helena handbasket

Keef I just noticed this. Um, wow. Don't take this the wrong way because I respect your opinion, but have you actually read any of her books? WTF?;-) Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Okay, I'll put my head on the block. > > There are SOME aspects that I would call cruel, > yes.

Since I'm many time zones behind you, I was afraid that this would have turned into a mummy war thread. I'm pleased that it hasn't. Keef I hear what you're saying, but I think the misunderstandings come from the fact that The term Gina Ford (and I do mean term :) has become one of those classification systems peculiar to the British: either you are Gina or AP, Guardian or Daily Mail, working class or middle class. I could go on and on but I will tell you that the thing I miss most about London is the people and I don't recall ever meeting anyone who was so one dimensional as to fit into one category. It does make sense to mix with like minded folk, and I fully support an AP group in ED. It was the language that concerned me. As for attempting to bottle feed and AP, have a look at the advice they give. Dr. Sears is the most condescending but the International AP website is just as bad. They recommend "attending" to your baby (basically just paying attention), eye contact, skin to skin etc. as if resorting to the bottle has rendered you too stupid to think of basic mother/child bonding rituals. Keef as a father, did someone have to tell you how to snuggle and love your daughter while you bottle fed her? Would you be offended if someone suggested that because you could not breast feed her that you would have to be taught basic parental love and nurturing? The reason Gina Ford doesn't mention these things, I suspect, is because she is offering advice on technique. I get the impression that she assumes you know how to love and nurture your own baby, or least she doesn't assume that one can be taught this in a book. I can respect that. For the record, Gina Ford does not exist outside of the UK. Nobody has ever heard of her here. Yet somehow most babies I know end up on something resembling a GF routine. That's not an accident. The anti GF hysteria needs to come down a few notches I think and it needs to cease to be a a term used to describe cold or authoritarian parenting. That was what I was getting at in the beginning, and I still think that if one sat down and rationally compared parenting styles you would find that they are a lot closer than you think.

Well, as someone who once dared to show up at one and *gasp* bottle fed my son (long story, none of their business really), I can tell you that I became invisible in the amount of time it takes to whisper "horrible mother". I tried two more meetings but it was clear that nobody thought I belonged there. Sometimes you just know. Not good for the PND, but that's another thread. Judging by the thread on self esteem, mothers don't need an excuse to feel bad about themselves. All I was asking is that you use care and clarity in your descriptions. When you mention the range of outcomes as attached, non-attached and ambivalent and then describe the spectrum as AP at one end and Gina Ford at the other, can you really not see how some people who are not familiar with these terms might make assumptions? I came on here asking for sensitivity for struggling new moms, and the response is "I'm surprised that this innocuous post on the usually good natured family room has elicited such strong feelings".

SW I think only the attachment people will care about the comparison TBH I'm not one, but I think the Gina people just want a bit of sleep, from what I can tell. Anyway my point is that people who have never heard of either will read that, and based on Saffron' s explanations will interpret a pretty obvious good/bad bias which is not accurate and unfair. If you are going to talk about spectrums then a bit of clarifying is in order. My background is in child psychology and I feel compelled to reassure parents that attachment theory (not to be confused with the movement called attachment parenting) is much more concerned with attention, care, and love than wether or not your baby has a bottle of formula or goes to bed at 7:00. I fully understand the theory of attachment parenting (more than many who live it I suspect). I have no opinion either way and I obviously can't fault the intentions. But I wonder why it seems to come loaded with value statements? I felt that the explanations that were given to Ann and womaofdulwich were misleading. I am not even a little bit interested in getting into a parenting debate. I hope your group comes together for you. Good luck!

Actually Gina Ford and attachment parenting are at the same end of the spectrum. These both include versions of mothers who take their role seriously and work to provide the best start for their child, regardless of abstract value assumptions. The opposite end of the spectrum is severe neglect and/or mental illness. I just thought it was important to clarify this for the new moms out there who are having trouble breast feeding or co-sleeping and terrified that they will have babies with ambivalent attachment. Please be careful how you chose your words. Saffron Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Attachment parenting is the opposite end of the > spectrum from Gina-Ford type parenting. Jean > Liedloff's book 'The Continuum Concept' is the > basis for what is now known as attachment > parenting. You are welcome to borrow it from me. > > I don't know of any groups specifically for > attachement parenting, but I would also be > interested. > > xx

Not Panto, but Soho Theatre does brilliant shows for pre-schoolers. This season they are doing Bagpuss. Reasonably priced as well.

