It is not easy to be between four walls for almost three weeks. How can it be for children?
It depends on many factors. Where you live, your environment… It’s not the same a boy who lives in a 500-square-meter chalet of the Moraleja of Madrid, with a campa of Christ, or a girl of Barakaldo, on a flat without a balcony or on a floor where sunlight does not enter home.

There are many variables. If your family is working on telework, if your parents have to assume child rearing and responsibility for school tasks, if you live with a family that has lost their job, if you have siblings, because that helps increase resilience, etc.

What worries me the most today, I assure you, is health. There is a chance that many boys and girls have immunosuppression that can reduce their immune systems. This has to do with, for example, vitamin D, supplements and food can help something, but they will never replace the importance of sun in calcium and phosphorus metabolism.

At certain stages children have long and need a lot of food and vitamin. It is clear that the lack of sun is detrimental to them.

The home environment will also influence you.
I work the memories of adults' childhood. Many people have lived in families that have had difficulties, many discussions at home, because they have been in the middle of a divorce process, etc. Some of these people say that, in those difficult times, they went out to an open and natural place around, where they found tranquility and peace that they didn't have at home. So, being in an out-of-home environment helps not only in the physical, but also in the psychological and emotional. It goes without saying that nowadays many children are living stressful situations at home, especially because their parents, their closest environment, live like this. And now they don't have that escape route out of home.

An example. One person sent me a comment yesterday. I was concerned about the possible spread of their children. It also seems dangerous to go to the supermarket. And in the end, his kids have told him that they don't want to go out into the street until that 'cocovirus' has gone.

Fear is also contagious.
It is one of the main problems. Parents who at first were convinced that children have to go out in the street have been left behind for fear. The media have spread fear in a very effective way.

But the petition is not absurd… Children are
being denied what the World Health Organization recommends: to do at least one hour of outdoor exercise every day. Experts and almost all governments make laws about children and the first things they protect are children's health and well-being. Look at Germany, France, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland, United Kingdom… But here, from the very beginning, the only thing that has worried us is to run the school’s work, not to lose the course.

It's symptomatic. We believe that in this country education is pure knowledge, and we ignore the other aspects related to human development. That is, in addition to knowledge, we should also be concerned about their well-being, their health, movement, light, play...

In the German texts they talk about play and say: "Boys and girls need to play. They want to play, and they have to play." How is it that he's not here? I've been thinking about this for three weeks now, and I don't understand what happens to us.

There are not very many lies that have been spread on this subject.
A lot. For example, the one who says that children are more likely to be infected by the coronavirus. We've seen that in some English media and media from EE.UU, but we haven't yet found what kind of research that idea proves. At the moment, some studies seem to show the opposite, that the coronavirus does not affect children at all.

There is another, very widespread, because children are uncontrollable… “Dogs are taken
to the street bound by the rope, but children…”. That is, parents are irresponsible and we have wild and uncontrollable children. Imagine, some mothers have told me. -Look, where do I have to sign to put a harness on the child and take him out into the street? ".

Why do grandparents die? They don't die from infection with their grandchildren. They're dying because we have 230 percent less AIG than we do in Germany, and because war medicine is being used, because there are not enough respirators. Fear keeps you from thinking, thinking, inhibits, and then you get those false ideas that bind you together in a short chain.

In the absence of outdoor air, we always have PlayStation and TV.
This is another big problem. The other day he told me that he was talking to a mother who, because of ignorance, many parents have their children a few hours of school work and then, as a reward, they let them play video games and watch more television. So there are many hours connected to a screen. We should not forget the addictive nature of screens, even more so if we offer them as a prize.

The human being is not meant to be locked up. This is not a win-win situation. I don't know if you've seen a lot of the video where a two-year-old from Cadiz told her father: "I want to go out into the street, out into the street! And the father said, - No! It's not possible." Then the hashtag #allWe are Bea [we are all Bea] became viral. I say, no, we're not all Bea. To put it plainly, for good development children have to be in the open, it is an inescapable necessity.

Children are not mentioned in the decree implementing the State of Emergency.
It is not acceptable that the royal decree establishing the state of alarm should mention dogs three times and never children. I know that in communities like Madrid there are many more dogs than children, I know there may be more votes, but dogs are not the future of society. That, of course, does not mean that we do not have to legislate to meet the needs of dogs. That's OK.

