Saffron

Foxhelp Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DJKQ I didn't come back to the forum with a > request for further help as I assumed no one on > here could help because no one replied or gave > advice. I used the time to contact other sources > including environmental health , rspca, Wildlife > centres and local vets. Why didn't you speak up or > contact me? Saffron was sympathetic and when she > said Oh dear do keep the forum updated I just > thought she was being nice and not asking for an > update with regard to anyone offering help! Silly > me. Next time I will certainly request further > help on here from you because you have offered to > help which I am grateful for. So sorry to see the cubs died. Yes, my post was entirely genuine, and I would have been very happy to help in any way (then or in the future). But please try not to feel bad. What happened was a natural event for a wild animal. Although it's sad, it's not your fault. xx

What kind of travel? Are you flying? Using public transport? Will the buggy be used for naps on the go? Are you sticking mostly to pavements, or will you be travelling in roughly paved areas or countryside? Is there a size requirement, needs to fit in a small boot?

Belle, has your son been for any recent professional assessments? As far as I understand, the concensus on medication for very young children is that it's a treatment option of last resort, so at this point your son should be being assessed to see what type of behvioural-based intervention would be helpful. He needs a psychological "toolbox" of coping skills as much as you do. That way you and your son can try to work with eachother, even though he's very young, rather than you feeling like the disciplining is all down to you and then doubting yourself. If that makes sense? xx

Agreed there are bigger issues in education. So why is the government even bothering with meddling with something so relatively trivial? Is it just so they can be seen as 'doing something' while actually avoiding tackling bigger issues efficiently? Considering it from that p.o.v., I'll protest it on principle.

I just remembered that my mother used to keep calamine in the fridge. We'll try that tomorrow. DH just returned from work via the pharmacy with a bottle of antihistamine syrup. Pharmacist said it's ok. xx

Just read online that you can use Baby Anbesol on bites. Does anywhere local routinely stock it? xx

Yup, I thought of that this morning. Haven't had a chance to get down to the pharmacy to ask. Little Saff is only three.

Mr Saff finally re-painted the en suite loft... after 3 years of me asking (and he's builder!).

Does anyone know if you can get the AfterBite brand of anti-itch cream in the UK? Have used it abroad, not seen it here. Kids formulation is non-stinging.

Thanks I'll have a look.

Great will give it a try. Willing to try just about anything. The bites are so bad!

Poor Little Saff has a terrible itchy rash, looks like mosquito bites or something similar. Is there something better than Antisan please? Antisan contains alcohol. It stings on abraided skin. I tried Savlon which takes away the pain but doesn't stop the itch. Hydrocortisone relieves the itch but takes a long time to start working. She really needs a fast-acting topical analgesic that doesn't have alcohol. Can't find anything in our local pharmacy, but the pharmacist there is generally pretty clueless anyway!

Oh, that is very sad. I signed the petition too. Bromley MyTime are a disgrace for not supporting this valuable community resource. :(

TBH, KK, I think your first comment summed it up more succintly. ;-)

Google "motion activated sprinkler" ;-)

The media and other popular discussions (and unfortunately even some scientific works!) have a major problem in correctly applying terminology, particularly when discussing risk, as not all risk factors are the same. Therefore the progression of the associated increased risk being equated to an actual contraindication for co-sleeping is not necessarily a given from the observed scientific literature. For example, consider smoking as a risk in the context of infant sleep. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378378207001296 Parental smoking is linked to increased perinatal death. Therefore if you smoke, co-sleeping is contraindicated. This is due to the inherent toxic effect of the chemicals produced by smoking. So that makes sense. Now consider different risk factors. Consider low-birth weight or bottle-feeding, which are also associated with an increased risk for perinatal death. However, low-birth weight or bottle-feeding alone do not necessarily contraindicate co-sleeping. This is because these factors individually are not inherently toxic conditions in otherwise healthy babies with no associated risk factors. Nevertheless it may be seen as advisable that low weight babies or bottle-fed babies sleep separately, in so far as this may make it easier for the parents to identify and control associated risk factors, such as sleeping position, etc. http://img2.timg.co.il/forums/1_147673444.pdf http://adc.bmj.com/content/91/2/101.short While consideration of risks in context is obviously important, delineation of types of co-sleeping and effect on perinatal outcomes don't always seem to be well-defined. Indeed in some cases co-sleeping is being defined to include co-sleeping on any surface (bed, chair, sofa). This is not really correct methodology scientifically speaking, because it does not allow for accurate separation of risk factors associated with different sleep surfaces. Attempts have been made to correct for this, for example, by defining co-sleeping and bed-sharing separately. However, this is still problematic. Not all bed-sharing styles are equal, eg positioning in bed, security of placement, placement between adults, mattress and bedding type, and whether or not co-sleeping is the usual arrangement or a one-off, etc. http://adc.bmj.com/content/85/2/108.short http://adc.bmj.com/content/91/4/318.short So before we can lump co-sleeping into a category as to whether or not it's inherently risky or contraindicated, we'd have to be better able to define and study co-sleeping styles. Therefore the default position medically has been (understandably) to advise the use of other sleep styles which have been better defined in terms of risk. That's not the same thing as saying co-sleeping is inherently not safe. While Carpenter et al (2013) is an interesting study that does attempt to pick apart some of these issue, it is by no means black-and-white. http://www.west-info.eu/files/BMJ-Open1.pdf IMHO, instead of taking an outright stance against bed-sharing, we should be investigating ways to make it safer. And in so doing, we would likely learn how to make sleep safer for all babies regardless of sleep style.

