them, including those below the age of majority. These are just some of the changes I've seen in my lifetime.
In a number of other areas, we still have quite a way to go. For example: do we really think that putting gory pictures and dire warnings on cigarette packages will deter young people from smoking? Or using plain packaging, hiding them behind the counter or outlawing cheaper, fruit-flavoured or candy-flavoured varieties?
With alcohol, we no longer have to skulk into the liquor store and fill out a little form to get our beverage of choice; we've lowered the drinking age below 21 in most (all?) provinces while still warning against drunk driving or alcohol abuse during pregnancy. That's some progress, I think.
Still, I think the "forbidden fruit" aspect of tobacco or alcohol or cannabis or any other kind of potentially addictive substance is very often the main driver of serious substance abuse issues in young people. If they had grown up having the occasional civilized glass of wine with mum and dad at dinner, would they still feel compelled to go get hammered when work or classes ended for the weekend? Not so much, I suspect. And our children's generation was if anything subjected to more in the way of "helicopter parenting" than we ever were, which might have further strengthened the Gen X and Millennials' need to rebel.
Anyway, back to the matter of lockdowns. I don't think there's any going back now and I don't see Ottawa, or any of Ontario or Quebec getting out of lockdown any time soon. I hope things turn around sooner rather than later. And I hope we are filing away a few "lessons learned" to apply to the next public health emergency!
