should be given food vouchers redeamable only on certain food types.
Some people are so moronic that you'd only end up with a black market in junk foods.
Anyone who thinks living on benefits is mollycoddling should try it for a month or two.
I agree, anyone who has such low personal aspiration needs sympathy.
There is however still some element of personal choice which cant simply be dismissed as limited opportunities and education.
but I suspect that with no more than a moments thought you may possibly find that you are completely wrong.
Nope - I gave it a little thought and I don't feel I am wrong in the slightest bit. Why is it wrong to expect an adult to be able to make quite simple and basic adult decisions? Could any right-thinking adult think it is okay to chew fish & chips and then feed it to a child because they can't chew it themselves? Society can only do so much in trying to educate and cannot then be held responsible because a tiny minority failed to pick up even the simplest of instructions.
As has been said on here, there is so much information available for expectant mothers - moreso for ones expecting a multiple birth. If one individual is unable to grasp what is basic information, they have no-one to blame but themselves.
Not bothered about the rights and wrongs of the mother but what she is doing to her children is child abuse. You can spend all day talking about who to blame but those children need a change now. If a parent was beating them you would not think twice about calling for some sort serious intervention, just what is the difference with this obviously unfit parent?
By the time they leave school they should be capable of making adult choices
Wouldn't disagree with that, except for the obvious fact that it very frequently doesn't happen as in this case. Think about it people you can't have it both ways. Either she is responsible for her actions, in which case she has learnt/developed that behaviour along the way, or shes not, in which case shes a victim.
My argument on that subject is that as a society we went through a seed change in the 80's where the norm changed from two parents, one at work and one at home with the kids to one where two parents are at work and latterly one parent families substantially changed the dynamic of family life and we are now reaping the rewards, where what to me is abnormal behaviours are now the norm and vice versa.
Adults are usually capable of making sensible decisions
I find this assertion unfounded.
riding an MTB - not sensible
being fat - not sensible
believing in gods - not sensible
believing made up stories from The Sun - not sensible
we may have the capacity to be sensible but oftentimes prefer something easier or more fun...
Silly theories about something being wrong with society that produces parents/people like that are blown out of the window when you get 'normal' people growing up and coming out of these communities.
I grew up on a council scheme, surrounded by tubsters, teenagers with 3 babies, people with aspirations to have a big old smelly banger of a car, the men who go poaching with their air rifles and ther women who make tina turner's voice sound like the queens.
I wasn't told what to do by society. I ignored the adverts, my mum went out to grocers to buy me veg and healthy food. I got 2 degrees and work as a professional, am a home-owner with savings and don't yet have kids. That was because my mother and I chose to live a healthy and sensible life. Each of these social-scum can choose to do what they want, and generally what they want is to be useless, fat and lazy, smoke and eat cr*p and pop out a few kids to increase the household income.
IT'S A CHOICE!
Anyone who thinks living on benefits is mollycoddling should try it for a month or two.
Agreed, but thats how it should be - you shouldnt be able to live easily off it for long periods unless the lack of employment is down to reasons beyond your control. Lack of ambition and drive are not beyond your control.
Very difficult area.
Could any right-thinking adult think it is okay to chew fish & chips and then feed it to a child because they can't chew it themselves?
also totally made up - the whole piece is a piss take. Shame on you for being so uncritically credulous.
[i]By the time they leave school they should be capable of making adult choices[/i]Wouldn't disagree with that, except for the obvious fact that it very frequently doesn't happen as in this case. Think about it people you can't have it both ways. Either she is responsible for her actions, in which case she has learnt/developed that behaviour along the way, or shes not, in which case shes a victim.
The crux of the matter. We can all say "should" but it plainly is not what is happening on the ground. seeing as we cannot even agree the reasons for this happening - tainted by ideology from both sides perhaps- then there is little hope for finding a solution.
As for the healthy food option for people on sink estates - just go and look at the shops available in those areas. its not Waitrose and independent veg shops - its Lidl and Farmfoods. I live in an old working class area that is gentrified - there is no quality fruit and veg available at a reasonable price within cycling distance.
I do go along with the argument of the sociological shift in the 80s that produced an underclass that has basically been left behind. Ill educated, out of work, addicted to junk food, fags and cheap drugs - prescription and otherwise. Living in poor accommodation and with poor prospects. These folk have low self esteem and find it very hard to get out of the situation they find themselves in. Regardless of how it happened, it has happened. Either we as a nation tolerate it or we do something about it.
What to do about it is of course very hard to see. Simply throwing money at them will not do - it needs a major shift in society in the way it works and in the attitudes of the majority to the underclass.
mysterymurdoch : Arguing against or agreeing with my point? Surely you are saying that your parental influences made you what you are. So why should that not then equally apply to someone else but in a negative context.
In fact how could you possibly get so high up on your high horse and not recognise how lucky you were in relation to those around you who weren't given those chances by their parents.
