Which one should we cancel? The dads' one seems a good choice

Well, further to my rant the other day about the lack of dads groups in the area, Lucie received a mailing yesterday with a timetable of events for parents. Out of all the groups (there's about five or six on a day), dads get one. On a Friday. In the afternoon.

That should have a stunning turn out, after which I'm sure that they'll quietly drop it due to "lack of interest". However, even if two men turn up and form their own mini-support network I suppose that that's a little result.

I needed a new bookmark yesterday so grabbed a scrap of paper I found. I do this often, I don't own any real bookmarks so will just grab anything that comes to hand. An envelope. A till receipt. You get the idea.

Today I actually read the piece of paper that I stole. It was an amendment to the timetable. It states that "due to staffing issues, the 'Lunch Munch' (groups for fathers and male carers) will now not start until the 5th February".

Maybe I'm getting paranoid. But out of ALL the groups they hold, this is the one they have issues with and they can't find ONE staff member to attend this group? They're not sending anyone such as a health visitor anyway, it says so on the timetable. So all they need is a random member of staff to go along and sit there.

Furthermore, none of the other groups are affected, so they only seemingly have issues for this hour and a half.

Lucie thinks I am being over-paranoid. But this reeks of convenience to me. To me this should have been treated as a priority if they were having staff issues, no matter how well attended it is compared to other groups.

Why?

Because it's the only group that is identified solely as a support group for men. It's the only group where males can meet up together and KNOW that they will meet other males in the same situation. As I said in my earlier post, when I have attended other groups you are almost guaranteed to be the only male there and pretty much ignored. Hell, I remember at one group as soon as Lucie walked away for a moment the lady talking to her turned my back on me as if I didn't exist.

Secondly, when Lucie's groups haven't happened, the women know each other well enough to break out and go to a different venue on an ad hoc basis.

If the aim of the council's childrens' support service is to provide a support network to different types of parents, this is one of the groups that they should have identified as a priority. Instead, I feel that they cancelled it because it is the easy option.

And I think that stinks.

Addendum: on top of what I've written above, there is actually another group on at the same time as this cancelled session, and they even get a health visitor in attendance.

What a load of rubbish

You know that you're getting old when you start moaning about bin collections.

Well, I'm getting old, because here I go....

We haven't had our bins or recycling collected for three weeks. Around here it's meant to be weekly on a Monday.

It isn't a huge issue for us, as we've never created much waste. But all the roads around here are like bomb sites, as Christmas has caused people to accumulate vast quantities of rubbish and just through it on the kerb.

Our first missed collection was on the 21st due to ice and snow. That's fair enough - the safety of the workers must come first. However, due to a quirk of the calendar our following collection - the 28th - was a bank holiday.

Normally in such circumstances of bad weather stopping play they catch up with the areas they've missed first, and then move back to their regular schedule. This time nothing of the sort happened.

What this means is that lots of houses that were due to have collections on Tuesdays and Wednesdays have still had weekly collections, yet we have had to wait until tomorrow.

(Incidentally, the mailing that we got from the council in early December stated that the houses that were meant to have collections on the 24th and 25th of December would have them squeezed into the Tuesday and Wednesday collections, so they haven't really noticed any difference, aside from having to wait until tomorrow for "this weeks" collection).

Like I said, for us it isn't an issue. But attempting to navigate the pavements with a pushchair around all the festering bin bags wasn't fun today.

Bleeding councils.

MP's response to libel reform campaign

I recently wrote a letter to my MP asking him to support the moves to reform the libel laws in this country, and also to find out his opinion on the current situation.

Unfortunately I got a reply that basically said "oh look, there's a fence over there. It looks jolly nice. I'm going to sit on it".

Here's the reply:

-------

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding reform of the libel laws, which I have noted. I appreciate you taking the time to contact me about this matter.

