Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because a kid will recover more easily from feeling responsible for their parent's death than they will from extended but finite lockdown?
I keep saying "do the cost-benefit" because you should do the cost-benefit. One option harms every child and potentially saves some parents' lives. The other harms practically no children and will likely lead to some more parents dying, although the data is unclear (as death rates in states with much more open schools is not consistently higher). Harm all kids to save a few parents on the margin...potentially? Do the…
Really? You think that a parent dying harms "practically no children"?
For christ's sake, I lost my father at 25 years old (10 years ago) and it still hurts me daily (at 35 now).
Your calculus is just plain fucking cold.