Surely you are saying that your parental influences made you what you are.
apocryphal. Everyone ignores their parents. You learn from your peers.
apocryphal. Everyone ignores their parents. You learn from your peers
It depends on age. For young children peers may not exist, all socialisation is learned from parents.
As children grow they mix more with peers and the socialisation broadens.
its Lidl and Farmfoods
Plenty of decent quality food in lidl and farmfoods, just not super-expensive M&S foods. One of my usual shopping locations is right in the middle of a rather dodgy glasgow location, where there is a large tesco and a lidl, both have a VAST array of decent quality food at very reasonable prices. Sure the local corner shop will be full of tat but again you should exercise your brain and go to the cheaper shops with better food if you are an adult. If you choose not to do that for yourself then at least when you have a kid you should make that switch for their benefit.
apocryphal. Everyone ignores their parents. You learn from your peers.
Actually the majority of learning is done between the time of birth and 5 years of age. What traditionally comes after and is as you rightly say hugely influenced by peers is a tiny fraction of what comes before. That is why since the 80's "peer influence" has in fact become a substantial issue as we have changed to a society where those significant first years are often now spent in a form of care, as opposed to the traditional home environment. Whilst it is always possible to argue the specific against the general, the fact is that we are all aware of a general lowering of standards in most areas of society.
Is there any harm in a small child having a bit of pre-chewed fish 'n' chips and some cheesy wotsits as part of a balanced diet? Somehow I rather doubt it. ❓
But I agree with sfb that this story has been made up to annoy.
~Not sure a pack of cheesy whatsits would ever form part of a balanced diet for a child that old. A kid of 4 maybe, but not a toddler. Just go take a look at the quantity of fat and calories in a pack of them and realise their daily intake should be around 800cals - that pack would be a very large portion of it.
Actually the majority of learning is done between the time of birth and 5 years of age
learning to talk and move perhaps but 5 year olds are not noted for their sensibility or depth of thought.
If we choose to believe the story (I must admit to being somewhat sceptical this person could actually exist), then I stand by my view - no-one in this country needs pity for acting in the way this woman *has. No blame needs placing anywhere other than at *her feet. No-one could possibly think it is okay to change their children's clothes just once a week if they have the financial ability to buy 10 cigarettes a day and eat at MacD's. Fair enough if she was living in a South American slum, but certainly not in the UK (yet - the financial meltdown might mean we are all living in slums soon)...
*If she exists
[i]Remember it is the Sun - large pinch of salt required[/i]
Well she does look like a slug. I know 'would you' threads have been bad but, well....for £50,000........would you? I would 8)
yup its a recession allright, worst since the 1930's
Back then some guy in Germany became popular for blaming everyones problems on the Jew's and gypsies.
Now then, if the state didnt give her a house then she'd be gypsy, and banking is traditionaly linked with which religion?
I doubt the story is made-up at all. That would be illegal. No newspaper, not even the Scum, can print lies. I've emailed a mate who works for them, to ask him.
Meanwhile, elsewhere, there are far worse things happening, I'm sure.
Things that don't sell newspapers as well.
SFB they cant 'make' this up. They can find stories though that troll for public opinion/stick out.
Sadly, this sort of abuse etc is not isolated.
As the father of triplets in a small house I sympathise with one line [b](and one line only)[/b]... [i]Their tiny house is strewn with laundry piles and toys.[/i]
p.s. there were 15 in the operating theatre when ours were delivered. (not including me and the wife)
My argument on that subject is that as a society we went through a seed change in the 80's where the norm changed from two parents, one at work and one at home with the kids to one where two parents are at work and latterly one parent families substantially changed the dynamic of family life and we are now reaping the rewards, where what to me is abnormal behaviours are now the norm and vice versa.
That'd be an almost believable argument* if it wasn't for the fact that most of these people being talked about in these silly articles are long term unemployed and often children of unemployed parents. It isn't that they aren't seeing their kids.
Joe
*except for being a bit daily mail
It won't be made up as such but slanted in the direction they think will make the best story.
Its all very well saying she "should" be more responsible - but she isn't - and why? You need to sort the chicken from the egg. Establish why she and many others behave like this and then you can take the steps to prevent this sort of thing.
Merely saying - its her fault gets society nowhere.
Perhaps saying it's her fault, then removing her from society and putting her in a pit with everyone else like her, will get society somewhere. The objective isn't to clean up society, it's to clean up individuals. Give her kids a chance by allowing some more intelligent people to look afte them! Sort out the individuals and society takes care of itself (pennies and pounds and all that).
The question "what's wrong with society?" is essentially flawed. It should almost ALWAYS be "What's wrong with these people?". The cause comes from the person, not beyond.
*except for being a bit daily mail
😯 I've never been accused of that before !!
A pleasant change from soft liberal bedwetting commy, Joe, so thanks for that.
