(05-22-2020 10:30 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: (05-21-2020 08:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote: (05-21-2020 07:02 AM)MWC Tex Wrote: (05-21-2020 12:50 AM)DavidSt Wrote: These schools=greed for money
Money>student, faculty and athletes' health
Those people aren’t at risk. Liberty University was supposed to be doomed when they let students back on campus after Spring Break... nothing happened.
The typical student isn't at risk. Those with underlying health conditions have some risk, as do faculty and staff over 60. Schools should protect the latter while allowing the former to go about their business, on campus, IMO.
I get this argument, but as a corporate lawyer that regularly gets sent complaints from tort lawyers that really stretch for arguments, what you've outlined just can't be defended if/when some faculty and staff end up contracting the coronavirus and either die or suffer life-long debilitating conditions from it. The fact that a state government says that schools can open doesn't provide any type of immunity.
Eventually, there's going to be a "reasonableness" standard established by the law where companies and other entities can feel comfortable defending themselves against tort claims, but the problem is that it isn't defined at all for a pandemic of this nature in modern society.
A couple things. First, about immunity, in the case of state schools, a lot of states enforce their sovereign immunity against lawsuits, right? I know that varies from state to state, but in some states it is just very hard to file a tort claim against a state institution.
That aside though, I would open the campus with protections for faculty and staff. For staff, barriers and social distancing from students, and particular professors can conduct classes from a physical distance (e.g., a stage or lecturn) or online if they older or have underlying conditions. Students too can take all the classes online if they have health conditions. I am not advocating that older staff or faculty or students with health conditions just be thrown to the wolves, concrete steps have to be taken to protect them, but of course there is always an assumption of risk - have kids and professors like me sign waivers to return to campus, etc.
As for kids taking the virus home, that can happen anywhere. E.g., right now, my wife and I, pushing 60, are not allowing anyone in our house, period. Nobody, not even close family. Won't change until we feel comfortable and despite our state taking steps to re-open, we aren't comfortable yet. Yes, many students live with parents, but unless they are going to never leave the house, they can always bring the virus back, that's a risk the family takes by living together, all families face.. A 20 year old isn't going to leave the house and limit themselves to only places where they don't come within 6 feet of other 20 year olds, school closed or not.
Bottom line is, despite polls showing large majorities in favor of "shutdowns" and moving very slowly to reopen, the actions of people seem to differ from what they tell pollsters (not uncommon at all, btw). Two months seems to be the limit of at-home tolerance for a large segment of people given the nature of virus, namely that it does seem to specifically target some groups but not others. Re-opening is happening everywhere, even in deeply-blue states, so we have to figure out how to make it happens as safely as possible.