Alpha Mummy is the blog for mums who work, used to work, or want to go back to work one day.
Subscribe to a feed of this Times Online blog at http://timesonline.typepad.com/alphamummy/rss.xml
There's a thought-provoking piece about the headscarf debate in Turkey in today's Times. Does the wearing of headscarves by devout Muslims change society overall, perpetuating hard-line ideals and sexism? A female journalist there says: "The harrassment of women who don't cover up is increasing. I get called a whore as I walk down the street. The confidence of the Islamic movement is shoring up lumpen sexism among Turkish men."
She goes on to say: "Women who wear headscarves have already been exposed to religious ideology. It affects the kind of things they want in life. They make more passive choices."
Can we say the same about the wearing of headscarves in the UK? Are girls who wear headscarves being molded into meek specimens of womanhood? I think requiring them to wear headscarves jars with our society's ideology of equality. But for some it is simply a case of parents passing on their ideals to their children, just as one might pass along the tenets of Protestant or Catholic beliefs.
I've always been interested in women who cover themselves for religious reasons, at the same time feeling a bit sorry for them. They seem to be colluding in their own disenfranchisement and oppression. They - together with those who champion the niqab and burka - seem to buy into the idea that a woman's hair or face or body are dangerous things that must be controlled. That they are naturally "bad" because they are too stimulating and provocative for men to see.
And when it comes to young girls, there is a moment where they pass over from the freedom of childhood - of being able to run and play as equals with boys - to having to be modest and decorous and not too visible. That's my personal opinion and there are many who disagree. But then who's to say what's "right" when it comes to the rules of the country we live in?
It’s so predictable. Mention you’re interviewing au pairs and the first thing people say is “Get an ugly one”.
Well, they don’t say it actually. They snigger it. Blame it on the age-old reputation of men – although undoubtedly Jude Law and Ethan Hawke haven’t helped matters with their high-profile getting-it-on with their nannies. Get an attractive 20something around a man and, so the thinking goes, he’s unable to contain himself.
Frankly, this is the least of my worries. I need a young woman (or man) who’s responsible enough to look after my daughter, engaged enough to make her after school hours fun, cool headed enough to deal with any emergencies that come up, yet with modest enough expectations that we can actually afford him or her. And I need to be able to live with them in my house. If Scarlett Johansson fit the criteria, I’d hire her.
I figure if my husband’s susceptible to an affair, he’s more likely to a tasty tidbit among the intelligent and attractive women he works with in the City. Besides, as anyone who’s married knows, familiarity breeds contempt. And if you’re paying someone to live with you yet they still leave pans with caked-on baked beans in the sink, it’s hardly conducive to romance. That’s one thing I know from experience.
Picture: Scarlett Johansson in the Nanny Diaries
An excellent suggestion from the new School Gate blog: scrap the old system whereby kids get six weeks off over summer for a more manageable system that includes four weeks off over summer. Check out the very convincing arguments.
 Can we just step back for a moment and marvel at the news of Angelia Jolie and Brad Pitt having twins and selling the pictures for an estimated $11 million? Before the birth, paparazzi camped out in front of the hospital, and the mayor of Nice announced the twins' arrival along with the couple's doctor.
There is big price escalation for celebrity baby pictures these days. Consider that in 1989 pictures of Lisa Marie Presley's baby - quintessential tabloid fodder - sold for $100,000. Nowadays that barely covers the catering bill at baby's first photo shoot. But really, what is our fascination with celebrity baby pictures?
There's a ludicrous predictability to them all: parents beam as the little blob looks uncomprehendingly up at the bright photography lights. "We're a happy, normal family" the pictures attempt to project, but the perfectly styled mums and dads end up looking as posed and artificial as the babies look unformed and natural. People in "the business" say the rising prices of baby pictures is fueled by fans wanting to know the "real" person behind the celebrity facade. But these pictures look as plastic as a pacificer. And while ostensibly they are focussed on the baby and the family unit, they seem to be about one thing alone: burnishing the parents' image.
