NHS doctors ‘don’t know how to hold a baby’


(What a gorgeous baby in the pic above)

Doctors’ knowledge of paediatrics is so poor that some GPs do not even know how to hold a baby, the head of a report into children’s services has claimed.

All GPs and nurses should be given additional paediatric training under proposals by Prof Sir Ian Kennedy, the former chair of the Healthcare Commission, who led the report. Health care budgets should include a ring-fenced amount set aside for care for young people, he said, as he claimed that the requirements of adults are routinely prioritised over the needs of children.

The report was commissioned in the wake of a number of high-profile cases highlighting the failings of children’s services, including the death of Peter Connelly – known at the time as “Baby P” – in Haringey in 2007.

Sir Ian said GPs should be given training on the comprehensive care of children and young people “as a matter of urgency”, and that one doctor had told him that “some GPs do not even know how to hold a baby”. He added: “There needs to be an identification of the money that should be allocated to children from the total pot. Currently children do not get a look-in because the needs of adults simply trump the needs of children.”

In a recent study by UNICEF, the UK ranked bottom out of 25 industrialised countries for the wellbeing of children.

SOURCE

British Prime Minister backs French leader over expulsions of Gypsies

A new Entente Cordiale?

David Cameron rounded on the European Commission last night over its extraordinary criticism of France’s expulsion of thousands of Roma gypsies – as President Sarkozy said the controversial policy would continue.

The Prime Minister revealed he had tackled the Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso over the issue after the Commission likened the actions of French President Nicolas Sarkozy to those of the Nazis.

He said it was vital that commissioners ‘choose their language carefully’ when interfering in the domestic affairs of member states. But he also warned France that it must not target illegal Roma immigrants on the basis of their ethnic origin.

President Sarkozy, who was involved in an exchange with the Romanian President Traian Basescu at the Commission today, revealed he had had a blazing row with Mr Barroso during lunch at yesterday’s EU summit, which was overshadowed by the Roma issue. He described the EU’s criticism of France as ‘disgusting and shameful’ – as the unprecedented row between the Commission and the founding member state intensified.

The row erupted after EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding branded the French policy a ‘disgrace’ and called for legal action. She said she was ‘appalled’ by the expulsion of thousands of Roma, adding: ‘This is a situation I had thought Europe would not have to witness again after the Second World War.’ She later said she regretted interpretations of her statement.

President Sarkozy was unrepentant yesterday and vowed to continue dismantling illegal immigrant camps. He said 199 camps, containing 5,400 people, had been dismantled. He launched a ferocious attack on Commissioner Reding, describing her comments as ‘outrageous’ – and warning that they were ‘unacceptable’ to both himself and other EU leaders. He said: ‘The disgusting and shameful words that were used – the Second World War, the evocation of the Jews – was something that shocked us deeply. ‘I am the French president and I cannot allow my country to be insulted.’

President Sarkozy says the expulsions are a matter of security and that the European Commission should come up with Europe-wide solutions rather than criticising France. He said there had been no expulsions based on ethnicity.

Downing Street sources said Mr Cameron and President Sarkozy had discussed the issue before the formal start of yesterday’s summit. He also thanked the French president for laying on a helicopter which enabled him to reach his dying father Ian in the south of France last week.

Mr Cameron told reporters he had raised the issue of the Commission’s criticism of France during yesterday’s lunch. He said: ‘Members of the Commission have to choose their language carefully. Of course the Commission has a role in enforcing and identifying community law. ‘But I think it’s important that we respect people and speak in a respectful way and I note that the Commissioner in question has actually given an apology for the words that she used.’

But he also said it was important did not target the Roma unfairly, adding: ‘It’s important that countries are able to take action if there is a problem of people acting illegally or being illegally in your country and that you are able to remove them. ‘But it’s important that no-one should ever do that on the basis of someone’s ethnic group.’

Sarkozy has also received backing today from the Italian president Silvio Berlusconi. Mr Berlusconi told Le Figaro newspaper that it ‘would have been better if Madame Reding had dealt with the subject in private with French leaders before expressing herself publicly as she did’. He continued: ‘The problem of the Roma is not specifically French. It concerns every country in Europe. ‘It is therefore necessary to put this subject on the agenda at the European Council so we can all discuss it together in order to find a common position,’ he said.

