Saffron

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Saffron Wrote: > ... > > "instead of actually doing what's morally and > financially necessary" - when there are > constraints on what is financially possible this > absolutist position cannot be sustained. I don't disagree that there are financial constraints. But where we part ways is that I don't believe those constraints either stretch to, or justify, deconstructing Lewisham in any way, particularly under the guise of 'rescuing' poorly performing hospitals. > The > report proposes a sensible and rational > compromise. Yes, but the report is not god. It's not the only viable solution.

yes, that too

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you actually read the report (how many > intending to march have actually bothered?) you'll > understand the issues at hand much better. Make > up your own minds but the decision has sensible, > well reasoned arguments behind it. I'm aware, and I do understand that, BUT... There are also sensible and well-reasoned arguments not to impose these cuts to services at Lewisham. Personally, I don't like the precedent it sets if Lewisham hospital services get deconstructed over these current issues. So, then, anytime a couple of hospitals aren't doing great, instead of actually doing what's morally and financially necessary to improve them, we'll just look to the nearest well-functioning hospital and carve it up instead? These aren't good long term solutions, IMHO.

WorkingMummy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What I react against the most (and come to think > of it, dislike about some of the superNanny shows > on tv) is the idea that your children kicking off > or getting angry is a sure sign that you are doing > something wrong... > > If you have an angry child on your hands, that is > what you have on your hands. ... Sure I can see > that a child might be angry because their parents > are having a hard time (not talking about my own > life there) or because someone's died or because > of some other difficulty. But that does not > equate to something being wrong .... Just focusing on these parts of your posts, does it strike anyone else that situational anger can be a totally different thing to having an 'angry' child? Any child can experience situational anger b/c of parental or family problems, school, friends, etc. BUT, surely some children have more trouble with anger than others, just natually? That's certainly not the parents' fault anymore than if you have a difficult sleeper, a sensitive child, a fussy eater, etc, etc, etc. The main things is not to exacerbate the issue once you recognise it. I totally agree that children --even very young children -- have different personality types that are beyond the parents' control, and that certainly does not equate to something being wrong. I think the supernanny type behavioural fixes appear to work quite well for situational anger. Perhaps this would not be the case for other anger scenarios? Remember that the families on these shows have been through a selection process prior to filming, and the shows are heavily edited post-production. A glossy, quick-fix show is going to have way more selling appeal than the real life uphill struggle of channelling children's creative, yet sometimes destructive, internal forces and emotions. On that Jungian angle... have a read of this strange and brilliant article: "Where the Wild Things Are as Method of Psychoanalysis for Anger in Children" http://voices.yahoo.com/where-wild-things-as-method-psychoanalysis-4539535.html

I think there is also some funding available for 2 year olds, if families qualify within a low income bracket. Ring the Southwark Family Services for more info on this or Free Early Years Entitlement... http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200165/southwarks_children_and_families_trust

No, DaveR, I totally agree with you! As I stated above "dietitians will almost always recommend that it's better for your children to get their nutrients from whole foods rather than supplements". However, that's what makes Vit-D supplementation so interesting, because you cannot simply attain an adequate level of vit-D through diet alone, if you fall into one of the many categories of individuals who by the nature of their circumstances are necessarily excessively low in Vit-D. This is due to the fact that the main source (90%) of vit-D is UV exposure of the skin, not dietary. Conversely, you don't have to supplement with Vit-D orally. You could use a sun lamp instead.

Back to the codliver oil... hmmm. Personally I would go for an age appropriate specific vit-D supplement or general multivitamin. If you're giving cod liver oil plus any other supplement, you need to be very, very careful that you're not over-supplementing with vitamin A (or D), which has toxic side-effects.

One thing the above article is saying though, is that it's sometimes more complicated than that. We had a rainy/cloudy summer in the UK this year. Even many of the days in which people were outdoors, the amount of light actually reaching through the cloud cover may be insufficient, combined with the fact that many people spent more time indoors over the summer than previously. And it isn't always darker skinned people who need more exposure to UV. If you're very fair skinned and need to cover-up and/or wear sunscreen, then you're also missing out on critical UV exposure for vitamin D synthsis. On this point, interesting that the above article highlights that vitamin D is also low in the general Australian population, where there is plenty of sunshine. WorkingMummy, vitamin D is also supplemented in many brands of milk in the States. This makes sense for two reasons: (a) helps prevent vitamin D dificiency, and (b) facilitates calcium absorbtion. The article suggestes this is being considered in the UK as well.

But seriously, being a seconday care giver (ie nanny, sitter, etc) is not the same as being a parent. This is true from the adult's p.o.v. as well as the child's p.o.v. Children act differently with parents than with secondary care givers for a variety of complex reasons. Solutions which work well for one adult may be more difficult for another to implement with the same child(ren). My point is that the solution needs to fit the adult in the scenario too, not just the child. Behavioural advice is great, but it only fits where it touches. xx

The five most horrible words a parent can hear: Mummie, I washed your phone. (Followed by a flushing sound...)