12 celebrity couples and what they sold their baby pictures for:
1. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt: Twins Vivienne Marcheline and Knox Leon, sold for a reported $11 million to a US magazine
2. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt: First child Shiloh Nouvel born in Namibia in 2006, sold for between $5-7 million to People magazine
3. Jennifer Lopez and Marc Antony: Twins Emme and Max born in 2008, sold for $6 million to People
4. Matthew McConaughey and Camila Alves: Levi, reportedly sold for $3 million to OK!, according to TMZ.com
5. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt: Adopted son Pax Thien, sold for $2 million to People in 2007
6. Anna Nicole Smith and Larry Birkhead: Dannielynn, sold for a reported $2 million to OK! magazine
7. Christina Aguilera and Jordan Bratman: Max, sold for a reported $1.5 million to People in February
8. Jessica Alba and Cash Warren: Honor Marie, sold for a reported $1.5 million to OK!
9. Jamie Lynn Spears: Maddie Briann, sold for a reported $1 million by OK! in June
10. Nicole Richie and Joel Madden: Harlow Winter, sold for a reported $1 million to People in February
11. Gwen Stefani and Gavin Rossdale: Kingston, sold for a reported $575,000 to OK! in June 2006
12. Britney Spears and Kevin Federline: Sean Preston, sold for a reported $500,000 to People in November 2005
And three high-profile celebrities who didn't:
* Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban, for Sunday Rose, because they said they did not feel that it was right
* Sarah Jessica Parker and Matthew Broderick, for James Wilke. The actress stood outside the hospital with her baby and posed for free.
* Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, for Suri Cruise. The couple reportedly took the pictures off the market after a bidding war. Pictures taken by Annie Leibovitz ran in Vanity Fair.
Source: Forbes.com, The Times archive and agencies
The new head of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission says equality laws are holding women back. It's good to see that someone is finally acknowledging it. There's been such a focus on getting more maternity leave for women that we haven't noticed that the one-sided benefits aren't always benefitting women or families in general, because...:
1. You can't change human nature
If an employer has two job candidates, and knows that one can take off for months with little notice and do it repeatedly, it's natural that the employer would choose one that provides the most continuity, the one that can be more available and - perhaps - just make the employer more comfortable with their predictability. That is to say, an employer would choose one who won't become a mother.
2. It sidelines dads
Why does the law assume that mothers are the best at peeling bananas, playing ball, reading stories and wiping tears? The law places the responsibility for the first year of life solely on mums and sends the message that dads are there to be breadwinners and occasional babysitters, not full-on parents.
3. It keeps women out of the top ranks at companies
If a man took a year off from partner-track at his law firm to sail round the world, it would be assumed that his heart wasn't in his work. If a woman takes a year off to look after her child, the same is assumed. It's not right and the situations aren't analogous, but "commitment" at the management level in many companies is still measured by the amount of time - year after year - that you slave away at your desk. The law feeds into the existing cycle. Men are currently in top management; women take off time to look after children; they come back but languish at lower levels because they haven't put in the time; they leave because they're not being promoted. Rinse and repeat.
If taking time off was normalised for everyone within companies (that is, if men were doing it too), then attitudes among top management would change within a generation.
4. Maternity leave law affects all women - whether or not they want to have children
Even if a woman has decided she never wants to have children, when she's of child-bearing age - and especially if she's married or in a long-term relationship - she'll be subjected to the same fears and concerns from employers. In other words, every working woman from age 21 until the menopause has a harder struggle for her "commitment" to be taken seriously. After all, who knows when she'll lark off to make babies?
5. It keeps mothers barefoot and pregnant
The longer you're out of work or out of the office, the harder it can be to get back in and maintain your career trajectory, as this story of working mother Sarah Vince-Cain shows. Once you've started your family it makes sense to continue (a big topic of debate in my antenatal group was whether it was better to leave one year or two between babies). And while you can take the woman out of the fast lane, you can't take the fast lane out of the woman. Intelligent, educated women who leave their jobs to look after children devote their intelligence and dedication to their new task. Thus having babies and raising children become the woman's vocation. Just like the good ol' days.
Sometimes at work we are our own worst enemies: We don't ask for big raises, we don't speak up in meetings and we flap around the office in a whirlwind of activity, trying to get everything done between morning drop-off and evening pick-up from nursery (or at least, I do).
A new Times video special on body language shows how to read colleagues and use your own body language to get ahead in the office. Julie Daniels, who produced the video, says this about the experience: Next time you’re standing in a group chatting, look at the other people’s feet. If they’re pointing in your direction, you can be sure that it’s really you they’re giving their full attention to. If they’re aimed at the attractive blonde standing next to you, you’re in trouble.