You asked me to add my name to Early Day Motion 423. Early Day Motions are an expression of backbench opinion, so as Minister for Rural Affairs and Environment, I am unable to sign them.

However Early Day Motions are just one of the many ways in which Members of Parliament can represent the views of their constituents. As your MP I am able to lobby individual Ministers, including the Prime Minister, informally and through written correspondence.

As you may know Jack Straw MP, the Justice Secretary, is setting up a working group, which will consist of media lawyers and other experts, to examine a range of issues around libel. The aim of this group will be to make recommendations on reform. In addition the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into Press Standards, Privacy and Libel and is considering a wide range of issues in this area of law.

I look forward to learning of the new proposals with great interest.

------

OK, fair enough, he can't sign it due to his position. However, I'm disappointed that he didn't hint either way what his thoughts on the matter were. The "wait and see" approach sounds like he's playing it safe to me. I would have at least liked him to agree or disagree with me that the current laws are wrong. I would have preferred that he disagreed than sitting on the fence!

Here's my original email for reference:

------

I would be interested in finding out if you will be signing the Early Day Motion for reform of the UK libel laws (http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=39987&SESSION=903)

Many people in the UK feel that the current libel laws allow large companies to silence criticism against them due to the high costs of defending a libel lawsuit, and because of the onus for the defendant to prove themselves innocent (and that there was no damage done to the reputation of the other party... I have no idea how you prove that). The UK is now being treated as the 'libel capital' of the world, with international companies using our courts to sue others for words written overseas, merely due to the fact that because of the internet the words and opinions can be read here. There are concerns that this may make overseas publishers unwilling to allow material to be published here.

There is also growing discontent of the way writers and scientists are treated under the current laws, and this cannot possibly be in the public interest. For example, you may be aware of Simon Singh, who is currently appealing a ruling from the Royal Courts of Justice. He cited scientific evidence that questioned the efficacy of chiropractic treatments, yet has still been dragged through the courts since 2008.

You may also be aware of the NHS doctor Ben Goldacre, who was sued for libel by Matthias Rath for articles criticising his promotion of vitamin pills to AIDS sufferers in Africa. The case was eventually dropped, but not until significant legal costs had been incurred defending the action, which has been quoted as 'unlikely' of being recovered by the Guardian newspaper.

The examples go on and on, but you can read them for yourself on the Libel Reform campaign website at http://www.libelreform.org, which includes an excellent report on the current problems with the law as it stands, as well as proposals for change.

I would like to point out that this campaign is supported by an extremely wide cross-section of the UK community. It is supported by journalists, comedians, scientists, TV personalities, bloggers, human rights campaigners, writers and ordinary members of the public.

I would highly encourage you to join your Labour colleagues who have already shown their support for the campaign in supporting the Early Day Motion - I'm sure that they would be more than willing to discuss the issues involved in the EDM with you.

Happy New Year

Happy New Year to you all. Just a quick thought that goes beyond the usual new year messages. The last decade has seen many close family and personal changes for me. I've been close at hand to weddings but also divorces. I've welcomed new arrivals to the family, but also felt the difficulty in letting go those that have departed. In the last decade I've reached many major milestones; like getting a degree, marrying and having a son.

On a wider scale, we've seen amazing leaps in technology yet witnessed religion causing much angst and strife around the world, especially in the form of terrorism and ongoing war.

However, if we think really hard - really really hard - we should realise that the good outweighs the bad. We should never ever lose sight of that, and I trust that in the next decade some wonderful things will happen. No-one knows what the world of technology will bring, but I look forward to finding out. I look forwarding to joining you all in 2010! Have a good one, and never forget the positives in life.

You say you want a revolution? Evidently, I don't want to change the world

Well, I feel like a big fat stinking hypocrite.

