Estimates and Projections of COVID-19 and Parental Death in the US

What Happened to the Prevention of Child Maltreatment During COVID-19? A Yearlong into the Pandemic Reflection

“…Recent reports estimated that, as of February 2021, as many as 37,300 children in the USA aged 0 to 17 years have lost at least one parent due to COVID-19. This is an increase of 17.5 to 20.2% (Kidman et al, 2021) compared to pre-COVID rates of parental loss. This means that during the pandemic, children worldwide were not provided with their most basic rights while living in escalating toxic environments.…”

Is the cure really worse than the disease? The health impacts of lockdowns during COVID-19

“…32 Recent estimates suggest that the number of children who have lost a parent to COVID-19 is extremely high, with a recent paper estimating that 43 000 children have lost a parent in the USA. 33 The same study estimated that 2 million children have lost at least one grandparent to COVID-19. 33 Generally, the evidence indicates that government interventions against COVID-19 are not associated with increases in suicide figures.…”

“…33 The same study estimated that 2 million children have lost at least one grandparent to COVID-19. 33 Generally, the evidence indicates that government interventions against COVID-19 are not associated with increases in suicide figures. Where suicide rates have increased, as in Japan, this was not associated with government action but with large-scale unemployment that occurred well after the government had lifted restrictions and encouraged individuals to return to life largely as normal.…”

“… 33 The same study estimated that 2 million children have lost at least one grandparent to COVID-19. 33 …”

Editorial: ‘No pain ‐ No gain’ – Towards the inclusion of mental health costs in balanced "lockdown" decision‐making during health pandemics

“…This sounds like it should be straightforward, but in fact, the COVID situation presents a number of practical and ethical complexities that stretch the application of the QALY concept beyond its initial intended usage. This means that the QALY concept will need to be developed further so that it can be applied to an intervention: ‐ designed to prevent rather than to treat – the issue of COVID‐19 susceptibility, in terms of both morbidity and mortality, needs to be factored into estimates of costs and benefits. that impacts the community as a whole rather than just susceptible or sick individuals – the impact of the lockdown on individuals with low susceptibility to the virus needs to be taken as seriously as those individuals with high susceptibility. where QALY losses may be more common than gains – so that the negative effects of lockdown felt by the community as a whole are set against the positive effects limited to a minority of COVID‐susceptible individuals – this is complicated further, of course, for instance, by the knock‐on lockdown benefits in terms of quality of life associated with bereavements avoided (Kidman, Margolis, Smith‐Greenaway, & Verdery, 2021) and the knock‐on costs in terms of reduced life expectancy due to missed diagnoses and treatments. where QALY losses and gains have qualitatively different profiles – lockdown‐related QALY losses relate more to quality of life, while gains relate more to increased life expectancy. But see caveats above. that have an imbalance of impacts between and within demographic groups – for instance, COVID‐19 susceptibility, and therefore lockdown gain, is likely to be concentrated in the older age groups, especially those with underlying health issues, while lockdown losses may be experienced most acutely by younger members of society ‐ where the personal health risks of infection are very small. …”