The flirtatious behaviour of some women in the workplace can be seen as demeaning, and the videos have certainly made me think about how a woman’s body language can undermine her. But men are great preeners. Have a look at one of your colleagues next time he’s in conversation with a attractive woman. He may pull in his stomach, stand up straighter, adjust his tie - isn’t that flirting? The way men behave with each other is also very telling. Guys will puff out their chests, mirror the body language of the other man, try to outdo each other and show who’s boss.
If you want to find out what your colleagues are really saying: who’s lying, who’s flirting, and who’s powerplaying, check out our films. You can also pick up useful tips on interview techniques, how to give a good presentation and get the promotion you deserve.
Part 1: how to read your colleagues
Part 2: how to give an effective presentation
Part 3: find out who is in control
Part 4: do’s and don’ts at an interview
Part 5: how to negotiate a pay rise or promotion
Plus here's a great ad from Crunch gym about a different kind of body language in the office.
The Times has just launched its new blog all about education: School Gate.
Sarah Ebner, who's hosting the blog, has already got some great posts:
* The most embarrassing recipients of honorary degrees
* A poll on whether end-of-term gifts have gone out of control. (If you missed the comments from an AM reader about having to fork over money for a group gift, read them now.)
* The 10 best blogs about education
Check it out!
 1. Sue, mother of a "trendy 4-year-old" boy writes in with a clothing source for XYs:
"I have found a great new website www.guycollection.co.uk What a refreshing change to find something different for boys! The polo shirts are as good as they look on the site, and the 'jumping hoddie' washes beautifully and indeed does look fab with the red shorts! My son will no longer look like everyone else in his class, with the Next and Gap collection!"
2. Cowley Manor, the cool family-friendly hotel near Cirencester, has a new boutique, and unlike so many hotel gift shops, this one is worth visiting. For adults, they have items such as Ernest Sewn jeans, funky necklaces, felted saddlebags in grape and gorgeous design books about luxury travel. But the kids' corner is amazing. In addition to adorable clothes, they have groovy design-led items from all over. There are Areaware Fauna silkscreened stuffed animals from New York City (£21.50 for a blue boxer dog), Douce France stickers you colour yourself of iconic French images (Tour Eiffel, mais oui, but also a waiter, students sleeping on a bench and little cups of espresso) (£3.95), and my favourite - the Wu and Wu Dumpling Dynasty kits.
These are beautifully decorated little kits made of tin that hold sewing items, first aid supplies or pigtail accessories. The Hove-based designer was inspired by trawling through the flea markets of Shanghai, Beijing and Hong Kong. I got the pigtail one for my daughter's birthday (£15).
3. The Littlebabycompany.com isn't so very new (started in 2007) but has stylish items for everything from feeding time to playtime to bathtime. The site carries classics like the Mary Jane socks (£16.95 for 6 pairs) and amusing items like the crochet tea set (£35) but my favourite section is decor & interiors, with the race-track decals (£39) and birdhouse lamp (£110). What is it about countries like Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands that they turn out such great design for kids?
Toddlers who dislike spicy food could be deemed 'racist'
Check out this amusing list of things you only learn once you have kids, from the US.
It's a pretty good list, although I think he's left out some very important ones, such as:
11. You were never really tired before.
You thought you were exhausted when you used to stay up all night drinking on Thursday then work all day before heading out to another party on Friday. You believed you were shattered during a week of exams at school. But then you had a baby and realised that it's possible to drift through an entire year drifting in and out consciousness without any proper REM stage while simultaneously working the straps of a Baby Bjorn or singing Twinkle Twinkle Little Star as dawn breaks. You now know what it means to have tired bones.
12. Half-eaten nursery food is still palatable.
A biscuit - sodden and gummed for 20 minutes - can still be popped into your mouth after being passed on from your toddler. Cold chips and abandoned fish fingers are perfectly fine, if eaten while hovering over the sink before loading the dishwasher. In fact, almost any manner of food fits into your diet as long as it is handled and spurned first by your offspring.
13. It's not so important to be 'cool'. (pictured)
Kids demonstrate that it's a lot more fun to roll around on the floor, make animal noises and funny faces, and generally act goofy than to pose in the corner, sneering and making snide comments about other people's outfits. But beware - from their teens to their own parenting years they'll forget this rule. Be prepared to soldier on in your unhipness.