SOURCE

Straight talking from the Holy Father

The Pope issued a clarion call to defend Christianity last night, saying Christmas was at risk of being struck from the calendar. In a strongly worded speech delivered in Parliament, Benedict XVI bluntly told politicians not to ‘silence’ religion and discourage public celebration of its most important festivals.

And in a thinly veiled attack on controversial equality legislation, he said laws which forced Christians to act against their consciences were wrong.

‘There are those who would advocate that the voice of religion be silenced, or at least relegated to the purely private sphere,’ he told senior politicians and public figures. ‘There are those who argue that the public celebration of festivals such as Christmas should be discouraged, in the questionable belief that it might somehow offend those of other religions or none.’

Benedict, who is now half way through his UK trip, insisted Christianity should not be forced to the sidelines and festivals including Christmas and Easter altered to avoid offence.

In his speech, the Pope said he was voicing his concern at the growing marginalisation of religion – particularly of Christianity – even in nations which place a great emphasis on tolerance.

‘There are those who would advocate that the voice of religion be silenced, or least relegated to the purely private sphere,’ he said.

‘There are those who argue that the public celebration of festivals such as Christmas should be discouraged, in the questionable belief that it might somehow offend those of other religions or none.

‘And there are those who argue – paradoxically, with the intention of eliminating discrimination – that Christians in public roles should be required at times to act against their conscience.

‘These are worrying signs of a failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square.’

The Pope said a moral failure was to blame for the global financial crisis. He said: ‘There is widespread agreement that the lack of a solid ethical foundation for economic activity has contributed to the grave difficulties now being experienced by millions of people throughout the world.’

And he said that, just as governments had come to the rescue of the banks, judged ‘too big to fail’, they must now act to help the world’s poorest people. He said: ‘Here is an enterprise, worthy of the world’s attention, that is truly “too big to fail”.’

He then urged those present to use their ‘respective sphere of influence’ to ensure religion was involved in discourse ‘in every sphere of national life’.

After the speech, the Pope went to Westminster Abbey to participate in a joint service with Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams.

Dr Williams welcomed the Pope and spoke of the historic visit as ‘a special time of grace and of growth in our shared calling’. He said: ‘It is a particular pleasure that on this historic occasion we are able to come together as bishops of the Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches in this country to greet you, Your Holiness, during a visit which we all hope will be of significance both to the Church of Christ and to British society.

‘May this historic visit be for all of us a special time of grace and of growth in our shared calling, as you, Your Holiness, bring us the word of the Gospel afresh.’

Dr Williams said Christian leaders must be ready to fight back against the critics of religion. He said their duty ‘involves a readiness to respond to the various trends in our cultural environment that seek to present Christian faith as both an obstacle to human freedom and a scandal to human intellect’.

Dr Williams continued: ‘Our presence together as British bishops here today is a sign of the way in which, in this country, we see our task as one and indivisible.

The Pope said society was moving away from its Christian heritage. He said: ‘On the one hand, the surrounding culture is growing ever more distant from its Christian roots, despite a deep and widespread hunger for spiritual nourishment.

More HERE

Straight talking British judge

Highlights the Gypsy problem

A judge has launched an astonishing attack on criminal Eastern European gangs who come to Britain to target elderly and vulnerable people. District judge Bruce Morgan said he was ‘deeply concerned’ about the impact of criminals who arrive in the country to steal from innocent people.

His comments came as he sentenced teenager Ceca Dadic, who is believed to be a Roma gypsy from Bosnia, to six months for her ‘despicable’ role in trying to steal a 78-year-old woman’s purse. The 19-year-old mother-of-two admitted attempted theft as she appeared at Worcester Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday. She distracted her elderly victim by asking her advice on a cream cake while her underage accomplice tried to unzip the woman’s purse.

Mr Morgan said Dadic was part of a criminal gang and added that he had dealt with six similar cases in the previous five days.