Dear oh dear...
there is always a spectrum of behavior in society, the story highlights one end of it
there are no winners in stories like this, its just used by which ever end of the political spectrum for their own ends. From its Thatchers fault (how long ago did she go?) to look at the underclass and stop their benefits.
freedom and a democratic society means that you have to respect peoples right to behave how they want within the constraint of law. If they want to self justify their behavior (McD's are healthy) then we need to accept they can do that. The underclass have always existed and had their own subcultures where what "normal" people aspire to is seen as strange or stupid.
The question "what's wrong with society?" is essentially flawed. It should almost ALWAYS be "What's wrong with these people?".
I'm guessing here, but are you a royalist by any chance mystery? 🙄
Hate the buggers G! My point simply is that there are no politicians to blame for the fat one feeding her kids chips, just the braindead useless pleb herself.
Big and daft - when I was the kid in the 70's the "underclass" was much smaller and far less divorced from mainstream society compared to today.
Mystery: To be fair I did make the point that it was politics apart.
What I actually said was that as a society we have at best accepted a situation where kids aren’t getting the proper messages from their folks about how to live healthy lives. Whilst there will always be a few who rise above that situation, most won’t so we have to bear some responsibility for what is a societal problem collectively.
The reason I asked the Royal Family question is that it’s the same argument in essence, i.e. that the Royals are believed to be special by reason of birth, and that therefore ipso facto if you believe that you will also believe it is not possible to impact upon a persons life style or status, as its something you are genetically programmed with from birth. (Also bol-locks IMHO).
I just happen to believe (along with most of academia, but not SFB apparently) that a great deal of what shapes a person happens in years one to five of their lives. If that is seriously flawed their life chances are IMHO likely to be severely impeded. For that reason, I'll bring politics in, and the short termism that is a feature of our political system is a serious problem that we all need to wake up to and strive to change, (and yes this bit of it was down to Thatcherism, but its not an accolade that is unique to her).
The Infant and Toddler Forum poll also discovered that 65 per cent of mums NEVER cook meals from scratch.
😯
While I don't believe that as a figure, how sad that they are missing out on the delights of ['real'] food?
Edit: Sorry double post
Hate the buggers G! My point simply is that there are no politicians to blame for the fat one feeding her kids chips, just the braindead useless pleb herself.
Wow you are quite the charmer.
God forbid any of you or the people you care about should find yourself in a bad situation, presumably it would be all your own fault and you should get no help or sympathy.
If it's not Thatcher's fault, who's fault is it that you are such a selfish, vindictive twunt?
mysterymurdoch - Member........... Give her kids a chance by allowing some more intelligent people to look afte them! .................
And where are you going to find these tens of thousands of foster parents? foster parents are in short supply anyway. How are you going to pay for it? Fostering is expensive.
I have deliberately refrained from suggesting solutions because I simply don't know of any. that certainly isn't one.
65 per cent of mums NEVER cook meals from scratch.
I was in Mothercare recently and you can *actually get 'Ice cube tray' style plastic trays with lids so you can cook food and freeze it in baby-sized portions.
*I say 'actually' but they are probably very commonplace but as I am just about to enter the wonderful world of parenthood I was happily oblivious for years.
No newspaper, not even the Scum, can print lies.
RB you have excelled yourself in irony :o) The question is rather "How often does the truth sneak through?". Less than one might hope 🙁
i read it was between 1 and 7 you leant 'stuff' (i.e. your personality, behaviour, social skills, heierachy, etc)
And at 7 your pretty much setup for life and whatever you do your personality is unlikely to change. Makes sense to me, I grew up in the middle of (3 seperate) nowhere(s), and as a result find it much easier to make freinds 15-20 years older. I also can't abide macyD's, BK, KFC etc and have never cooked a microwave meal for myself.
Is it an OK reaction just not really to care that much? I'm trying to summon up some sort of indignation at the state (or perhaps not) of this woman and her brood, but in reality she doesn't really matter to me at all, other that in purely financial terms she probably has an impact on my taxation. Given that that nice Mr Darling wants to rape me for the next half century to bale out his banking chums, I find it hard to get worked up about the couple of hundred she gets each week.
Sorry, not particularly STW, but I don't care that she feeds her kids mushed up Maccy D's, or is fat/stupid/unemployed.
people you care about should find yourself in a bad situation,
But the point isn't that the woman IS in a bad situation. She is in a situation entirely of her own making. If she can afford to eat MaccyDees, then she can afford to eat properly. She lives with her mother and she provides the daughter and grandchildren with salads and things but they won't eat them. She just sees 'convenience' food as an easy solution because she quite simply cannot be bothered to act like a parent should and devote love, time and attention to her children. That could be because she never had any as a child herself so knows no other way, who knows, but there is simply NO excuse to feed/treat children like that.
[img] 
[/img]
I wonder when we are goig to get to the Thatcher event horizon? ie when you can't blame her anymore and have to face up to everybody else having some responsibility
I also don't believe that the underclass were not as separated from what TJ calls "society" as they are now. They have always existed and probably always will, its more that no-one reported on them in the daily newspapers/ TV news.
Or was there a "golden age" pre Thatcher when all was well with the country?