Got any of your own?
Just when you thought you might have to stop worrying. Just when you thought, we've got the vote, we've ostensibly got equal rights by law, we're no longer our husband's chattal, some clergy shatter the illusion. Thank goodness the Church of England officially decided to consecrate women bishops, and leave behind the antiquated idea of females as not up to snuff when preaching God's word, but the groups rallying against it give me cause to worry.
I've been meaning to join a local church, especially after my daughter asked in the car recently, "Who is God?" Yet the call for no women bishops reminded me how important it is to choose the right church. It's pretty shocking to realise that some religious leaders still think women are inferior to men. Some people are saying this is the end of the CofE, but it's the opposite: if people feel the church reflects evolved and modern moral and ethically viewpoints, it will become more relevant to their lives, not less.
I'm reminded of the hysteria when I was young about Satanic messages embedded backwards on records. At a youth group, several kids asked the minister if we should worry about absorbing "bad" messages via pop. "How many of you regularly listen to your records backwards?" he asked jokingly, before dismissing the scaremongering as a distraction from the real issues facing us - coping with parents, peer pressure, budding sexuality. He made me realise that there was a church that actually tries to help people with real problems in their real lives, that I could feel a part of. Now I feel that way about the CofE.
Ruth Gledhill blogs about the debate on her excellent Articles of Faith blog - check it out if you want to read more about the full motion.
(Thanks, KM, for bringing up the bishops issue in the comments of Caitlin's post.)
We went to Glastonbury last week. Yes, I know, it was a while ago but, to be fair, I still felt a bit "dizzy" until yesterday - although I have now nailed for certain the fact that drinking half a bottle of ASDA own-brand brandy, before 11am, really doesn't agree with my constitution, after all. That feels like a scientific breakthrough.
This has been the first year we haven't taken the children. The kids love Glastonbury - but this is because, as far as they're concerned, Glastonbury is The Kidz Field, where Bodger and Badger do shows every hour on the hour, fairies wander around handing out handfuls of fairydust, and half a dozen tents offer everything from puppet-making, to song composition. After six years of this, we finally tired of going to the greatest rock festival in the world and then using it as a hippy Centre Parcs, and dumped the kids with an assortment of my siblings, instead. Then me and the man-missus headed down there to spend four days in the fulcrum of ROCK. Despite my intense desire to ROCK, I did greatly fear that I would become maudlin, and miss the children. But I have to say - and you must imagine me saying this in the voice of Mr Toad - I didn't miss them at all! I'd do it all again in a heartbeat!
Indeed, so marked was my joy at being away from them that, by 3pm on Saturday, I had actually forgotten that children existed. When a small bunch of small people, wearing velvet jester's hats, barged past me on the way to see Crowded House, I truly marvelled that so many dwarves had travelled down together, to rock. Then I saw their faces, and remembered. The young of the species! Of course! Kids! Coh!
Perhaps our pleasure was all the more intense because this has been only our second break from the children since Dora was born, in 2001. Indeed, I am starting to wonder if I might actually be, contrary to all my assumptions, an incredibly diligent and loving mother, after all - like some manner of slightly overweight saint, in a TopShop smock. When I was having a pre-Glastonbury guilt, my sister Weena said, slightly incredulously, "All my friends who have kids are off on mini-breaks left, right and centre. They leave them for a week, sometimes. Just bugger off and get wankered on hot cider, there's a good girl."
So, I have no idea what the average child-dumping rate is. All I know is that, on Saturday, I was pleasantly steamed from 11am onwards, danced for 10 hours straight, "showed" Jay-Z my "diamonds", spontaneously learned to body-pop, and accidentally punched the woman who plays the sexy gipsy lady in Stardust in the mouth when running to a falafel stall at 2am. And it was brilliant. And I wish I could do it all again this week.
My husband laughs at the latest announcement from Gordon Brown that we're throwing away too much food. I confess: I love leftovers. The bit of risotto hanging around after dinner. The roast pork enduring after Sunday lunch.
No bit of uncarved meat or pan scraping is too small for me to pop into a Tupperware container and reheat for breakfast, lunch or dinner. My mother used to call it "jungling up" (she said it was an old phrase used on the railroad).
