bawdy-nan

We've had a very similar experience to those described though our son is now a bit older. I bring good news from the future. The impact was pretty bad at school and we went down a CAMHS / Sunshine House route. After a very long period of testing and re-testing at a specialist clinic we were given no diagnosis at all and were very happy indeed with that. We got a narrative description, results of intelligence testing (very, very high) and a set of "instructions" for school. School was disastrous (and cruel as, it has to be said were other parents: top tip never eat anything I make for the sodding PTA you pitchfork-wielding people with nothing better to do). He faced awful interventions, regular exclusions, violent and sustained restraint and we nearly took him out of school persevering only because he asserted powerfully that he wanted to be "an ordinary school boy". Their attempts to "help" included quite a lot of attempted "emotional management" theorising and education. Absolutely useless I'd say, for a 4, 5 &6 year old. He moved schools and the world opened up for him. No exclusions, no restraint nothing like that at all. What was the difference? The new school (superb) were already doing most of the things the clinic had recommended and, I think most importantly, were allowing him to experience his stronger than his peers emotions and find a way himself of working out how to "manage" them. They stomped on the mean parents and just wouldn't allow the hideousness that had been encouraged in the previous school. At home we'd naturally been doing this already (giving him a bit of space, being straightforward, not taking in personally, remaining calm and kind but being firm, rigorous bed times, using humour, plenty of outdoors action etc) and whilst his behaviour was sometimes difficult to be around: strong over reactions, stubbornness etc etc etc we didn't find it especially alarming. We just thought that maybe school wasn't quite right for him. For us the saving graces were his humour, intelligence, kindness and the fact that we loved and liked him (unlike his teachers). Now? He's thriving. He can still have big, powerful reactions to things: he's sensitive. But I see that as a plus in a human being. He's self-aware and growing in confidence. It's an absolute joy to see and to see the transformation in his and our predicament. The current school have been amazing but mostly what they've done is take a bit of a step back and let him properly learn himself how to deal with the big feelings he might have. All of which is to say that I think that children develop in all kinds of different ways and at different rates. It's quite a business growing up and learning how to be in the world but a "difficult" patch or phase can be part of that learning especially for a child that is very intelligent or very sensitive. My top tip would be "bear with it" and try to remember that they're not trying to "have a go" at you. "Lack of respect" is a difficult thing to bear but its also hard to perform "being respectful" if you're a 6 year old in a kind of whirlwind of feeling. Good luck.

Plenty of fresh air and exercise, and a chance to move about, a rigorous bed time, regular meal-times, learning to touch type, and waiting. 6 is very young be expecting a child to "manage their emotions". I really do think that children develop at very different rates and maybe he's struggling right now. That's ok. Life can be quite demanding for a 6 year old - school, developing social life as well as fitting in with the family etc. Some of the things you describe raise flags in terms of "disorders" (ADHD, ASD, dyspraxia, etc etc etc)and if they are affecting his ability to be in home, social and school settings it is probably worth getting it checked out via GP. You could describe the issues and ask for a referral to Sunshine House. I'm not at all saying I think he might have any of these things and I do think the kinds of things you describe aren't uncommon. Its probably also worth a look at what kinds of things are put in place to help children with the kinds of "disorders" I describe above. Doing them helps children in all kinds of ways and it basically involves not over stimulating, clear and simple instructions, not over-fussing, regular bedtimes and good sleep hygiene etc etc etc. I understand that its really very hard to love (argh! Live, I mean live) with a child who's struggling and I imagine you're feeling quite stressed too. Edited to say - yes that's a great book recommendation. Good luck!

Thank you! Dulwich Diverter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi all, thank you for your comments. We're really > glad to hear you like the sound of the paper! A > huge thanks also to everyone who has contributed > their hard-earned cash to the crowdfunding > campaign so far. We've raised over ?800 since 8pm > last night, which is way beyond our hopes and > expectations! > > Bawdy-nan, thank you for your question. The > concept behind the Dulwich paper is the same as > The Peckham Peculiar, in that everyone who works > on it does so in their spare time. We believe in > paying all our regular contributors for their > efforts, be it journalists, designers or > photographers. > > Paying all our staff costs a fair bit of money and > thanks to the advertising support we have, we > essentially break even each issue. As a result, in > order to launch a new paper we'll need to raise > the initial cash to fund the start-up costs, which > is why we've launched the Kickstarter campaign. > > If you'd like more of an idea of the type of > stories we cover, you can check out the back > issues of the PP here: > http://issuu.com/peckhampeculiar We envisage that > if we do manage to print The Dulwich Diverter, it > will be very similar in the style of content. > > Let us know if you have any more questions!

Hello Great idea and very good luck. I wonder though, would you mind sharing how it works. I don't mean a budget, but, for example, do you pay your contributors, or is it a "community platform" type of thing? Is it a commercial enterprise? Or one of these "new-hybrid-things-they-have-these-days"?

