Royal College of Midwives brands withdrawal of central funding for 18-year campaign ‘disappointing’ The government has stepped back from a campaign launched 18 years ago to encourage new mothers to start and continue breastfeeding, in spite of the low proportion of women who breastfeed their babies in the UK for any length of time. National Breastfeeding Awareness Week, which begins on Monday, is no longer receiving central funds from the Department of Health. Events will take place around the country, organised by local hospitals or groups such as the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), but there will be no central co-ordination or national campaign, which the Royal College of Midwives said was “very disappointing”. The Department of Health, which has cut back on all forms of social marketing, is said to be reviewing the situation. But also worrying campaigners is the disappearance of a network of regional infant feeding co-ordinators who were based in the strategic health authorities which are now being abolished. Yet organisations involved with new mothers, such as the royal colleges of midwives and nurses as well as the NCT, say the battle to increase breastfeeding rates is far from won. New figures, to be published next week, are likely to show an increase in the number of women who start to breastfeed their baby, but are not expected to show a big shift in the numbers who continue to do so even close to the six months recommended by the World Health Organisation and endorsed by the UK government. The last official breastfeeding figures were published in 2007, and showed only a 2% increase over the previous 20 years. Less than half – 48% – of mothers were breastfeeding at six weeks. Only a quarter of mothers were breastfeeding at six months. Exclusive breastfeeding was highest among women from professional and managerial occupations, aged over 30 and with higher levels of education. Most women were willing to try – before the birth, 70% of women said they would like to breastfeed and 84% said they were aware of the health benefits. A new survey from Lansinoh, makers of breastfeeding products, appears to bear out the willingness of most women to attempt to breastfeed. Nearly 87% of the 1,400 women who responded to their online survey said they did or would breastfeed for “the health benefits of my baby” and almost all – 98% – thought “breast is best”. A substantial proportion – 40% – felt that they had received good support from midwives and health visitors. Some 30% had “early issues” that were overcome, but 20% felt they had to deal with it on their own. Unicef, which runs the Baby Friendly Initiative, accrediting hospitals and maternity units that offer good supportive breastfeeding care, says that more training is needed for health visitors and midwives. It has just accredited the first health visitor course, at Bolton University, which has a specific two-day training module on breastfeeding. Rosie Dodds, senior policy advisor at the NCT, said another issue is that some women are deterred still from breastfeeding in public, in spite of the Equality Act passed last year which specifically protects their right to feed in cafes and other public places. “Women are hesitant about it,” she said, “especially the youngest and least confident women.” The Department of Health said: “Due to reduced budgets this year, the department is unable to offer any funding for National Breastfeeding Week.” However, it said it valued and encouraged the support and information available to health professionals and parents through NHS Choices, the National Breastfeeding Helpline, Unicef UK Baby Friendly Initiative and peer support programmes. “The department recognises the importance of breastfeeding both for the mother and her baby and we continue to support breastfeeding through the Healthy Child Programme, as set out in the Public Health White Paper. The coalition government has made the challenging commitment to an extra 4,200 health visitors by 2015. Health visitors will be able to help support women who want to breastfeed but may find it difficult.” Breastfeeding Health policy Public services policy Parents and parenting Health Health & wellbeing Sarah Boseley guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Royal College of Midwives brands withdrawal of central funding for 18-year campaign ‘disappointing’ The government has stepped back from a campaign launched 18 years ago to encourage new mothers to start and continue breastfeeding, in spite of the low proportion of women who breastfeed their babies in the UK for any length of time. National Breastfeeding Awareness Week, which begins on Monday, is no longer receiving central funds from the Department of Health. Events will take place around the country, organised by local hospitals or groups such as the National Childbirth Trust (NCT), but there will be no central co-ordination or national campaign, which the Royal College of Midwives said was “very disappointing”. The Department of Health, which has cut back on all forms of social marketing, is said to be reviewing the situation. But also worrying campaigners is the disappearance of a network of regional infant feeding co-ordinators who were based in the strategic health authorities which are now being abolished. Yet organisations involved with new mothers, such as the royal colleges of midwives and nurses as well as the NCT, say the battle to increase breastfeeding rates is far from won. New figures, to be published next week, are likely to