The government is exposing teachers to unnecessary risk over vaccine wait

Laudable though the aim of ensuring schools remain open is, those leading classes need to be protected, writes Ian Hamilton

Many teachers will have to wait to be vaccinated (Getty)

The government has taken the advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) and decided that teachers won’t be prioritised for vaccination; instead the strategy of targeting age groups will continue.

So, when 10 million school children return to the classroom on 8 March, many teachers will do so without the protection of a vaccine.

The government has been clear that education is a priority and that any period of school closures damages the life chances of all children, but in particular it disproportionately impacts children from low-income households. As always it is for government to set policy having listened to the scientific evidence. The JCVI and deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam emphasised this impact on children but argued the data shows teachers are not a high-risk group when it comes to the threat of dying or requiring hospitalisation due to Covid-19.

Although the decision appears well-founded, as always nothing in science or policy is that clear-cut or perfect. Firstly, consider what has changed – or rather not changed – since the government’s decision to close schools just a few weeks ago. They would no doubt argue that a third of the adult population has received the first dose of a Covid-19 vaccine. Spectacular as that is, the majority of those vaccinated are over 70, not the same group that will be sitting in classrooms in a week’s time.

But there are other significant assumptions and factors that make the decision on teachers problematic. Unlike health staff, protected with full PPE, teachers have to rely on a few open windows, possibly hit-or-miss social distancing, dubious teenage hand hygiene, and masks for protection. Even in the most accessible and high turnover health setting, primary care, the equipment and precautions taken make most schools look pitiful.

Clearly teenagers are themselves less at risk from the virus compared to older people, but they are still able to transmit and spread the virus – placing teachers in a higher-risk environment than many of us.

Compounding all this is the government decision to not make the twice-weekly testing, or wearing masks, compulsory in England, even though the education minister Nick Gibb has said that both are “highly recommended". So it will not be a case of no test meaning no school.

Laudable though the aim of ensuring schools remain open is, this latest decision risks schools reopening then shutting down again within a short period, which is disruptive. The government failed to learn from the mistakes of previous lockdowns in opening up society too soon – it looks as though the same scenario will play out in education.

The government is suggesting to me that it does not value public sector staff. This is apparent not in its warm words but its deeds, in forcing teachers to take risks they would not take themselves were ministers in the same position.

It is nothing but complete hypocrisy to praise the role of education, then place those who are responsible for delivering it at unnecessary risk.

Ian Hamilton lectures in mental health at the Department of Health Sciences, University of York