Parent (boys aged 6 and 9) here. At first I figured that school at that age (kindergarten) was basic skills, not very critical, and as you say mainly a way of getting kids out of the way.

With some experience now, I think that school provided more than I thought:

* socialisation

* authority outside of bfamily

* development of personality

* habit-forming for later school

.. aside from the fact that even if you're a good parent and have already exposed your kids to letters and numbers, you will likely not have ensure a complete coverage.

Example of importantance of school choice: my first son went to a regular public kindergarten and lost some of the autonomy he had built-up with us. Going to the bathroom was done together with an aide at school, so why not at home?

My youngest ended going to a Montessori kindergarten by accident. They focus a lot on autonomy and as a result he is very much 'his own boy', even at the age of 6.

And beyond kindergarten, even just in primary, the 'skills' part of school is difficult to do 'in-house' unless you spend a lot of time on it. There's a reason we applied Taylorism to education.

I guess it's amusing to you because you don't have children.

I think wanting daycare is totally reasonable though. I just think it'd be nicer if it didn't have to be school. Traditionally, multigenerational households would have helped with child rearing but now it's often pretty much entirely on the shoulders of the parents which I know would be extremely draining.

> Traditionally, multigenerational households would have helped with child rearing but now it's often pretty much entirely on the shoulders of the parents

It goes much further. In 90% of human societies up to 60 years ago, it was normal for children to spend a lot of time interacting with neighbors and others outside of the home and schools environments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_takes_a_village

Furthermore, the extreme forms of helicopter parenting where children are not even allowed to walk to school by themselves is very US-centric and very modern.

I agree. As a parent, I both want my kids to learn, and I want care for them so I can work. I think if we were more honest about both these needs, we could do better at both. I have seen a certain mania that schools are only for education, and it leads to crazy things like expecting five year olds to spend 45 minutes per day writing, or otherwise asking kids to sit and learn for a lot more of the day than they can really tolerate - as opposed to more outside time, more play time, more movement. It's ok to be a school and a daycare!

Semi-related, I know I'm responsible for deciding to have kids, but the ongoing functioning of society relies on a continuous supply of people to keep it running. I sure hope some people are still working after I retire! It would be nice if the U.S. could support parents more than we currently do.

That’s also why the “remote learning” during Covid was such an infuriating joke: the main purpose of schooling (which is daycare) was destroyed, and the learning was marginal at best. This is all while the elementary school children were at no risk from the disease, and while plenty of other “essential workers” were busy working their jobs in person. What a joke.

> This is all while the elementary school children were at no risk from the disease

First, that's untrue:

https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-survival/covid-19/

Of course it's not even close to the death rate in adults, especially older ones, thankfully, but it isn't "no risk".

Second, the main reason for school closures was that the kids, even if there's very little risk for them, can transmit the disease to family and friends.

Nonetheless, some countries, like France, made the choice to keep the schools open to maintain some level of schooling for most kids. It wasn't without issues and massive criticism from teachers ( who were risking their lives to keep other people's kids occupied), parents ( because classes were closed when a kid got Covid to prevent further transmission, so you could suddenly have to deal with your kid), etc.

That link is a very complicated one that could mislead people due to the first numbers they see. The number of direct deaths of under 10s in developed countries who did not suffer from a serious congenital condition is essentially 0 (e.g. in the UK about 1 in 20k deaths were of a child under 10 and as far as I know they all had serious health conditions).

There's been an outbreak of hepatitis recently which has resulted in a number of deaths and is very probably Covid-related.

There's also a significant risk of Long Covid, although the details are still being debated.

Covid attacks the immune system and also hugely increases the risk of complications from micro-clotting. It's certainly not a disease to be casual about, in either kids or adults.

Note that long covid is MUCH more common in older populations. I'm unaware of a case of debilitating long covid in a child under 10.

> the grocery store clerks had more integrity and sense of duty

The grocery store clerks shouldn't have been risking themselves without hazard pay either.

Making someone too desperate to quit isn't duty, and calling people essential without treating them better is insulting.

But that's not for you to decide. We live all together, and someone getting sick from an infectious disease concerns us all.

People who don’t want to get exposed can just continue to stay at home. Sure, they might not like it, but my children don’t like the house arrest either. The difference is that I’m not forcing anything on you, it is you who are forcing things on me.

Yes you are forcing things on people, without noticing it.

You are forcing vulnerable people to stay at home.

No, I’m not, any more than I am, through my driving, forcing people scared of being hit by a car to stay home.