Selfridge's will probably be sold out as well. It's great if you can get in though. Not free, but under ?10. Leed's Castle does a wonderful one. It's easy to get to off of the M20. I'll bet it's quicker to get there than to Selfridge's! Last year there was snow and it was just magical. Oh and they had done up all the rooms in the castle as fairy tale themes. Santa gives a decent gift too. Highly recommend.

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > steveo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Museums and galleries should charge again. > Seems > > to me 90% of the visitors clogging up the > > Tates/National etc. are well heeled tourists. > Why > > do we subsidise them? > > A fair point. Why not waive charges on > presentation of proof of address in London? Because these people are each pumping about ?100 a day into the British economy. It's not like they are coming for the weather.

In 1989, as a bright young university student I decided to go on the birth control pill. The only way to get it at that time was under prescription from a doctor, which meant having a full physical exam. Lady bits and all. I had never had this lovely experience before and was extremely anxious. As I pulled myself together at home to get ready for my big gyno debut, I thought it would be good to um, add some floral whiff shall we say and had a peak in the bathroom to see what the roommates had for perfume. Found one, qerous spray, good to go. At the doctor's, in that humiliating position women know too well, the doctor was quiet for a moment and then said "Wow, um, pretty". I had no idea what this meant, but assumed (as a naive idiot) that she meant my uh, you know. When i got home I realized that the "perfume" I had used was actually purple and gold sparkle spray.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi helena handbasket, > Roughly where do you and your neighbours live that > were burgled? > > Hi sb, > This thread should perhaps be retitled "burglaries > in Forst Hill/East Dulwich areas/Bellenden/Peckham > Rye /South Camberwell with bits of Dulwich > Village" because roughly that's the areas posted > about. Such an area has about 50,000 homes with > 80,000 residents. We were near Goose Green. It was a couple of years ago. I think it's odd to suggest that people shouldn't talk about it. If I had known, I would have done things differently, like have our locks changed immediately, install a London bar, and most importantly, not have our infant son's bedroom at the top of the stairs and ours further up where we couldn't hear anything. Of course it changes you; that's why people are affected and talking about it and needing to say "it happens!". You don't know if it's random or if it's the fellow that walked by the other day and was, in hindsight, a bit friendly. Or is the fellow down the road who has been very welcoming and chatty but was actually just sniffing out your situation? Of course it's nice to be a bit naive and friendly, as I was before, but seriously one needs some smarts about it and there are plenty of habits one does in South London that you may think are the same everywhere but they are not. Read the old thread about how to keep your kid from getting mugged on the way home from school. It's a bit of an eye opener. >spelling edit<

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Concita. Apart from your experience and that of > others posting on here why do you feel that these > ares in particular are hotspots? We were burgled while we slept, and the "CSI" people who came in the morning were not shy about telling us we were in a burglary hotspot and that there had been several others just that week. Our neighbors were done a few days later. Having just moved from another country, that was a pretty difficult idea to "rise above". No idea how that is peddling fear and prejudice.

sillywoman you are totally right. I guess I'm just trying to figure out if my pre-existing guilt is clouding my judgement and making me look for problems that aren't really there. That's why I thought I'd ask the "forum of truth and common sense" :) edit: oops sorry redjam, another crosspost! Glad to hear it worked out for your daughter. I'm really hoping it's my dramatic son being just more dramatic than usual, but I we'll have to see how the carers respond to my concerns, and how he responds to the (hopefully) positive changes. I feel like I know him so well, but this one has me puzzled.