Ever since Lucie was pregnant, I've found myself getting more and more annoyed with the way fathers are treated in this country. To name but a few:

1. A system that hardly ever asks how the man is feeling and coping whilst the woman is pregant
2. Men completely ostrasized by health professionals (I remember when I managed to attend one of Lucie's check ups, the midwife blanked me and started asking about "your husband's family's medical history" when I was sat two feet from her)
3. Antenatal classes usually only held during working hours. Women have a right to attend them fully paid, men have none
4. Often ordered out of maternity units after their child has been born, sometimes even minutes after
5. Paternity pay that pays pittance (the other day I was told to 'celebrate' as it had been raised in the budget... from £121 before tax to £123)
6. Minimal leave for fathers, which means that they feel dislocated from childcare once they return to work, and also doesn't allow families to decide who will be the main caregiver and who will return to work

Those are just the ones that spring to mind right now.

One of the main other things that have annoyed me after child birth is the lack of support for fathers. Many groups are specifically targeted towards females, for example groups like "bosom buddies". There's a reason that they're called mother's groups. They are also without fail held during the working week. Whilst I understand the reasons for this, there is little attempt made to offer early evening groups or weekend ones. Health visitors don't like working outside office hours. When I have managed to turn up to them, two annoying things often happen:

1. I'm told "it's nice when men take an interest" (more probably would if they were held at convenient times - I don't like this type of comment as I feel it perpetuates a myth that most dads can't be bothered with their kids)
2. I'm completely blanked or looked at with suspicion as I'm an extremely rare male attendee

To make it worse, there was a group in our local area called "music with mummy". If that isn't a group name that says that men aren't welcome, I don't know what is. Then one day, they changed their name.

Hurrah!

Well, no. They changed it to "music with mummy or granny".

Nice one.

It was one of my bug bears, and I really moaned and moaned about it. One day the woman who organised it turned up to one of Lucie's groups to promote it, so Lucie took it upon herself to moan on my behalf. The response was "it's always been called that" (because that's the answer to all of society's ills) and "no men ever turn up anyway".

Lucie's words must have had an effect though, because shortly after they changed their name to be more inclusive.

Hurrah!

Again, no. It was now:

Music with mummy or granny
(or significant other)

Great, so I'm no longer just a sperm donor, I've been upgraded to the title of significant other. In future, I will not announce myself as Archie's father, I will announce myself as "Archie's significant other".

So I've been whinging, I've been moaning and I've been on my box moaning that someone should do something about it.

Let's move the story on slightly to get to the point. We know the local NCT chairperson quite well (the NCT are the National Childbirth Trust and organise lots of parenting meets and assistance, if you didn't know - I'm acutely aware that us parents talk a different language sometimes). Lucie is a member and has done some work with them. I've even been a hero and donned an apron to help out at one of their nearly new sales in the past (never again, those women are lethal when they're searching for a bargain).

So a few weeks ago she said to me "where are all the fathers? I need someone to start organise some groups and make them feel involved. Fancy taking it on?"

What I should type now is that I said "YES! I've been moaning about this for ages! This is the perfect outlet! A hell of a challenge but it should be fun and worth it"

So did I say that? Eh, no. I waffled about how I would love to, but I'm much too busy. And I am. I have two jobs at the moment, I finish one and then head home and work some more. I don't work the most hours compared to some people by any means, but I am pretty stretched at the minute. I'm working between 45 and 50 hours a week, not including commuting. I just couldn't fit in the organising of this and associated promotion on top.

However, ever since I have felt bad. I am more than happy to moan about this issue, but unlike others I haven't done any proactive when I've had the chance. I feel like a keyboard warrior, nothing more. Maybe I should just forget about it and move on, but I can't. It just keeps biting away at the back of my mind.

Everyone else is talking about it, so what the hell....

I couldn't believe what I was reading when I was read what Jan Moir wrote about Stephen Gately's death. I read it relatively early in the morning, as the power of Twitter was already warming up and news of the 'opinion piece' was spreading. Back then the title was still "Why there is nothing 'natural' about Stephen Gately's death", before they changed it to the (not much better) "A strange, lonely and troubling death..."

