Ganapati

Dom--I hope you're not picking me out as one of those parents, bc frankly I don't go anywhere with my children these days, especially to all of those pubs in ED. I went once for takeaway at Le Chandelier and got such an annoyed look from the owner I simply left. It just strikes me as strange that people bang on about children so much. I don't think of myself as a lover of children just because I have some. In fact, my husband was the one pressing to have them. But even when I was childless, I didn't really care that kids weere running about in the background--and if you think ED is bad, you should see how some cafes in the more "child-friendly" countries of Europe get. I remember our local Sunday breakfast place always being full of kids. Can't explain it, but it simply never bothered me. Now the smoking on the other hand...

These threads always depress me a little. Having lived on the continent, where children always seem to be welcome, or at least present, whenever and wherever, I wonder if this attitude says something about the British as a people. I remember going to Barcelona on holiday and drooling over the menu at some posh restaurant. We didn't dare go in as we had our baby with us. But the maitre d' saw us and when he asked us if we wanted to come in, we said oh no, it's too small ((we had our pram) and our baby is too loud, he swept us inside, moved furniture around, and generally bent over backward for us. And the waiter even took our baby off our hands and asked if he could show her to the kitchen staff. None of the other patrons seemed to give a fig--even those whose tables were moved a bit to accomodate us.

For all you Nunhead bashers you need to look at the area SOUTH of the cemetery--especially the roads between Cheltenham, Ivydale, and the cemetery. I think you'd change your tune as tons of other young families/ professionals have. Quiet wide streets and very good Victorian housing stock.

I thought Denmark Hill was going to get the Tube in the second phase of the East London Line.. Or is that just a proposal and hasn't actually been cleared yet?

Spangles it was a joke.

So I guess that leaves us with immigration...

Thanks I try my best, much to AllNun's chagrin.

Spangles, you're not showing much respect either to those of opposing opinion. When you ask Asset how her quadruplets are doing any idiot can read the contempt that you have both for her and for those going down that path. If we're just disagreeing then do we need the contempt? You say that infertility is not an illness, well, yes it is, especially if that infertility were caused by cancer. Speaking of cancer, should couples with a history of cancer in their families be banned from having children? It's a crap shoot if they end up getting it, but there is an increased likelihood of getting it (just as its a crap shoot whether IVF born babies will have health problems.) As for your comment about "charity begins at home"...and talk about the indigenous population...well, it seems to me that you of all people should be all over IVF. As I said before Western populations are in decline. If you don't count *immigration*, many countries fertility rate do not meet their population's replacement rate (births replacing deaths)--this includes the UK. All over Europe, governments are scratching their heads on how to shore up their "indigenous" populations--and guess what, paying for IVF is their answer. They pay for 6 cycles in Denmark--and they've proven their that IVF intervention has helped stablize their population. So what's it going to be more *indigenous* babies with IVF or immigrant babies, a la Madonna, and Angelina? As you say, charity should begin at home... So should we now steer this thread toward pro-anti immigrantion? How about it, just for a laugh? :))

So what are your views on subsidised, public housing Maurice (curious not baiting)?

Franglasia--that is such a good description of the Ivydale bit of Nunhead--the land that time forgot. It's so true. What makes it charming is that much of it is in relatively decent nick. But then it feels like the council has decided bc its not so bad it needs no regen money.

Just to add to what Chav says--men also need to see themselves as part of the older parent phenomenon. Unless we're advocating that women go off and have children on their own, I don't see how men never seem to factor in to these discussions. It's not just that women have wider ambitions now, and that we have more choice of what to do with our lives including pursuing a career, but that all of our society wants to put off, for lack of better expression, "growing up." How many men do you know want to have kids in their Twenties? Even if a woman is ready (as my friend was) that doesn't mean the man is a willing partner. Of all the typical yummy mummy middle class educated couples I know, only *one* woman is in her twenties (late), and her husband is 10 years older. He was "ready" to have a kid in his words. I think the problem these days is that women and men may be physically at their peak to have children in their twenties, but no one is mentally ready until their thirties or later. Let's also not forget that men's sperm quality declines as they get older too.

Tommy thanks for the tip--I will definitely try them out. At least I can still get decent kippers at Sopers.

