Is it time to abandon the word 'normal'?

The Oxford English Dictionary definition of the word ‘normal’ is:

adjective. Conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected

        In looking towards the post-Covid-19 era, most commentary uses the phrase ‘new normal’. Implicit in this phrase is the expectation that once the era arrives there will be a standard situation, there will be usuals and typicals and familiar expectations – in other words, a set of identifiable circumstances to which people and actions can conform. The reality is that, if a new normal is coming, it will be some long time in the future. There are a vast number of unknowns out there, each and every one denying the swift advent of the usual, the typical and the expected. These unknowns can be broadly categorized into four groups:

DISEASE

           Currently, and for the foreseeable future, there is no easy cure for a Covid-19 infection. We are reliant on a combination of our body’s immune system and specialist intensive nursing. At the same time, the only means we have of controlling infection rates is a combination of high standards of personal hygiene and social distancing. The lockdown phase of social distancing has had a significant impact on the spread of the disease through the population and consequently both infection rates and deaths have noticeably reduced. However, there is a strong school of scientific thinking that suggests that whilst the peak has been flattened i.e. the numbers reduced at this moment, the overall numbers have not been reduced and that there will be serious infections continuing for a time, possibly in the form of a second peak. The debate is ongoing and therefore the unknowns remain. 

At the same time and whilst actions continue to try to reduce the infection rates and volumes, work also continues to develop a vaccine to prevent the disease. Whilst the messaging, and investment, from the UK Government about the development of a suitable vaccine is positive, there are still a vast number of unknowns. Will the vaccine successfully complete the human testing phase of the programme (the key downfall area of many drug developments)? Why commission only 30m doses for a country with a 70m population?

SOCIETY

           People’s faith in society as it was, has been profoundly challenged. Nobody envisaged the unprecedented Government actions of removing all freedoms of movement across the population, even to the extent of prohibiting family meetings and potentially isolating the elderly and infirm. Nor did people ever envisage the closing of all but essential businesses and transport networks in order to inhibit population movements. Similarly, nobody foresaw the near pillaging of shops to provide personal stocks of ‘essentials’, even at the expense of the more vulnerable members of society. The consequences of these actions will remain unresolved for a long time, particularly the psychological impacts on the elderly and infirm.

           But within society there have also been some very significant positive responses to the actions taken by the Government. The massive goodwill shown to the members of the health services and to local communities through the selfless and charitable actions of individuals within society. New charitable organizations, both formal and informal, have sprung up in response to particular needs within local and national society. These have literally been lifesaving in many cases. But what will happen when further changes are introduced such as the easing of the lockdown, the return to work, the opening of the transport systems? Will these new organizations continue to support their fellow members of society or will they wither on the vine as individuals’ lives return, where possible, to what was before the pandemic? Will those individuals who have selflessly contributed to sustaining their communities be able to continue? 

           Within society, nobody can fail to be impressed, even utterly amazed, at the performance of one of the major pillars of any advanced society i.e. the health service. There are many questions to be asked about the preparedness of the service for this pandemic, even any pandemic, but one cannot question the devotion, loyalty, utter selflessness of the staff within the service. Giving succour and support in such a field is often described as a calling. In this case the call has been, and still is, fully answered. But, there are consequences to responding in such a narrow and dedicated field. Other treatments have had to be suspended. At what cost? Nursing and medical staff are exhausted; what is the future effect of this? On them and on their families? One area of the lack of preparedness relates to protective equipment failures. What are the physiological, psychological, and behavioural consequences of working under these conditions? 

  WORK

Because of the near closure of all business premises and transport systems, the nature of work for millions of people has been changed massively and suddenly. By chance the unheralded investment over the past fifteen to twenty years in building a digital infrastructure across the whole country has enabled many people to experience and adapt to a new way of working. Described largely as ‘working from home’ or WFH, whole organizations have been able to sustain some aspects of their business enterprises through the use of digital communication tools. Significantly, this has allowed individuals to avoid extended commutes into central locations, and enabled them to work from the environment of their own home. Many have found improved quality of life in terms of work/life balance, notably by adding more family time into their day. Others have found time to take advantage of the free learning and development services that have been made available and have now enhanced their skill profiles, potentially opening new opportunities for personal growth. Because of the duration of the lockdown, people have had time to become accustomed to these new ways of working, for new behaviour patterns to become embedded and there are many questions being raised about whether a return to the old way of doing things is a) desirable and b) necessary. No answers are available at present, so the unknowns continue to pile up.

           In this same context, most communities have reported significant improvements in the quality of the environment as a direct result of the lack of business travel. Will local authorities capitalize on this to bring in changes to the work commute? Will individuals want to contribute to downgrading the environmental quality if they can avoid it by working from home? Will big centres of employment and associated transport networks introduce staggered hours in order to reduce peak pollution? 

GOVERNMENT

At first, when the Prime Minister issued the instruction for the lockdown of the population and the closure of all but essential business and services, central Government was praised for its strong and positive actions in the face of the pandemic crisis. Its messaging was clear and the actions seen as both bold and decisive. But gradually, as the figures for infections and deaths began moving in the right direction, and the needs of the population were perceived as less and less met, messaging became less clear or more complex. The press interpretations of what was required was allowed free rein and Government communications moved towards answering questions and criticisms, rather than providing leadership. Equally, as the preparedness of the health service for such a crisis was found wanting (in a service run centrally and directly by the Government) so speculation and interpretation and uncertainty increased. Further doubts appeared when the tragedy within the care homes for the elderly unfolded and it was seen that neither central nor local Government had responsibility, and the private sector did not have the capability to take care of these less able members of society. One of the hallmarks of a civilised society is how it treats its elderly members. These experiences have to raise many questions for the future, further adding to the unknowns.

           An additional area of unknowns in relation to Government has to do with whether the United Kingdom is indeed united or whether it is a federation of four countries with one more dominant than the other three. Are the three devolved communities – Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales – really at a disadvantage? Do they really have need of a different solution from the fourth? If so, what about the different population groups within England?

           Taking into consideration the range and depths of all these unknowns it is impossible to see anything remotely like ‘normal’ i.e. standard, usual, typical, or expected, as likely to appear in the foreseeable future. It would appear wise, therefore, to abandon the word ‘normal’ for the moment and focus the creative energies and capabilities of individuals, groups, communities, and businesses on developing the ‘new’ – or any number of “news”, which can address the pressing issues outlined above, plus those still waiting to be identified.