Of course, in true Twitter style, I commented on it, read a few @ replies and then returned to work.

Other the absolute rubbish that she wrote - which has already been ripped apart ad naseum by people with a much better way of words than me so I won't dissect it here - I couldn't believe her 'apology'. She attempted to claim that her comments had been misinterpreted and that she was the victim of some sort of orchestrated internet campaign.

Well, wake up Jan, because social media doesn't work like that.

You can't publish an article in the morning and then get literally millions of people to denounce it on mass in a 'planned' way.

Take a good look in the mirror and wonder just why people ripped you to shreds. It's because you took joy in dancing on someone's grave before his family and friends had the chance to bury him, and because your 'opinion piece' was full of stereotypes and bullshit that was obviously aimed to appeal to your narrow-minded readership. I would be quite content if no paper would publish you again, but I'm sure deep down you're loving the attention.

The whole thing thing makes me feel like I did when my sister received a letter from a womans' magazine that wanted to publish her 'story' just a couple of days after my brother-in-law was killed in a work accident. Completely crass as they didn't even give her the decency of burying her husband. The Mail chose to publish an inflammatory article that insulted his family and didn't even give them the decency of holding his funeral before printing their rubbish.

Anyway, that's enough of that. This has to be one of the most funny comebacks to this whole saga, and I'm sure you'll agree it was much better than my blog effort: http://notsowunderbar.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-there-is-nothing-natural-about-jan.html

Media misreporting

The news drove me crazy the other day. I was driving to work and the newsreader was announcing the latest warning to parents.

"Parents warned that 50% of cot deaths are caused by parents sharing a bed with their baby"

Now, I will freely admit that I'm not a medical professional. I also try to keep an open mind about new child-rearing advice, because I know how frustrating it is to hear parents say "back in our day...." and effectively brush off the latest childcare advice, even if it makes sense (should I mention the whole "we used to chew our cot bars that were covered in lead-based paint and we were fine!" nonsense here?)

But this one, I've heard it before. There are always studies into cot death, and the media over report the dangers of co-sleeping. I found myself yelling at the headline every time it was repeated and couldn't wait to get into work to read more into the study. I started up my company laptop, made a coffee and sat down to read up on it before I was due to start work.

As expected, all the news stories led with the warning about sharing a bed with your baby. Supposedly a big factor in 50% of cot deaths studied. But then I got into the detail (including hunting out the research findings themselves).

That 50% included falling asleep with your baby on the sofa. Which with a tiny baby is pretty crazy as the risk of them falling off the sofa, or even worse, being smothered, are much much higher. Of course, the media didn't differentiate between the two and just lumped it all into "sharing a bed with a baby".

Futhermore, many of the deaths where co-sleeping or sleeping on the sofa had other factors, chiefly the parent taking drugs or being intoxicated. This wasn't heavily reported, but changes the playing field in a major way. The media, as usual, are trying to make parents feel guilty for doing something that is completely natural, when in fact many of the major risks factors - being on a sofa, taking drugs, being drunk - are usually absent when they do it.

My advice to anyone that asks stays the same - co-sleeping is practised all over the world, and there is nothing to be ashamed about in practising it. You get a better nights sleep, the child feels more secure and, from my experience and talking to other parents who have done it, the baby moves into their own cot much easier. They know at night that their parents aren't far away. People's protests to me when they heard we were co-sleeping, and that Archie would never 'learn to sleep on his own' have turned out to be bullshit. We take him to bed at 8pm, kiss him good night and lie him down in his own cot, and most times he's asleep before we've left the room. I know other people with one year olds that have had them in their cot since day one and they still have endless battles settling their child to sleep every night.

And what is more crazy - sharing your bed with a child in a way which we've done since the dawn of time, or forcing a child that has been safe and snug in the womb for nine months to sleep in their own cot at night just because it's what we 'expect' in the Western world?