Depending on the size of the pond, another option would be to plant the pond with aquatic plants, to a depth and density so as to effectively make it a bog garden rather than an actual pond. This would still leave a small amount of free water for frogs etc.

Can you not simply return the offending garden deposits through your neighbour's letter box with a little note saying, "You left this behind"?

Prioritising values can be a challenge. We all value the same things for our children, but we rank those values differently as individuals. It can be difficult to find a nanny that prioritises values in the same way you do as a parent (and even sometimes the two parents prioritise differently... arrghh!).

> Safe cosleeping amongst non-smoking > breastfeeding mothers has a myriad of benefits for > babies and the alternatives (being knackered and > falling asleep on the sofa with baby because of a > perceived view that cosleeping is wrong) are much > more worrying. Well said, Bluesuperted!

Trees on public land are generally the responsibility of the local council. They will be pruned if there are dead branches, or if the council believes the roots are liable to cause problems for the foundations of local buildings, dependent on soild type, building condition, tree variety, age and size. Although sadly, these considerations are not always as balanced as one might suppose. Disruption of the pavement is not cause for pruning. You might be able to get the offending area repaved if it prevents a hazard. Contact your local ward councilor or the planning office. Their contact details are on the council webpage. Or, you could buy a house on a barren street entirely devoid of trees? Just a thought. ;-) If the trees are not blocking busses or overhead cables, or causing foundational damage, then then council won't alter their growth. It would be a waste of public money to prune where unnecessary. Also, considering that pruning and pollarding is best done in late winter / early spring, you've missed the boat timewise. You'd be better off bring up the issue next winter before the spring leaf outgrowth. Otherwise, pruning diminishes habitat for birds and insects.

My little girl starting getting carsick around this age, not related to illness as far as I could tell. But having a cold could probably make it worse. We noticed a difference when we moved her from her infant carseat to a larger carseat. The new carseat has the option of being in an upright or reclined position. Somewhat counter-intuitively, the reclined position is better. Too upright = carsick, everytime. I think it's less stressful on their posture when they're reclined, and it makes it easier for them to clear mucus or bring up wind without vomitting. Always leave the back window down next to your child. Leaving a front window down may mean the airflow goes over your LO's head, which doesn't help. The air needs to go on her face. Also, wiping the face with a babywipe or wet towels helps. No food or milk ~20 min before travelling, and only water to drink in the car. If your LO starts to look sick, don't wait. Pull over asap and take her out of the carseat for ten minutes. Make sure you have a sick back, muslins, spare wipes, change of clothes all ready for accidents. The one time DH was like, "Meh, she'll be fine. She hasn't been sick in a while." Sure enough, she vomitted everywhere.

Little Saff was ~1 when my FiL died. Hubbie and I took her to his funeral and meeting all the distant family he hadn't seen in years. He was a bit worried about it, but in the end, her presence was a great comfort to him and his extended family. Of course this was local, and there were the two of us to look after Little Saff all the time. If you have to travel without your partner, then the stress of travelling may be an important consideration. Although, personally, I think I would want to take my daughter with me, and I know that my overseas family would also want to see her. But there's no right or wrong answer. I think you just have to do what feels right for you and your family. xx

Lewisham has very little information about their own tree pruning policies online; however, I have spoken with Lewisham council this spring. If you're in Lewisham, contact their planning dept. You're more likely to get a response from them than from any of the councillors IMHE. Southwark is slightly better in that is has some documents online about it tree policies. But you don't have to take my word for it. If you'd like more information, I urge you to contact your local council personally.

Two resouces for anyone in Lewisham: http://brockleystreettrees.blogspot.co.uk/p/welcome.html http://nigeltyrell.com/tag/lewisham-trees/ xx