It's the reflection of today's society. Therefore, in addition to claiming that children should leave the house, this special situation is a good opportunity to recognize children as subjects, as people, in a legal text.

That is not the vision that is taking place in the laws, precisely…
Unfortunately, no. First, set prohibitions for everyone, and then think about exceptions. That has been the logic. Instead of regulating it, two exceptions have been added, initially following the general ban, which has been made public several days later.

The first exception is due to the protest made by the single parent families in the presence of a single family member. What did they have to do to go to the supermarket? Leave the children alone at home? Will you let me be tied with a rope on the patio door? In view of this situation, the Government added this derogation. Some of those with a high position in childhood have told me that this exception would be the oxygen balloon for families. What oxygen!

From the four walls of the house to the four in the supermarket.
That's it. The supermarket will never be a suitable environment for the child, let alone in this special situation. The German or French texts do so. That is purely logical.

The second exception was due to pressure from the Spanish Association of Autism. They managed to give the option of going out to those who have already diagnosed the autism spectrum. However, at that time, they have begun to go out into the street and have been subjected to pressure, threats and insults from the "balcony batos".

And there appears the blue link to identify them fácilmente.Me has liked how César
Rendueles has defined this issue in the El País newspaper this Sunday: "They give them a blue loop as if the problem was the chibate goal." Are we becoming concentration camps? Really? We are not aware that it is not fair to impose the same prohibitions on everyone and to add exceptions. The welfare of all people should be sought. Laws must be created that take into account all ages of childhood. It is also a cultural issue, because we still do not recognize the child as a subject. It is not a private property of parents, the child is a being with rights. And for example, making laws is also educating the people.

If prohibitions create and educate laws, it can be considered a "normal" consequence to scolding from the balcony those who allegedly do not comply with these prohibitions.
I agree. There are several studies in social psychology about the relationships with authority. That doesn't happen because people are like this. No. It depends on the social conditions of each of them. I am convinced that bans encourage such practices. Education is the key.

The feeling of irresponsibility is also widespread. Many say that you cannot regulate here, because people are very irresponsible, because everything is a bargain. Are we more reckless than the French, Belgian, Austrian, Swiss? We have a slightly pessimistic picture of ourselves. But how do you learn responsibility?

Practicing.
Of course. How do you want a child to learn how to be responsible? Saying: “Don’t do anything, I will do everything for your sake, are you calm?” No. It learns to be responsible, progressively assuming responsibilities.

In this matter, apart from the Spanish Government, can something be regulated at a more local level?The law of the state of alarm
is that of the Spanish Government. Therefore, it is necessary for the government to provide a broad and clear framework, and then, in the communities or in the municipalities, to be able to offer the necessary support, focusing mainly on the most disadvantaged families.

We have talked to many municipalities, and it is ready to cooperate. For very tough situations. In some neighborhoods the alcohol shelves of supermarkets are empty. To alleviate anguish, many resort to alcohol or some other drug to try to escape the harsh reality. And there are children in these kinds of situations. Imagine what you're experiencing.

A lot of help is needed. Parents who are plugging children into screens all day long do so because they don't have the means to be with them, to help their children differently. Perhaps they should also be protected.

Should growth be socialized?
It is related to the privatization of childhood. 40 or 50 years ago, children lived much more on the street, in public space, and the tendency for boys and girls to take care of everyone was greater. This saying that the tribe is necessary for the child's growth is absolutely true. Neoliberalism is privatizing everything, and so are children. Now, after the closure of schools, the children are already completely private. The message is as follows: "Fix them and fix them among you."

Including children in the Royal Decree would mean returning to the common area. Because children belong to everyone and not to parents.

So in this situation, what would be the most feasible request?
For example, follow the example of many countries. But in any case, in a first law they should recognize the child as a subject of rights. And secondly, take into account the needs of boys and girls. For example, as was done in France, the World Health Organization (WHO) offers you the possibility of leaving home for an hour, without going beyond a kilometre of your home, respecting the security distances, in an organised way, so that not all go out together.