Around 7 years old is when it's widely accepted that logic and reason become more fully developed in children. Therefore, under this age, it's more difficult (to a greater/lesser degree, depending on the specific child) to help them rationalise events and emotions. For pre-schoolers, I would definitely keep it all short. Long explanations and requests for self-reflections are not likely to counter-act the tipping point for a meltdown once your LO is within eyesight of the "event horizen" -- that point-of-no-return around the black hole of a temper tantrum. Forumite Fuschia posted an interesting link on this a while back... http://m.npr.org/story/143062378?url=/blogs/health/2011/12/05/143062378/whats-behind-a-temper-tantrum-scientists-deconstruct-the-screams From the link:

Here's one area where advice on specific supplementation becomes rather interesting: Vitamin D. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20710026 So, indeed, many of us may have good cause to supplement with vitamin D. More info here... http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/news/vitamin_d

I think you should talk to your GP about this issue. I think you have a case for requesting that the NHS administer these immunisations, as they are essential for travel. Several years ago, I travelled to the States during flu season to see my godfather who had cancer. His doctor had instructed that anyone who visited him in the hospital must have received a flu jab. I relayed this information to my NHS GP, who gave me a flu jab (even though I wasn't considered high risk as the time). So there are some instances where NHS GPs can use their discretion. In any event, I think you can order the jab itself through your GP's surgery (you pay for the jab), and then book an appointment to have a nurse administer it to your child? Check with your GP/reception staff for more info, as different surgeries may have slightly different procedures. If this is not possible, then the MediCentre administers children's immunisations privately. Check their website, as they only do children's imms at certain locations, and appointments are generally recommended. http://www.medicentre.co.uk/ Your children's grandfather should be able to tell you what flu vaccine is being offered in his area. If you want to cross-check information about flu vaccine formulations, go directly to the websites of the vaccine providers. If you're paying privately for the vaccine, you may be able to request a different brand. You could also have your children vaccinated when you arrive in the States. (Maybe ask their grandfather to pay for it? Cheeky??)

True that. Mice stuffed with nuts were favourite of the ancient Romans. Ah, for the good ol' days!

Metanium at night, during the day Bepanethan or Drapolene (as alternatives to Savlon, if irritating). xx

This is no ordinary kitchen roll... this is new M&S luxury kitchen roll......

PaulK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > See none of you know anyone who would do this 8 > for a ?1 buying. You give me too much credit > woodrot but thanks. DJKQ even food banks dont dish > out this shit. Their food looks good. My housemate just bought 8 chicken legs for a ?1 in Sainos. Don't all rush down there at once. ;-) (At that price they're probably frog, not chicken.)

If you're releasing balloons, please make sure they're biodegradable. Otherwise they just make rubbish, can be ingested by wildlife, small can animals get tangled in them, etc. Little Cherry sells biodegradable balloons: http://www.littlecherry.co.uk/Balloons-&-Ribbon/c148/index.html?gclid=CO_Fhdmv9LQCFe3KtAodRxMA3w . However, even these take 6 months to fully degrade and could cause a bit of trouble in the environment in the meantime. What about planting a tree instead? This can have the purpose of helping children understand the cycle of life. My FiL died about two years, and we still have his ashes on shelf. We're going to scatter some of them, and we'll definitely take our daughter. It's a personal choice of course, but I think it provides good closure for children. My husband did not get to attend his grandfather's funeral as a small child, and he's always felt that it was a bit unfair that he was "left behind" when other family members attended the ceremony. Children need closure too. xx

some interestings thoughts here... not dissimilar to this thread in fact! http://www.today.com/moms/blogger-calls-only-children-obnoxious-selfish-1B8016962

Nappy cream around the nose. Also Kleenex balsam tissues. xx

I thought the norovirus outbreak was pretty awful but... If you have friends or relatives in the States, you'll already know they're having a terrible flu season. Even previously healthy adults and children can be made seriously ill by influenza. I thought this link was interesting, giving good concise advise on when to seek emergency medical attention for flu (though you could apply this to many other types of illness too). (For those unfamiliar, acetaminophen is the US name for paracetamol, and 104 F = 40 C.) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50500398/ns/health-cold_and_flu/

Similar experience to canela... some babies just aren't "by the book" with routines, sleep etc. Worth a go, of course, if you think it looks interesting, but don't get too caught up if it doesn't work out. I really like this book: http://www.thewonderweeks.com/ . This is also interesting for an anthropological viewpoint on early development: http://www.continuum-concept.org/book.html . xx

susyp Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I honestly think that a child's friends are more > important than their siblings. And that perhaps > we as parents of onlys, have a bit of a duty to > help foster that. I am a bit useless at arranging > playdates but plan to work on that this year. And > when they get to teenage years, you can take their > friends on holiday too - I would have LOVED that > had it been offer when I was that age! > > susypx Yes, TOTALLY agree that friends are soooo important! And we definitely have a responsibility as parents to help foster friendships. I feel so blessed and lucky myself to be part of a large and multigenerational set of friends whom we really do consider to be our family. However, it isn't only luck that's brought me to this point. I've worked really hard at friendships, been through failed friendships, and made extra effort to keep up with long-distance friends. Mr Saff and I have loaned money to friends, and had money loaned to us. We've celebrated and comiserated with friends. We've shared laughter and tears. We've confided, taken chances, and explored new ventures -- all with friends. We have friends of all ages, and we're even friends with many of their children! This is very different to my parents set of friends, who are more formal and less close. So, I didn't grow up in a close circle of friends. And even my extended family aren't this close among themselves. I hope my daughter's life will be all the richer for circle of friends we're raising her to know, whether or not (most likely, not) we have any more children. xx

My understanding was that charities have to pay the local council for bin space. Many charities it seems can no longer afford this. There used to be some great local charity bins for recycling clothing, including shoes. Sadly, I've recently noticed these are no longer there. My local council (I'm in Lewisham) is now recycling clothing, but it only goes for scrap. I imagine the scenario is similar for other charity recycling bins.

Aren't crisps supposed to be the worst thing for teeth? Hmm, that tooth fairy had a conflict of interest!