Why Our School Should Shut Down for Coronavirus

Note: I am writing this as a high school student. I am totally not writing so that I can get school canceled and play video games at home.

On March 11, FUHSD sent out an email affirming their position to not close down schools across the district to prevent the spread of COVID-19, citing information given to them through the Santa Clara County health department. A screenshot of the email is shown below.

However, their argument is flawed. So, let’s break this email down and figure out what’s wrong.

“[I]f a staff member or student in a specific school is confirmed to have COVID-19, the Public Health Department will consider … whether closure of that school is warranted”

First of all, if someone tests positive for the coronavirus, he/she will not be the only person with the virus. In the US, scientists believe that there are far more cases than the official tally shows. One of the reasons for this is the fact that the coronavirus is very sneaky. Once you get infected, the virus stays latent within you for up to two weeks. This gives you plenty of time to spread the virus to a lot of other people, especially in the daily jam-ups near the construction zone, where people are packed together like sardines! And you would probably only get tested for the virus if you were actually sick, meaning that you have already spread the virus to a lot of other people. And even then, the Public Health Department is only going to “consider” whether to close school (not even close it immediately), putting basically everyone in the school at risk.

In other words, we want to “flatten the curve” of infections; take the necessary measures to slow the spread of the virus and avoid overwhelming hospitals that are already dealing with flu season.

There’s also the risk of spreading the virus to the teachers themselves. And if that happens, they cannot come to school to teach and they’re also unable to care for their children.

“[C]hildren have been shown to be at low risk for COVID-19”

While it’s true that children generally have a less severe response to the virus, that’s not the point of school closures. The students themselves getting sick isn’t nearly as much of an issue as the fact that they can spread it to a large amount of people who could possibly exhibit more severe responses. As explained above, we want to slow the spread of the virus, even if it is not extremely deadly to the students.

“[T]he social disruption caused by closing schools would be significant and currently outweighs the potential benefits”

Really? More significant than canceling junior prom?

In all seriousness, how does social disruption outweigh the benefit mitigating the spread of a very contagious disease that is 20 times deadlier on average than the flu? And if educational disruption really a problem, it can be minimized by going online. Many colleges, such as UC Berkeley, Stanford, Harvard, and Foothill, have or are planning to go fully online in the near future. There is often more at stake when colleges close, such as laboratory research, and yet they’re still taking the initiative. What’s our excuse?

“Vulnerable families who rely on schools and staff for basic needs, including regular meals, are at a higher risk of being negatively impacted”

Fair point, and this is also the reason why Homestead didn’t close during the November 2018 wildfires. But there’s a solution for this — make school optional (keep classes online, but people can come if they must) and staff the minimum number of people required to provide meals for those who need it. This way, school won’t be crowded and allow the virus to spread, though low-income families can still have a steady source of meals.

In addition, should these low income students get infected by not closing school, it will be harder for them to get medical care and it will impact them more negatively than closing school right now.

“If schools close, parents may not be able to work and provide support to those who need it”

This doesn’t make sense. How does the fact that students aren’t going to school impact the fact that the parents can’t carry out their work?

All the while, they’re going to continue cancelling public events, many of which pose less risk of exposure as school does. We should strongly reconsider the actions we take on this matter, for the coronavirus is increasingly proving that the right decision isn’t always about what’s most convenient, but rather the one that benefits the greatest good.