womanofdulwich Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 100% agree with Dulwich mum. But that is quite a > lot of change for him-a third place? and he is 4? > I am sure that is not your choice- but it sounds > quite a strain. Exactly, which is why my first instinct is to get over protective. And you're right, not my choice at all. We've recently moved back to Canada and immediately enrolled him in the local pre-school so he could settle into the neighborhood and meet the local children, but I was unable to find local childcare. He instantly loved it and there was no way I was going to take that away from him, so the only way for me to go back to work was to go the two days he is not at pre-school and find care a bit out of the neighborhood. I told myself it would just be like another school for him to enjoy. Ha. Even worse, he's moved too many times for a four year old (twice internationally) and I obviously feel tremendous guilt for it. When people tell you small children are adaptable, please ignore them. Children need boring old sameness I now believe. So yes, in my effort to undo the damage of the last four years (why we're in Canada actually) I seem to be making a bigger and bigger mess of things! I really appreciate the personal responses, it's like walking a tightrope with a sensitive child at a sensitive age. I'm not 100% determined to keep working, but I feel like I've been out for too long already and if I don't get back in now I may never be able to. My son is my priority so I may have to just roll the dice on the career and believe it will work out. As it turns out I didn't even get called into work this morning (which is a good thing since I cried all morning after the traumatic drop off) and picked him up at noon........ they said he was great all morning and that yes he was making friends and yes he was generally a happy camper. Now I'm so confused. The carer I spoke to when I picked him up was very helpful and concerned and genuinely took an interest in my concerns. But there is no way I can go to work after the horrifying drop (I'm in absolute tears by the time I get to the car) so it's a real pickle. I think I'll try one more morning with the staff being now fully aware of my dissatisfaction, and then we'll see. Unfortunately I'm also viewing pulling him out as yet another drastic change, so I really need to be sure because there's no going back once I've done it. I know, I'll look it up in the parenting manual that came with him! Oh right, that doesn't exist. I hope those of you sharing your similar stories find a happy place for your babies too. There is nothing worse than thinking about your little one being sad and helpless.

Okay, I know I don't live there anymore but have always valued the opinions of the mums here and am at wits end...... I have recently gone back to work and put my son into a "daycare centre" two days a week. He has been going for about a month, and rather than getting better he is getting more anxious and hysterical every time we go. He is four years old and is in his second year of pre-school on my days off (this is his second pre-school as well,never had any issues with him starting either and in fact he took to both immediately). He has always been a bit on the demanding side (he's textbook spirited) but that has never been an issue at either pre-school so am thinking it must be this place in particular. I personally feel it to be a bit cold and impersonal, none of the lovely welcoming when we arrive and they don't try at all to engage him so suspect that his highly sensitive nature is responding to this "neglect". Part of me feels like it is natural for an only child to go through this under these circumstances and it's part of growing up and learning to roll with things so keep taking him and trying to make it work. But honestly, the morning drop off is horrific and I can't keep having to pry my hysterical child off of me and run out the door. It's just not like him. He's never been clingy and usually happily runs off and has fun when he gets somewhere. But not here. He has also started hitting children there (very unlike him) and seems to not be himself at home (and has started night waking/nightmares). I can't decide if this is just an adjustment issue that we need to muddle through or if my job as a mother is to realize that something doesn't smell right and call it a day. I'm enjoying being back at work but in all honesty it's just for me to get my groove back, expenses are eating up most of what I make so it's not that we can't live without the income. Have exhausted most other childcare options (would love a nanny but difficult to find part time and no luck finding a nanny share). So, is this just growing pains for both of us, or is my mummy instinct right and it's time to stop the nightmare? I don't want him to get "issues" as we prepare him to start school next year. I'm absolutely gutted about what it appears to be doing to him. Thoughts?

I could be wrong, but non-EU immigrants can't claim benefits anyway so it's work or starve. My entry visa states "no access to public purse" and I came as the wife of a British citizen, ex forces no less. Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Magpie Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > My understanding is that an immigration cap is > a > > policy yet to be introduced by the Coalition. > > Currently, there is a points based system > > introduced in the dying days of the last Labour > > government when they realised that their open > > doors policy on immigration had been a disaster > > socially, electorally, and had little long term > > economic benefit as any increase in economic > > output is offset by the increase in population. > > An immigration cap is pointless politics. It can > only be applied to non-EU countries and all it > will mostly do is block some highly skilled people > who are needed in the UK.

I was once dumped for turning 30. By a fellow I didn't realize I was dating. He said it was moving too fast, and that my ticking biological clock was now a gong. He was scared that we would be shopping for furniture soon. He ended by saying "It's not you, it's me". Uh, thanks for clearing that up, freak! He then married and knocked up the next girl he dated within the year.

My son has potato feet as well and I've bought the Sainsbury's ones at every size. ?3! I usually buy the next size up as well. They're old school green. Best deal in town.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > this is getting very heavy. Arent we making this > person seem more important than he is? This is my point. There is no such thing as "safety" on the internet, even if it is just a neighborhood forum (with 13,000 users to my memory?) Then again, I'm not sure what kind of information one might give to a forum that would be unsafe in the wrong hands. Keep in mind, google searches from all over the world produce EDF threads. Make no mistake, there is nothing private about what is said here. I first joined this forum under my real name, but felt too exposed. No reason, it just seemed a bit like using your own name for a bankng password or something. So I switched to my drag name ;-) edited to add: There are thousands of others on here. Do we know what any of them are doing with all of this information? He actually outed himself.

