R&A

Peckham High St (Bellenden road to Southhampton Way) shut Buses are being diverted or stopped (opposite the fire station)

I was crying within minutes of the program starting. I can't believe how amazing and strong that lovely girl was. She was so good at explaining her feelings and honest about (jokingly) being jealous of the nurse feeding her baby and her partner holding him/her. As for the other mother... I couldn't believe how much pressure was put on her by both her husband and the midwife. I can't get the quotes out of my head 'I didn't think i'd be allowed to have another paracetamol...' I felt it was the midwife's 'itch' to do a VBAC and not the mum's... 'I hope I'm not calling you on Thursday to bring the mother in for the c-section' i.e. i hope she hasn't 'failed' and the dad was pressuring her to opt for an c-section so he 'didn?t have to sit in a room for another 30 hrs'... poor poor woman As for handing her her lifeless baby! What was that about? I can't get that image out of my head, let alone the poor mum. She looked decidedly traumatised by the whole thing and i'm not surprised.

my guess would be that it's just not the image the tory party want to portray anymore Dave is after all 'one of us'

...so why have they banned it?

i hadn't realised that the conservative party.. i mean... the copyright owners of this picture managed to get it banned from use in the british press in the run up to the election??!!! here it is in case anyone's forgotten what it looks like... ;)

A doctor-friend told me that pethidine is dished out very readily in hospitals that allow it because it doesn't require a doctor to be present. Apparently provides little to no pain relief in half of the woman that receive it! The epidural is the only sure way of pain relief for woman who are not coping I think some woman have different pain thresholds and also different labours can vary in the extent of pain experienced I felt really sorry for that young girl She was clearly very shocked at her pain but her mum was great at being firm but fair with her

I loved how grumpy.. 'Joy' was! Not sure I'd want to be looked after by someone who'd never had a baby and be told i 'wasn't coping well' But she seemed genuinely kind which is the most important characteristic of a midwife in my opinion

just watching... did she get that epidural she asked for? agree that her husband is a complete tool

I completely agree and would never have dreamed of suggesting that this was a good idea before i went into labour. However - desperate times call for drastic measures... Had i done this i wouldn't have been left in the hospital toilet on my own during the whole of my labour and i would have got an epidural which i wanted and requested throughout. No one wants to be irresponsible but until maternity services improve this is the sort of thing woman will be driven to do.

The best advice i have read on here is to say you're having a home birth and then change last minute to a hospital birth. You will then get a midwife for before/during and post natal care which is what i didn't get and wished i had in restrospect. You need someone to fight your corner and your partner may not be enough e.g. to get you that epidural (or care you need) should you want it. or get a private midwife (lots of thread and recs on here too) also probably a good idea not to read any of my posts (!) as i had a bad time. Saying that - lots of people seem to have had very good care. It's a mixed bag. congrats and big good luck

"the situation will be better because......" 1) These people are not 'above the law' 2) There shouldn't be one rule for them and one for us Dear Sir/Madame Thank you for your e-mail today showing a photograph of a Southwark camera enforcement vehicle and the location without the vehicle. I would like to explain that Southwark's civil enforcement officers (CEO) are allowed to park their vehicles in contravention of the parking rules as long as they are carrying out their statutory duties with limited exceptions. In this instance if the vehicle had been parked wholly on the double yellow line then they would have been parked correctly to carry out enforcement as long as they were not causing an obstructions as they are allowed to park on double yellow lines. However, from your photograph it appears they have parked partially on the footway and they are not allowed to do this to carry out their duties. I am a little concerned that you say this is a regular occurrence and have now referred the matter to our parking contractor APCOA parking who will investigate this matter and if deemed appropriate instigate their disciplinary process. If you do see it there again please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards Nicky Costin

Nick It has come to the attention of some of the residents of East Dulwich that a parking enforcement officer is regularly parking dangerously and illegally on a junction off Lordship Lane outside a children's shop. I have attached two photos showing: 1) The junction without the car. The picture clearly shows double yellow lines, a dropped pathway for disabled and pram access and the corner of the children's shop JojoMamaBebes 2) The junction with the dangerously parked car I understand that parking enforcement officers may have to park illegally in order to pursue their duties but to park on a pavement, on a well used junction, on a dropped pathway and on a double yellow line appears dangerous and reckless. Moreover, to see that this particular car is parked here on multiple occassions causes us great concern as young children are using this pavement regularly and i can't see how it is safe to be driving ONTO the pavement so close to a highstreet junction and a children?s shop (Jojomamabebe) during shop opening hours. Please can someone explain to me, and the other residents, why this is deemed necessary? I look forward to your response Many thanks R&A Edit: To say sent 1pm today Tuesday 19th

the pavement juts out which is why the enforcement officer is parked on the pavement. I don't think the van is on the pavement - i think that's parked ok.

My flash wasn't working but (just about) shows exactly the same car in the same spot - so he's clearly using this space as a regular parking slot. Mark - i completely agree and right outside a shop for mothers and young children....- i'll get the email written today.... >"On double yellow lines, on a pavement and within 10 meters of a junction (not in a parking space). Three offences in one, that's gotta hurt."