When I was still living in New York and my husband called from London, he's often hear me just finishing a breakfast of Thai green curry or last-night's spaghetti. "It's unnatural!" he'd cry. "Noodles for breakfast?"
But what started out as a serious culture clash has now we've settled into symbiotic balance. He cooks a little bit more than we'll eat, and I'm not forced to have tuna sandwiches every day. As long as nothing gets pushed back behind the mayonnaise jar or hidden by the milk carton, everything gets eaten. This makes my husband especially happy since it doesn't have to get eaten by him.
What's the leftovers philosophy at your house? Are you one of those people Gordon Brown is mad at?
 Stories you read when your mother put you to bed
When Caitlin Moran wrote recently about the books that defined her childhood – notably Enid Blyton’s Naughtiest Girl books - her post evoked reams of response.
“These books actually work as wonderful parenting manuals,” Caitlin said, “showing children working out their problems for themselves, and seeing the consequences of not only their actions, but their personalities. They tackle some pretty big issues, as well: ugliness, anger, loneliness, laziness, obesity, parental disaffection.”
“I just might never bother with a book written after 1962. I just might live in my mother’s suitcases.”
Loads of Alpha Mummy'ers agreed, citing books loved from childhood into adulthood. Yes, we like our children to discover them. But we still enjoy them as grownups. As one mother wrote, “I could go on [listing these] forever! In my 50s I'm collecting and rereading them all over again!”
These days we’re more likely to recognise the gender stereotyping or the homosexual overtones (or did we just imagine that?). Yet their grown-up appeal can be unexpected.
“I wrote about Enid Blyton's life and work for my university thesis, so I ended up reading my books and listening to my story tapes more in adulthood than I ever had as a kid. Suddenly all my friends started donating their long-abandoned examples. I've now digitised the tapes and put them on my iPod. [It's a] really is a great way to relax after a long day.”
Here's a by-no-means-exhaustive list of your heirloom reads - for children of various ages - in no particular order. Where possible I've put in posters' comments - lightly edited so they work with the list format.
There's also mention of a story in entry 90 about a burglar who gets trapped in a cupboard that we're still trying to get a title for. Anybody heard of it?
Post any obvious ones that got passed over. In the meantime I'm putting these on my daughter's Christmas list.
1. Enid Blyton books
“I have recently reread the Faraway Tree trilogy and, yes, I am 65. It still is magical. I have introduced my grandson and goddaughter to the same, and at 7 and 8 they are enjoying reading and escaping with Enid Blyton. The world today is so abrasive and somewhat frightening to our young. How wonderful to read and escape it for a short while every day or evening. The world of literature has been opened for many by these lovely childhood books.”
“I was always thrilled by Enid Blyton. The stories were funny and it was lovely to learn about British ways and words like tyre, boot, and torch.”
“I liked Julian from The Naughtiest Girl series but always thought the quarrel in the stables - "if you were a boy I'd show you what I really think of you" - had sexual undertones.”
2. The Patchwork Cat
“A most beautiful book by Nicola Bayley and William Mayne. My daughter would sob "Read it again! Read it again!".”
“How brilliant was that book? I have wanted a tabby my whole life because of it. 'I have done some snatchwork on your patchwork ...' genius. I learned to read late, and I think my mum must have read me that book about a million times ... and I'm keeping it for my children when they come along, too.”
3. Susan Pulls the Strings
“I loved the Susan series. Susan Pulls the Strings, Susan interferes etc. It was good to have a Scottish heroine and she was so funny. The later ones now fetch a lot of money on Amazon.”
4. Swallows and Amazons
“I love Arthur Ransome's Swallows & Amazons series. I adored the book covers too - definitely appealing.”
5. The House of Arden
“I loved time travelling books – this was a favourite.”
6. The Tiger Who Came to Tea
“It's all mummy at home and daddy popping in for dinner later on! Lol - I loved those when I was little; maybe it's why I feel a deep subconscious need to ply my other half with dinner on the table at seven and beer on tap.”
7. A Traveller in Time
“Alison Utley's A Traveller in Time is set in the doomed Babbington house, and the heroine goes back to the Elizabethan days. There was a great 'first boy' in it, Antony Babington's teenage brother, who kisses the heroine - but then she has to go back to the future, her own time. Sigh.”
