I figure this is a situation many people will be forced to face in the coming weeks, so I am curious where everyone might stand on this issue.
Your roommate tests positive for Covid-19, but symptoms are mostly mild and they don't need to be hospitalized. You are currently testing negative, with no symptoms of illness. Who (if anyone) should have to vacate the premises? As I see it, there aren't a whole lot of options. Either one person has to leave, or everyone stays and just does their best to mitigate the risk. Whoever leaves will probably have to pay extra for either an AirBnB, extended stay motel, or additional apartment. Should the cost of this be split between all roommates, or shouldered entirely by the person that temporarily leaves?
While the situation is hypothetical, feel free to answer based on your current living situation. I think things get a lot more dicey and complex if you consider a situation where there are multiple roommates or children involved.
EDIT:
I admittedly formulated the question assuming only a "roommate" scenario, where you are just living together with someone for the purposes of splitting and sharing living expenses. This is where more of a quandary exists, because it's questionable how much loyalty you should have to someone who is at best a good friend, and at worst just some other person that you can tolerate co-habitation with.
I expanded the question to include a Significant Other just because I recognize that many people are living with a life partner, but obviously that changes things in a pretty significant manner. I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone to walk out on a partner forever, but I don't think it's out of the question that the both of you could maintain separate living spaces for a couple weeks. There's likely dozens of vacant AirBnBs in every city, so finding some place close by for one party to stay would not be entirely unreasonable.
Your roommate tests positive for Covid-19, but symptoms are mostly mild and they don't need to be hospitalized. You are currently testing negative, with no symptoms of illness. Who (if anyone) should have to vacate the premises? As I see it, there aren't a whole lot of options. Either one person has to leave, or everyone stays and just does their best to mitigate the risk. Whoever leaves will probably have to pay extra for either an AirBnB, extended stay motel, or additional apartment. Should the cost of this be split between all roommates, or shouldered entirely by the person that temporarily leaves?
While the situation is hypothetical, feel free to answer based on your current living situation. I think things get a lot more dicey and complex if you consider a situation where there are multiple roommates or children involved.
EDIT:
I admittedly formulated the question assuming only a "roommate" scenario, where you are just living together with someone for the purposes of splitting and sharing living expenses. This is where more of a quandary exists, because it's questionable how much loyalty you should have to someone who is at best a good friend, and at worst just some other person that you can tolerate co-habitation with.
I expanded the question to include a Significant Other just because I recognize that many people are living with a life partner, but obviously that changes things in a pretty significant manner. I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone to walk out on a partner forever, but I don't think it's out of the question that the both of you could maintain separate living spaces for a couple weeks. There's likely dozens of vacant AirBnBs in every city, so finding some place close by for one party to stay would not be entirely unreasonable.
Last edited:
