Good point.
For my own answer: it’s pretty much mostly sympathy with more internal eye rolls thrown in the more obvious it is they were not careful. I only get judgey when I learn their job or circumstances required better choices.
Only if you take it to the extreme of deciding that every infected person must have been irresponsible. And it involves an equal amount of doublethink to declare that we can never judge anyone for catching the virus, if we also believe that any preventive measures are worth taking.
I just assume they got unlucky. So many people I know got Coronavirus despite following protocol. I don’t make any judgments about people who get it.
I’ve known 4 people personally who got it in the last month. No instinctive judgment at all.
Do you do the same if someone tells you they were in a car accident? Honestly curious if this seems different to you.
If I hear that someone was in a car accident, with no other context, I don’t tend to lean toward any particular judgment. If I hear that someone crashed their car, I do tend to wonder in a similar fashion whether they might have been at least a bit careless. Yes, even drivers can be completely not at fault, but auto insurance companies sure side-eye those accidents too.
I don’t think being nonjudgmental is quite the universal virtue that some think it is. Judging someone’s behavior as dangerous or otherwise ill-advised does not mean writing off their humanity or feeling no compassion for them. But it might keep you from doing the same stupid shit and suffering the same consequences.
I would question the link between judginess and good behaviours.
I was specifically addressing the part about asking “insensitive” questions. I agree that it’s good to learn from the mistakes of others, but I don’t generally quiz them when they are down.
I see what you’re saying. I didn’t mean question as in respond to their news by saying “well, what did you do to get yourself infected?” I meant that I’m questioning in my own mind, maybe discussing with my husband, and reevaluating my own choices on that basis.
For example, a co-worker with whom I’m friendly tested positive last month. He hadn’t been going to bars or anything stupid like that, but he and his husband were going to semi-crowded beaches and parks pretty regularly (and posting pictures on Facebook.) Before he got infected, another co-worker/mutual friend had remarked to me that this guy seemed to be playing a bit fast and loose with the rules (a lot of these spaces were supposed to be open for active recreation only, not the picnics he was having), and I agreed but wondered if his behavior was really all that risky. After all, he was outdoors, keeping 6 feet from people not in his household; maybe that was enough? But when he told me he tested positive, I thought back to all those images of him surrounded by strangers and thought, hmmm, maybe that wasn’t the best idea. And it made me reflect on my use of our local beaches, because although I am sticking with active recreation, that doesn’t guarantee I’m safe, or that I couldn’t do anything more to be safer.
Do you believe that if one is careful enough, one will NOT become infected? If so, what’s your definition of careful enough?
Without any other information, I don’t make any judgements.
Ok. I was imagining you asking people “where do you think you picked it up? Are you following county guidelines?”
Yeah that would be… highly questionable. And worthy of judgment. 
Reminds me of the thread about words with more than one meaning. Upon reflection, I realize that “question” is often used to mean “ask a person questions”: he was questioned by police, the interviewer questioned me about why I left my last job, etc. But it’s also used in contexts that make it clear the questioning was internal: I questioned his integrity, she’s questioning his commitment to her, etc. In this sense, which is the one I intended, it’s a softer form of judgment that assuming, which is what the OP asked about. It didn’t occur to me that it might be taken the other way, so thanks for asking.
I tend to see a lot of life in terms of probabilities, and the coronavirus certainly fits the bill. There are no absolute certainties, but basic countermeasures (mask wearing, social distancing, avoiding crowds and comingling of separate households) have been shown to dramatically reduce one’s odds of infection. I similarly suspect that if someone has become infected, there’s a high probability that they disregarded these countermeasures. In the absence of any information about how a person may have become infected, my predisposition is to strongly suspect that they let their guard down in one or more ways.
I’m personally acquainted with two people who tested positive. It happened last fall, at a time when prevention was very well understood, and each had gathered in a social group with people outside their household without PPE. I don’t feel that they deserved to have been infected, but I lost some respect for them for their choice to not protect themselves (and the inevitability that they would be exposing others to their own infection, potentially sickening and killing them), despite the fact that public health officials have been beating that drum for months. Their judgment and consideration for the people around them is now suspect.
My initial, kneejerk reaction is sympathy. But I admit that can turn to judginess fairly quickly, depending on what else i learn about them.
Eh, most people who don’t wear masks as much as they should do so for pretty much the same reason people don’t wear condoms as much as they should. They find them uncomfortable. Or they want to do something right now and the protective device isn’t handy by. No analogy is perfect. This one isn’t that bad.
(I am VERY judgy about people who discourage other people from wearing masks, but I think that belongs in another thread.)
Guess you don’t know many nurses? If you look through the “do you or anyone you know have covid” thread you’ll find a fair number who are on onboard with masks who got it.
Now, I’m sure you’ll make an exception to your judging for front line workers. And maybe workers in the meatpacking biz. And maybe a few others. But the fact is many people still have to interact with others and no, unless it’s a properly fitted N95, we don’t all know masks dramatically reduce one’s odds of infection.
Such is not my professional experience. I’ve had nearly 900 of my patients turn up + for covid. I’ve been lucky and not gotten infected, but many of the nursing staff have been. We are all pretty intensive in use of PPE. So it annoys me no end to be told that my nurses and medical assistants must be doing something wrong.
ETA: Q_t_M wasn’t there when I posted. As he rightly says, luck, both of your personal genetics, and of who you encounter how, is still a big factor here.
Agree w @Machine_Elf’s attitude.
With a side order of what @FigNorton almost said, namely that we need to allow for the differences various folks have in unavoidable occupational exposure.
This is a game of chance. Your odds are affected by what you do and by the collective “what they all do” of those around you. If you are somebody who has high occupational exposure the only way you can keep your total risk low is to be super-duper-extra-scrupulous in your off duty time.
Some of us can drive our total exposure to near zero and are actually doing so. Others aren’t trying to reduce their own exposure hardly at all.
The closer to the latter end of that spectrum you (any you) voluntarily operate, the greater you should be suffering the adverse judgment of both your society, and your legal system.
If you have high occupational exposure there is absolutely no way to keep your total risk low.