You're absolutely right to identify the excellent provision that is made. I have a friend who has described wonderful, thoughtful and kind treatment and support from the GPs at the practice. I do worry, though, that, especially for patient groups already "reluctant" to attend with early symptoms the almost impossibility of getting to see a doctor may have dire consequences. HonaloochieB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've had really good service from them lately, > been a punter since the early days when they > started opposite the Uplands. > > The 'phone triage I agree can be frustrating but > I've found the receptionists I've spoken to have > been reasonable and polite and when I've > emphasised the urgency of my situation I've been > contacted fairly promptly and given sufficient > time to discuss my needs and offered a face to > face appointment if I wanted one. > > I haven't gone through all of the thread, (don't > think me apathetic. I just made a NY resolution > not to be all that arsed about all that sort of > thing). > > But on NYE the duty doctor went out of her way to > push for an X-Ray appointment at Kings because she > had concerns about me. Got there ended up in A&E > for a while got a clinicians appointment on Monday > and was reassured that all is well. > > Today the doctor 'phoned me to see what the > consultant had to say. I felt reassured by her > following up and well looked-after. > > I'm sure some have good reason to be miffed and > fair play to 'em, but the DMC should know it works > for some of us and while not perfect, I think > they're mainly good.

I think they are currently being reviewed by the CQC (or were recently, it may have now ended) so worth also making comments to them.

It's SUPERB.

Except that guidance was issued to police officers by Paul Boaetang about fixed penalties not being issued always: ?The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other pavement users. ?Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.? This guidance was first issued in 1999 (when the fixed penalty was introduced) but the guidance was reiterated in 2014 by the roads minister http://stopkillingcyclists.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Robert-Goodwill-Minister-for-Cycling-Letter.pdf and confirmed and reissued by ACPO. The guidance was also offered to CSOs in 2004. CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice. I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004) Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > first mate Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It is difficult. While cycling on the pavement > is safer for dreamymummy and her children, it is > less > > safe for other vulnerable pedestrians and a real > problem if adopted en masse by loads of cycling > > parents and children. No excuse for lone adults > to cycle on pavements. > > The 'exception' to the law that allows children to > ride on pavements is simply that children under 16 > cannot be issued with fixed penalty notices. So it > is still against the law, it's just that no fine > can be issued. That would not apply to any adult, > whether cycling with or without children.

Apparently none that were suitable ...I know, seems a little unlikely and there were several useful suggestions on this forum...still, sad to see it go

The local area recently lost a very well used and well loved Friday night youth club for young teens, possibly the only thing to "do" of a Friday evening. This was down to the JAGS demolishing the old Sea Cadet hut for their new music centre. They said this will be a "resource" for the community.

I love the Adventure Playground and have absolutely no desire to see it close but it is true that local authorities are facing huge cuts with more to come. I worry that active campaigning by an effective / sharp elbowed interest group to save one aspect of LA provision inevitably means that another are is cut, one that has fewer effective campaigners behind it but one that is also "vital".

When I had my second child, at home, during the day and shouting like a deranged birthing loon, the neighbours (whom I didn't know well) must have heard because by early evening a lovely, nourishing chicken stew, enough for all of us, arrived and I was so grateful for the thought and care and kindness.

Do "they"? Not in my experience and none of the secondary aged children and young people I know. uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why don't they install detectors at the gates- > this is crazy....I have confiscated weapons over > the years...massive scissors, sharpened metal > combs...They all think that all the other kids are > tooled up so they need to be tooled up....

It's Kingsdale and according to the Met Police twitter feed 2 injured, 1 in a critical condition and 1 other arrested.

I think it depends what you want from the nursery and when. Are you expecting to return to work full-time and need full time childcare while your baby is under one? Are you looking for a more part-time arrangement? Is cost an important issue? Are you thinking about a bit later down the line? I ask because we used a range of options to fulfil a range of purposes and some of them worked better than others: we used a childminder for a short while (18 momth old) but I wasn't sure that felt right, then a lovely local nursery when my second child was born (eldest was about 2 then) part-time, then a mixture of nursery and nanny (ofsted registered and brought her own baby, so a kind of nannyshare). That was lovely but was down, in no small part, to the loveliness of the nanny. When she had her second child we tried it with another who was absolutely AWFUL. We both work freelance so could be flexible about how and where we worked (very lucky in a way but other childcare issues around that flexibilty too). We didn't every use a school nursery. What I mean to say is nursery isn't your only option.