Karrie, What are you going to do once you have outed all of the trolls? Half of the people on this forum are in character, and plenty of them are popular forumites (I think. Who knows? Isn't that part of the fun?). How do you decide who is a troll (a term I have grown bored of) and who is just having a bit of fun? Is there a solid definition of troll that everyone is in agreement with? I don't think it's possible. And anyway, what's the point? I think most people today recognize that everything read on a forum (or anywhere else on the internet.....Wikipedia?!) should be taken with a pinch of salt. I should give the terms of the EDF another read, but if it states anywhere that all postings must be truthful and that false identities are not allowed, then I think there might be more than one offender on this forum. Anyway, if you think that JRussell is single-handedly bringing down the integrity of the journalism industry, um.....

One of the corner shops (at Blenheim road I think) has a popcorn popper that makes fantastic popcorn. Buttery, salty movie kind, not that sweet stuff. ?1 a bag. Also Brockwell Park has a horse. He's lovely and friendly. No idea what his story is but I love that he's there.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Karrie, has the "intrusion" really bothered you > that much? Crikey. > > This made me think of something Impetuous said on > another thread about people being bothered about > real stuff, like the floods in Pakistan. Not > directing that at you Karrie, but just finding it > hard to care about trolling or otherwise in the > broader (or indeed any) scheme of things. Exactly. Anyway, I'm starting to get the feeling that it's not the exposure that people are worried about as much not getting credit. Remember the dodgy/missing post thread? When the news folks used that on the evening news, forumites were giving the high-five up and down the lane. Any obscure reference to the forum used in the news is announced on here, and not once have I noticed anyone complain about a Code of Ethics. Smells like sour grapes.

Karrie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dear J. Russel > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZ-SGljHik&feature > =related > > I hope you?ve had a nice weekend off from > trolling. > > While I am waiting for your paper?s code of > ethics, so I can decide how I feel about your > intrusion, I thought I?d view all your posts. I > have done a summary of the profile that you > portray to me. I have done it in a PDF format as a > keep-sake for you, because you must be very proud > of your achievements, lol, lol, lol, lol, lol, > lol. This says more about you than JRussell to tell you the truth.

Not sure where in Canada you are flying to, but for some strange reason I find Canadian airports generally a lot more serious and less flexible about regulations. In fact the smaller the airport, the tougher they get (boredom? :)) I've never been asked to sample EVERY jar of baby food at Heathrow, but I have in Canada (I declined, they didn't push it but when nerves are raw do we really need to fight with security?). Anyway just bear that in mind for your return. Even short haul domestic flights can get silly at security. Must be that good old fashioned Canadian insecurity.......... must......do...... better! Also just to note, some Can. airports are dumb about buggies and will only let umbrella type strollers to the gate. They will actually hand you a giant plastic bag and watch you wrap your buggy in it while the queue gets longer and more impatient, and then you have to check it at the oversize counter, depending on how pissy the clerk is feeling that day. Then you get to carry junior around for three hours. It's a crappy way to start a long journey. I would seriously consider a Maclaren for this trip. But Air Canada staff are generally lovely and helpful if that's who you are flying with.

jrussel - I find the whole thing really interesting. Please keep us posted. I would love to see what you have come up with.

Moos Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My son and his friends must be particularly > clumsy, as they seemed to be knocking their heads > on fireplace corners and coffee tables for a good > year! Same here! And going through any and all cupboards, and climbing bookshelves (which is why they are all screwed to the wall!), sticking things in outlets, falling down/off things, etc. etc.. Clearly some children are a bit more curious than others! That said (and I am speaking as the mother with the nervous twitch due to adventurous child), I will always advocate being safe than sorry. I've been trained now to spot a crisis a mile away :) but you never know what might catch a little person's attention, even just for the fraction of a second it takes for things to go wrong. I know that many people prefer to just "teach them not to do it" and if anyone has found a fool proof way to keep a small boy from running carelessly or not investigating something he can't possibly guess is dangerous, then I'm all ears.