I remembered this thread and took this photo of an illegally parked parking enforcement officer on Thursday night. He was parked on the pavement opposite EDT just off lordship lane I know that they can park on yellow/red lines etc in the name of 'duty' but are they allowed to park ON the pavement? Is that even safe??? Anyone any ideas and i'll follow it up if so

.. i suggest for next week's 'EDF family room book club' meeting we discuss Contented Little Baby? Any takers? Babies welcome of course. N.B I'm free any of the following time slots 11am-2pm, 3:30-5pm or after 7pm? ;)

From the conversatoins i've had over recent weeks re GF (and there have been many!) it seems that most people use her advice for child No.1 and then the with follow on kids they just slot into whatever routine the family has established. Generally people are more confident with the next children and know when the baby is 'tired/cold/hungry'. It's really for new mums who are lost in the world of baby-ville and don't have a clue about how long babies need to sleep or how much and when they need to eat etc - that's certainly the case for me. Perhaps it's because in this country we dont' live with the grandparents anymore and therefore miss out of advice and help which the EU countries do have? We need the manuals over here...sad but true. . What baffles me is just how angry and emotional people are about other people's chosen methods of bringing up their children. What does it matter if they put their kids to bed at 7pm? I can't see how that's cruel it's just what these people choose to do. If routine doesn't work for some people then that's fine - each to their own. This is controversial and i don't mean it to be but... i have also noticed that those people who have tried the gf routine and then it didn't work for them, now seem to 'hate' her. Did they 'hate' her methods before they tried? Or did they hate her cos it didn't work for them... anyway - as i have said earlier - i am not a gf follower (yet) as i've only just had my baby but i am going back to work and i know that a routine will probably be the only way i'll manage, so gf/routine is definitely going to be my first port of call... lots of smiles and winks

jojobaby Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > here is a comment from my seventy year old mother > - (ex midwife) " have any of these GF programmed > mothers given any thought to the possibility of > any long lasting psychological damage caused to > their neo-natal infant as a result of only means > of request for attention being ignored. Controlled > crying in my book is nothing short of bullying. It > is common knowledge that babies need and deserve > human contact. Even the much maligned upper > classes recognised this and employed nannies to > provide this essential care. Are we getting our wires crossed because i've not seen GF mention CC in what i've read of her book so far and according to the comments on this thread she never suggests controlled crying??? Or is it some other aspects of GFs advice that will damage these kids?

confused... i wasn't taking things personally keef - i haven't finished her book myself yet and i certainly don't know if it will work for us (baby is just 3 weeks old) so it was a genuine question about whether gf did controlled crying

Keef Is controlled crying a gina thing? In the book i'm reading she says don't leave a baby crying for more than 10 mins? I've read on line however about 'controlled crying' techniques that mean you leave a baby for sometimes 20 or 30 mins and even longer.... i'm sure this'd be really tough to handle and i'd certainly be in tears i've not read this in GF's book though? what page?

Keef - you have hit on the exact point - of course every baby is different. She says this at teh very beginning of her book - 'you apply your common sense to what i say as every baby is different' As a new mum i would never have known that newborns probably shouldn't be awake more than approx(!) two hours. I have no idea about how long they should be awake/asleep. But now if my baby's awake for say 5 hours on the trot and wont go to sleep then it's most likely that i have an over tired baby on my hands. I'm guessing it'd take me months to work that out on my 'instinct' alone. Then at least i konw the problem and i can try and solve it. Had i not known this i'd be tearing my hair out as to what the problem was (this happened to me yesterday) i calmly knew he was over tired and focused on getting him to sleep. Not shoving a breast in his mouth or changing his nappy..again. i just knew and then he slept and it was fine. So you apply common sense to her knowledge and you'll get the most out of her book... and i'm sure any other baby manuals out there.

>" is that an opinion based on reading the books " i completely agree. I listened to all the rants yesterday on the tv, radio and from some friends of mine and i had to check the cover of the book i was reading because it didn't resemble what people were saying. In fact some of the comments completely contradicted her book. Perhaps the book i'm reading is a toned down version and her original book was a lot more rigid? It's like she hits a raw nerve with some people and they get VERY emotional yet the arguments against don't come across as rational to me. Personally, i have found her approach very logical and full of common sense which is why i'm giving her a shot. So far other than the actual suggested routine times this is all that she's said: Don't let a baby get over tired - newborns shouldn't be awake more than 2 hours if possible Dont' think by keeping the baby awake longer during the day they'll sleep more at night Allow time for a baby to fully digest the previous meal before feeding again If a baby cries more than 10 minutes then there's probably something wrong i.e. hunger, cold, nappy Always feed a baby when they are hungry Don't fall into the trap of sleep associations namely - feeding to sleep, rocking to sleep etc as you'll be a slave to them inthe longer term which is no good for baby or mum This isn't judgemental or cruel - just sound advice which i'm grateful for I'm just glad i've read these points rather than have to learn this the hard way

hilarious! http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/aug/09/mumsnet now i'm beginning to see why she's so controversial

Why does GF cause so much anger? I'm new (3 week baby) to all of this so haven't yet found what works for us. However i'm totally open to being hand held in terms of sleep times etc. People talk about 'instinct' but i have zero instinct as to what babies need. e.g. I had no idea how long babies are meant to sleep for, how much they eat and when they eat etc. Isn't it each to their own and like with all manuals you pick and choose what works for you? I am dipping in and out of gf's book for help and advice but certainly not following her by the letter and i'd never be appalled if the baby was awake at 9pm when he shouldn't be etc. Also what attracts me by the routine is that i know when there'll be relative peace and when i can shower/eat etc That makes me feel less stressed out and out of control. But I think that's just my personality and other people get stressed out by even the mention of the word 'routine'... So like the atkins diet - you dont' follow it by the letter but take out the principles that make sense to you and see what happens Or maybe i'll hate her too in a few weeks... but seeing as the daily mail hate her i'm going to give her a shot

can you tell us when this will be on so we can watch the debate?