Dadic wept as the judge told her – through an interpreter – that he hoped her six-month sentence in youth custody would act as a deterrent to others. He added that she and an accomplice, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had acted in a ‘despicable’ way.

He said: ‘There is no doubt in my mind that you are part of a criminal gang who come to this country from Eastern Europe for the purpose of committing crime. ‘I’m deeply concerned about the number of young people like you who I deal with who come from Eastern Europe, find addresses in Birmingham and then go to the neighbouring counties to commit crime.’

The court heard that Dadic had been convicted four times in the past year of theft or attempted theft.

The court heard that Dadic, from Birmingham, was in a Somerfield supermarket in Worcester on August 12 when she asked the elderly shopper whether a particular cake contained strawberry jam. Liam Finch, prosecuting, said: ‘She asked her: “would my grandmother like it?”‘ Security guards then saw Dadic’s accomplice try to unzip the woman’s purse and called police.

Mr Morgan said: ‘You say you are sorry – I don’t accept that at all. ‘I accept you may be a small part of a large organisation but you are an essential part of it. ‘To pick on and try to distract elderly ladies for the sole purpose of financial gain is quite frankly despicable’.

SOURCE

The shifty Lord Oxburgh consulted the fox on how to guard the henhouse

Warmism just lives and breathes crookedness. Crookedness is essential to its continued existence

Steve McIntyre:

The Oxburgh Report stated: “The eleven representative publications that the Panel considered in detail are listed in Appendix B. The papers cover a period of more than twenty years and were selected on the advice of the Royal Society.”

This statement has been questioned ever since the publication of the Oxburgh Report. That the Royal Society did not select the papers has been clear for some time.

In Oxburgh’s testimony to the Parliamentary Committee, Oxburgh stated:

Q – Right. Can you tell us how did you choose the 11 publications?

Ox- We didn’t choose the 11 publications. They were basically what… We needed something that would be provide a pretty good introduction to work of the unit as it had evolved over the years. The publications were suggested to us came via the university and by the royal society, I believe. We feel ..let me just emphasize..they were just a start… because all of us were novices in this area, we all felt that they were a very good introduction – we moved on. We looked at other publications… we asked for raw materials, things of that kind. The press made quite a meal out of the choice of publications. For anyone on the panel, this all seems over the top. It didn’t have that significance.

Q – there are two things that arise out of that. It was a small unit. Are you saying that Jones, the subject of the investigation, chose the papers that were to be investigated… and that it wasn’t the panel or royal Society?

Ox – No suggestion Jones chose them,

Q – Where did they come from?

Ox- I believe they came … I suspect that that the […] involved was Professor Liss who was acting head of the unit who’d been brought in from outside the unit…he’s been an chemical oceanographer who is broadly interested in area. he in consultation with people with royal society and maybe others outside the unit who had some familiarity.

Q -So the list did not come from the unit – you’re absolutely categorical ?

Ox – Well I cant

Q – So the list did not come from CRU?

Ox – I can’t prove a negative. There’s absolutely no indication that it did.

Q – Your publicity said that it came from Royal Society. The Panel given list before Royal Society asked.

Ox – I… Not as far as I know. You Might be right but I don’t believe so. No certainly I don’t think that can be true.

In a recent post, I observed that the list of eleven publications was sent out as early as March 4 – well before a perfunctory email from Trevor Davies to Martin Rees and Brian Hoskins of the Royal Society on March 12 saying that Oxburgh wanted to be able to say that the list had been chosen “in consultation with the Royal Society”, even though the list had already been sent out.

I recently noticed that Lisa Williams of the UEA Registrar’s Office was shown as the author of the list version sent to panelists – thereby offering a lead towards solving the authorship of the list, which was accompanied by the statement:

“These key publications have been selected because of their pertinence to the specific criticisms which have been levelled against CRU’s research findings as a result of the theft of emails.”

Today – after almost six months – the riddle of who prepared the list is resolved. Lisa Williams wrote:

Dear Mr McIntyre

In response to your recent enquiry I can provide the following information.

I understand that the list of 11 papers for the Oxburgh review was collated by Prof Trevor Davies, in consultation with others. He was also the author of the statement at the bottom of the list.