There's quite a lot of footage on youtube now and there's absolutely loads of illegal and dangerous behaviour: riding on pavements, riding right across both lanes, riding without helmets, speeding. All which made much worse because of the number and also because they did this down residential streets (woodwarde road and side streets, for example) that were full of children in the dark. There's no doubt that there's excitement to be had in "occupying" en masse the roads of London but the police response is pathetic and outrageous.

yes and they sell special bike life balaclavas on their website

Actually it has just over 10k registered patients http://www.nhs.uk/Services/GP/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=40451

What a horrible situation. Have you looked at everything that might be available to help you with the childcare costs? If your nanny and child minder are OFSTED registered (very easy to sort out if not) then you should be eligible for tax credit support. Is it worth looking into whether you might be eligible for some free nursery childcare (depends on your income) right now (ie while your youngest is 2) and, if not, looking at nursery places for when they turn 3? Does the school have an after-school club (might be cheaper). Might it be possible to find someone with whom you can buddy up with on the after-school care (ie you do a pick up a couple of days for them etc) This is quite helpful https://www.gov.uk/help-with-childcare-costs/tax-credits. Obviously the most equitable thing would be for your ex to contribute fairly, but it might be worth establishing how you can keep working without his paying for childcare costs. I do think its worth keeping your hand in and the childcare crisis years (ie its just impossible) don't last that long, though it can feel like it. Good luck.

I emailed the practice for confirmation and clarification and it seems that this isn't the new policy at all, perhaps just a rather over zealous receptionist trying to manage the appointments. It did seem a bit odd and a bit off, especially as over the many years we've been going it's always been a rather positive experience.

The dentist we've been going to for years has put in place a new policy whereby they won't book appointments for schoolchildren outside of school hours - annoyed and I think it breaches General Dental Council Standards guidance on discrimination on the grounds of age but I'm not sure I can be arsed to complain. Can anyone recommend a dentist locally where you don't have to take them during school?

Hooray! KGastaldo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The quilt was returned to the cafe in East Dulwich > Park. Thank you to whomever found it!

balance bikes are supposed to be better (for encouraging understanding of balance necessary for later peddling)- Brixton Cycles used to do a part-exchange scheme for kids bikes bought with them (so the necessary upgrades are easier and cheaper - maybe worth popping in to see them?

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But you don't need convincing about bike use. > Millions do and if they see Chris Boardman, > they'll think it's not for them. Show Jo Brand > cycling and I'll back your campaign ;-) Yes, of course! But I think his focus has been on lobbying decision-makers to look at cycling infrastructure rather than getting nervous potential cyclists to get on a bike and pedal out into the traffic and for that a bit of celebrity status and jazz hands seems to do the trick.

I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that travelling by car in London isn't "convenient" mostly because there are so many cars on the road and that addressing the transport issues is important. I'm not a "zealot", though, I agree, I'm probably an enthusiast for cycling: I love doing it, especially for shorter distances and would like others to have that same experience and I'd like to see streets improved for walking and cycling. Households with access to a car are in the minority in Southwark so, yes, I think it is also fair to prioritise the needs of the under-served and I do think that enabling more people to eschew cars for journeys is a "good thing". I do take your point about side streets potentially becoming through routes and I think it is important to have proper modelling and trials. Pevara Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What a load of waffle followed by the (quoted) > dimissive statement about "inconvenience", made so > blithely. > > Like I said, a zealot cares for none else. > > How about we focus on the question here, rather > than swinging wildly from ecological catastrophe > to loving the ideal of community cycling as > reasons to "inconvenience" everyone else. > > The question in the thread is simply whether the > new cycling schemes should result in the closure > (one way or two ways or any way) of arterial roads > such as Calton and Court Lane to motor traffic. > > > Stepping away from future "judgment day" style > rants, it is clear that no cycle scheme should > close arterial roads to motor traffic. > > The cons are: > > 1. No assurance of reduction in motor traffic > 2. Definite diversion of traffic down peaceful > side streets, increasing localised air pollution > (slower moving traffic down narrower streets) and > creating noise pollution and blight in those > streets (which is also not good for the health and > stress levels of local residents on those streets) > - might as well call the scheme cycle > "noiseways". > > The glorious aim of the cycle collective - > fearless cycling on the motorways of Dulwich - > will also be difficult to achieve since the young > cyclists they want to encourage don't > automatically arrive on main roads when they leave > their houses. They need to first travel from their > homes, a lot of which will be on those very side > streets which will now see increased traffic if > arterial roads are closed. > > As for comparing the "inconvenience" from parked > cars with the health and stress impacting air and > noise pollution along side streets that will > accompany arterial road closures and diverted > traffic - what a risible analogy. > > bawdy-nan Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Snip > > > > > > The difficulty, of course, is that changes can > > inconvenience people. But that is already the > > case. The streets of East Dulwich weren't built > to > > accommodate the hundreds of cars now parked on > the > > roads but the increase in time in vehicle > > ownership means that all of the roads are > > "clogged" with parked cars inconveniencing all > > road users.