8. The Wool-pack
"Cynthia Harnett's history stories (e.g. The Load of Unicorn and The Woolpack) were good."
"I loved Cynthia Harnett’s book. Children's books just used to be *better*, basically, didn't they? How sexist are the Lucy and Tom books, though?"
9. Hugh Lofting's Dr Doolittle series
“I was absolutely furious at the farcical films with the same name.”
10. Laura Ingalls Wilder books
“I named my daughter Laura after her.”
“When grown up, I read a sequel called The First Four Years in which Laura described her own experiences of motherhood, which she found extremely difficult. Mrs Ingalls made it all sound easy, but Laura burnt the house down by mistake, through exhaustion as a new mother.”
Go to second page for the entire list
Continue reading "90 most awesome old-school children's books" »
Meningitis is a word that strikes fear in the heart of any parent. And I've just heard that a child at a friend's school has died from it. Apparently another child they know died of it last year. This is the kind of news that sends me to The Meningitis Trust like I'm drilling for a test (and in a way, I am, just in case). The signs and symptoms:
* feeling unwell
* fever with cold hands and feet
* floppy, drowsy or difficult to wake
* headache
* stiff neck
* dislike of bright lights
* rash
Apparently the much-talked-about petechial rash (ie, doesn't go away when you press a glass on it) didn't show up in this case and the local hospital didn't catch it either. It's just a reminder that as parents we have to educate ourselves, be proactive and not be afraid to challenge doctors if we think they've got it wrong.
Here's a good piece from the BBC that tells more about meningitis.
 Michael wrote in with the following response to the pester power post: his list of the items that have only flourished because of pester power.
Top 5 Victories for pester power
1: Bratz Dolls
Few mothers, and absolutely no fathers, want their child to grow up taking fashion cues from Bratz dolls. With their teenage hooker pouts and micro mini wardrobes they are a flash forward to a million parent-teenager arguments. Still, they sell in terrific quantities, and challenge the by contrast rather demure Barbie for the top selling girl’s toy slot most Christmases.
2: Swords and guns
No matter how hard woolly liberal parents try to dissuade their young sons from choosing weapon-inspired toys, the violence just seems innate. Try as you might to encourage the caring, nurturing side to your son he just wants to stab people. With a big plastic sword that could easily have someone’s eye out. Might as well let him get some practice before he moves on to the real thing.
3: Electric hair twirler
Every young girls who sees this perceives it as the pinnacle of personal grooming. Every parent sees it as a guaranteed trip to A&E. You’ll thank every God you’ve ever heard of when the battery finally runs out.
4: Electric powered toy cars
Not the ones that cost £20 and can fit in his toybox. The kind that cost upwards of £400 and demand their own garage. Every small boy wants one of these. Until he hits 3'5" and he can’t get in it anymore. Then it’s a very expensive ornament. That’s four feet long. Bought exclusively by overachieving dads or parents who are just plain scared of their own kids.
5: Super soaker water gun
Impossible to play with indoors, deeply antisocial in any public space, and just plain annoying in your garden. You don’t want to buy it. You’ll end up with two.
Picture taken by callme_crochet on Flickr.com
 "Pester power" has become one of those marketing terms that strikes fear in the heart of parents, mostly because it translates into whinging, crying, pouting and floor-rolling whenever you pass a display of something sugar-filled or stamped out in cheap plastic.
My husband tries to combat this by telling the kids they can have a "treat" at the store, then amends this to "a fruit treat - any piece of fruit you want" right before we check out. You can imagine how well that goes over.
Can pester power ever be used for good instead of ill? It seems like the eco-folks have enlisted kids to encourage parents to turn off lights, recycle and so on. Yet are there good ways that other companies can use pester power, or does it require having a product or food that parents like anyway ("Please, mummy, can I have the sprouting broccoli spears!")?
Or should we ban advertisers from appealing directly to kids? After all, any advert that claims a cereal is "fun" or a toy is "cool" is not talking to parents - should it be allowed?
 If you haven't read Caitlin's comment piece in the Times today about girls and abortion, you should. She cuts through the hysteria about the latest statistics on teenage abortion and refocuses the conversation where it belongs - on teenage pregnancies.
Let’s face it, the rise in teenage abortion is not the scandalous statistic here. It is, ultimately, the teenage pregnancies that are the problem. Why are these pregnancies occurring?