Spangles--I find it very interesting that you choose to tell us parenthetically that you didn't have a caesarean. Why let us know this--is it because we might have got the "wrong" impression of you? IVF is a medical procedure, not a moral one. As for IVF twins tending to require more hospital treatment than youngsters from single births--that's true of ALL twins. The human body wasn't built for multiple births, it puts a strain on the mother and on the babies. The unlucky ones end up in the NICU. As for "Of course, people who have had IVF are going to have a completely different opinion. As Mandy Rice -Davies said "They(sic) would, wouldn't they?" I haven't had IVF, but if people want to go for it, they should be allowed to it. There are worse "crimes" in this world than wanting a child. Anyway, we're going to see a lot more of it. I read an interesting article where Denmark was actively promoting it to stave off their shrinking population. Britian's IVF rate is around 1.5% of all babies born, and Denmark's was just under 4 percent. Interestingly, this article also noted that Danish women's fertility was falling, even for the younger women. Also, promoting IVF is apparently cheaper than trying to "bribe" families to have more children by giving them bigger child benefit payments.

Seriously Bob--and should we do away with cesearean section too because that's not natural.

Spangles--What do you think of this case. I know a woman who desperately wanted (wants) children, who was married to the wrong man all through her 20's and early 30's. He did not want children, and she wisely, was not going to have "an accident" to have one. Now she is in her mid 30's, married to a new, nice man, and after nearly 3 years cannot conceive. Should she give up? What should she do?

Mattham--I'm going to wade in as this is hanging in the air. There's a disturbing trend in the media (as I read it) to portray/assume that IVF and even older non-IVF mothers are selfish b*tches who put off having children in their fertile twenties because they were either too busy frittering them away "having fun" (or as the Economist's leader page put it buying the latest it bag and going clubbing) or scrabbling onto the career ladder. Either way, there's an undercurrent of blame attached to the woman. Before IVF, I suppose these women would have been "punished" because they wouldn't have been able to have a baby. But now, they can turn to IVF and it seems to me it is this "extra chance" that people seem to resent, as if these women have gotten away with being punished. Add to the mix that it's the wealthy that appear to be having "all these IVF twins" and you get the attitude that these women had to resort to paying for their babies. Cue more resentment, because a poor mother wouldn't have been able to do so. This attitude is absurd on so many levels, not the least of all, because it assumes that women and only women are totally in control of having children whenever they please. (How many dad's in their 20's do you see these days???) And, given that Western populations are in decline rather short-sighted. And lest I get this thread lounged for going off=piste, I for the record want to say I have not seen vey many IVF twins in ED.

Keep it real Spangles. Keep it real. and #2 is definitely true.

And yes, they do do funky. Andrew is always trying to get me to do super funky.

Do you think the owners of Le Chandelier read this forum? I hope they do.

I like Willis B as well. The receptionists seem fine to me. It's sort of hit or miss who greets you it seems But the Irish girl is lovely. Also, Keef, ask for Andrew, he's one of the owners and does a FAB job. He was cutting a bloke's hair before my appt and the guy seemed very happy with t.

Dom--You could have fooled me. And talk about whatever you wish, no one is stopping you. I'm simply making fun of a "rule" that was just an absurd justification to get the customers to leave. If you agree with it, fine. But is a 10 month old eating babyfood such a dangerous thing that a rule "safeguarding the premises and the comfort of other patrons" needs to be put in place. Sure I can see someone saying, please don't get babyfood on our lovely new upholstered chairs, but is that reason to ask them to LEAVE? And to ask that of a customer in such an officious way is just bad business. Anyway, like I said, they have a captive audience in ED so they can make all the absurd, officious rules they want. AllforNun--don't you have a community meeting to attend/report on?

Bellenden Belle--don't get me wrong I really like that area. It was one of the areas we were looking at to move to. I think it has fantastic housing stock and of course, how can you argue with a place that has Ganapati as its local Indian. :)) It just looked a little lackluster to me--but I'm quite willing to admit it's probably down to my disappointment that I can no longer get my poached egg and smoked haddock breakfast (as in the old days of the Peckham Experiment-pre Bellenden Brasserie). Anyway, as I said, I will make sure to go visit the area again.

That's great. I actually think it's a nice street, and I was sad to see the original Peckham Experience go, but it always seems a bit lifeless around there. I will definitely go support the Vietnamese cafe though.

Oh please Domitianus, we all know you hate children. We get it already. Ok? The rule I am talking about, and the reason I put it in "" is the one used to tell a customer feeding her 10 mo baby food to get out.

That's got to hurt. Well, who knows, they kind of have a captive audience around here. Anyway, maybe after this they won't be so quick to turf out customers that don't follow their "rules."