Yours sincerely, Lisa Williams

So the list was not selected by the Royal Society after all, but by Trevor Davies, the pro-VC of the University and former director of CRU. In consultation with “others”. Dare one hypothesize that these mysterious “others” will turn out to be Jones and Briffa after all?

SOURCE

British teenagers to pass a high school exam in sex

This is all part of a trend which has seen a record rate of pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases among British teenagers. So-called “education” has just encouraged sexual experimentation among increasingly younger age-groups.

Teenagers will learn how to use a condom and obtain the morning after pill as part of the first GCSE-style qualification in sex. Pupils will be able to gain the equivalent of a D grade under the new course which has been devised to raise awareness of issues surrounding relationships, contraception and sexually transmitted diseases. The Government-funded qualification is being offered in nine schools and colleges for the first time this term with plans to expand it across the country.

Last night, the move sparked outrage among families’ groups who claimed it legitimised sexual promiscuity and failed to make any reference to marriage.

But Suzanne Cant, research manager at the qualifications provider NCFE, which is running the course, said: “Sexual health education should play a part in the curriculum for all young people. “The latest figures show teenage pregnancy rates are falling, but not falling at a fast enough rate to meet Government targets.

Meanwhile, annual diagnoses for sexually-transmitted diseases are already in the hundreds of thousands – and increasing all the time.

“Part of the way to tackle these issues is through education and [the] qualification offers a formal way to assess and certificate learners to help ensure the right messages are being delivered and understood.”

NCFE – which used to stand for Northern Council for Further Education – formally launched the Level 1 award in sexual health awareness this week following official accreditation by Ofqual, the exams regulator. Level 1 examinations are equivalent to low-level GCSEs graded D to G.

The course, which is aimed towards students who are not yet ready to take full GCSEs, and takes just nine hours to teach,asks pupils to give the names of male and female sexual organs, describe two examples of “risky sexual behaviour” and outline two methods of contraception “that would be suitable for a young person”.

Students, who will be encouraged to take the course between the age of 14 and 16, are taught about the age at which someone can access sexual health services “without parental consent”.

Another question asks pupils to outline “two things it’s important to remember when using a condom” and list two places where emergency contraception, such as the morning after pill, may be obtained.

A further section focuses on HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Pupils are asked how HIV can be transmitted and to outline one possible consequence of not having Chlamydia treated.

Norman Wells, from the Family Education Trust, said: “In spite of its name, this new qualification is more about promoting sexual experimentation and the use of contraception by children than it is about promoting sexual health.

“The only sure way of avoiding sexually transmitted infections is to keep sexual intimacy within a faithful lifelong relationship, yet this course makes no mention of marriage or of commitment and faithfulness. “Instead, the focus is on telling pupils how to use contraceptives and how they can access them behind their parents’ backs. Schools exist to assist and support parents in the education of their children, not to undermine them in this way.”

A spokesman for the Department for Education said: “There are hundreds of qualifications that are accredited by Ofqual for a plethora of different ages, abilities and settings. We rightly trust heads to choose what is best for their pupils.”

Most students already receive sex education at secondary school, although Labour dropped plans to make lessons compulsory in primaries earlier this year as part of the Parliamentary “wash-up” before the General Election.

SOURCE

A spectre is haunting Britain: “The corpse of Brownism still haunts the political debate. The 50p tax rate will stay, not because of any tangible benefit it brings, but because of ‘fairness’. Taxes will have to rise to plug the deficit, not cut to ensure growth and greater tax takes in time. Free school milk is to remain despite having no discernable health benefits because of the long shadow that Thatcher has cast over the Conservative party.”

Advertisements

About jonjayray

I am former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party. The kneejerk response of the Green/Left to people who challenge them is to say that the challenger is in the pay of "Big Oil", "Big Business", "Big Pharma", "Exxon-Mobil", "The Pioneer Fund" or some other entity that they see, in their childish way, as a boogeyman. So I think it might be useful for me to point out that I have NEVER received one cent from anybody by way of support for what I write. As a retired person, I live entirely on my own investments. I do not work for anybody and I am not beholden to anybody
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s