Plus she makes this very important point:
Almost exactly half of the cause of teenage pregnancies - teenage boys - rarely, if ever, get mentioned.
If you missed it, check it Caitlin's blog about Why I believe abortion is part of being a good mother and the lively discussion that ensued.
 An Alpha Mummy reader (who prefers to remain anonymous) writes in about a problem fast approaching parents of school-going children:
When choosing a school for my child I deliberately chose what I thought was a good down-to-earth fee-paying school. What I didn't factor in though was the other parents' obsession with end-of-term collections.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against buying teachers a small token of appreciation at the end of term. Many of my friends whom are teachers are very happy with the presents they receive from their class - particularly the small home-made or quirky gifts which the child has had a hand in making or choosing.
But our collections are for "a recommended £25 per family" to be paid to the class rep and duly ticked off on a register of names twice a year. Now I can understand that some teachers might baulk at the idea of 20 or 30 bottles of Piat d'Or or gift-sized Galaxy chocolate bars, but do they really expect hundreds of pounds worth of Habitat vouchers each year from children?
A straw poll of friends with children at fee-paying schools shows this isn't the norm. So have I fallen in with a nouveau riche set? or am I just being tight? And what do you think I should do? Shut up and pay up? Make a stand and donate less than the recommended amount? or quietly drop out and buy, or better still make, something more personal from my child?
The news of Brian Philcox, who killed himself and his two children on Father's Day, is striking for its tragedy but for me it begs a larger question: are families cast adrift during divorce?
Our main image of divorce is based, one expects, on high-profile cases involving self-regarding fat cats and exes with an enlarged sense of entitlement.
But for regular couples, who struggle through without a bereavement coach, a team of accountants or a media spin professional, does the current system put too much pressure on everyone, including the children?
Separating couples are left to their own devices to sort themselves out, says Duncan Fisher, chief executive of the Fatherhood Institute, which bills itself as the UK's fatherhood think-tank. While the parents' lives fall apart and everything from the home to the pension to the daily responsibilities is thrown into the pot to be argued over and divided, children are left vulnerable.
"Two children died and there needs to be an investigation as to how this happened. Why was there no safety net?" asks Fisher. He believes that the risks to children during divorce should be assessed and we need to proactively counsel and support families. That would allow families to disentangle themselves rather than tear themselves apart.
Philcox contacted Fathers 4 Justice last week, as do thousands of others coping with separation and custody issues."We had over 1,000 inquiries [from men] from last week alone," says founder Matt O'Connor. Some consider the group a tireless campaigner for father's rights, others believe it's merely a gimmicky group of whack jobs who climb buildings in fancy dress. Whatever its reputation, it's not a support group.
While it operates a volunteer-staffed hotline and refers men to its online forums and support groups like Samaritans and Citizens Advice, it's raison d'etre is as a pressure group.
The UK remains the best place in Europe for women to get divorced. According to Ann Ison, partner at Hughes Fowler Carruthers law firm, in some EU countries, maintenance is shorter (in some places lasting only three years) or absent. Here, the starting point for dividing assets is 50/50 but if you're talking about a £150,000 house with a mortgage, it's hard to slice it up. "One thing the courts accept is that the mother with the younger children has the greater need," while still acknowledging that the father needs a home as well, she says. When you consider that spousal maintenance doesn't have accepted percentages the way child maintenance does (15 per cent for one child, 20 per cent for two…), each divorce means hammering out (and carving up) a deal anew.
It's a fraught system that overwhelms many people. Some plunge into depression. Others cope with drink or drugs. Some take their own lives and even murder their children.
Divorce happens. Surely this highlights we need to make sure it happens more smoothly for everyone involved.
"He phoned up Fathers 4 Justice," says Fisher of Philcox. "Oh, great. Is that all we can offer?"
Alpha Mummy is the new blog for mums who work, used to work, or want to go back to work one day
(as if looking after children isn't work enough). We depend on getting stories and tips from readers,
so please Send us a tip or drop us an email
to say hello.
Eleanor Mills, mother of two, edits The Sunday Times News Review
Caitlin Moran, mother of two, is a columnist for The Times
Sarah Vine, mother of two, is a columnist for The Times
Jennifer Howze, mother of one and stepmother of one, is editor of Women at Times Online
- For older posts, take a look at the blog Archive.
|
Recent Comments