show an increase in the number of women who start to breastfeed their baby, but are not expected to show a big shift in the numbers who continue to do so even close to the six months recommended by the World Health Organisation and endorsed by the UK government. The last official breastfeeding figures were published in 2007, and showed only a 2% increase over the previous 20 years. Less than half – 48% – of mothers were breastfeeding at six weeks. Only a quarter of mothers were breastfeeding at six months. Exclusive breastfeeding was highest among women from professional and managerial occupations, aged over 30 and with higher levels of education. Most women were willing to try – before the birth, 70% of women said they would like to breastfeed and 84% said they were aware of the health benefits. A new survey from Lansinoh, makers of breastfeeding products, appears to bear out the willingness of most women to attempt to breastfeed. Nearly 87% of the 1,400 women who responded to their online survey said they did or would breastfeed for “the health benefits of my baby” and almost all – 98% – thought “breast is best”. A substantial proportion – 40% – felt that they had received good support from midwives and health visitors. Some 30% had “early issues” that were overcome, but 20% felt they had to deal with it on their own. Unicef, which runs the Baby Friendly Initiative, accrediting hospitals and maternity units that offer good supportive breastfeeding care, says that more training is needed for health visitors and midwives. It has just accredited the first health visitor course, at Bolton University, which has a specific two-day training module on breastfeeding. Rosie Dodds, senior policy advisor at the NCT, said another issue is that some women are deterred still from breastfeeding in public, in spite of the Equality Act passed last year which specifically protects their right to feed in cafes and other public places. “Women are hesitant about it,” she said, “especially the youngest and least confident women.” The Department of Health said: “Due to reduced budgets this year, the department is unable to offer any funding for National Breastfeeding Week.” However, it said it valued and encouraged the support and information available to health professionals and parents through NHS Choices, the National Breastfeeding Helpline, Unicef UK Baby Friendly Initiative and peer support programmes. “The department recognises the importance of breastfeeding both for the mother and her baby and we continue to support breastfeeding through the Healthy Child Programme, as set out in the Public Health White Paper. The coalition government has made the challenging commitment to an extra 4,200 health visitors by 2015. Health visitors will be able to help support women who want to breastfeed but may find it difficult.” Breastfeeding Health policy Public services policy Parents and parenting Health Health & wellbeing Sarah Boseley guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
High court rules against London secondary school after boy was refused entry for breaching ban on ‘gang-related’ hairstyles An 11-year-old boy who was turned away on his first day at secondary school for wearing his hair in cornrows, has won his case at the high court after a judge ruled the school’s policy resulted in “indirect racial discrimination”. The boy, now aged 13, was refused entry to St Gregory’s Catholic Science College in Kenton, Harrow, north London in September 2009 because his hairstyle did not comply with the strict uniform policy. The school only allowed a conservative “short back and sides” hairstyle for boys amid concerns that other styles could encourage “gang culture”. But at the high court in London on Friday , Mr Justice Collins said that although the school’s “short back and sides” policy was “perfectly permissible”, it should have taken into account individual pupils’ family traditions. “There are a number of Afro-Caribbeans for whom cutting their hair and wearing it in cornrows is a matter of their cultural background … and can work against them on the basis of their ethnicity,” said Collins. “There is no question of this school being in any way racist. This was an honest mistake … it was an error. But I am satisfied that if the policy is applied without the possibility of exception, then it is unlawful. I have decided that there was unlawful indirect racial discrimination that was not justified.” The court heard the boy, known only as G, had not cut his hair since birth and wore his hair in cornrows as part of a family tradition. In a statement to the court, he said he was shocked at the school’s decision, adding that all the male members of his family wore their hair in cornrows. “I really like my hair and it’s been that way all my life. This problem at school was the first time me and my mum ever talked about my hair, it’s so normal to us … I really like my hair, my brother and dad have cornrows and we all like it. I really don’t want to cut it off. This was the first time I had to ask the question, ‘what’s wrong with my hair?’” His mother told the court the style was “of great importance to his cultural and racial identity”, adding that her son, who had been looking forward to starting secondary school, suffered a “major blow to his self-esteem” after being turned away minutes after arriving. The school said the ban on the cornrows hairstyle was part of its strict uniform code designed to deter gang culture and create a safe environment for all its pupils. Andrew Prindiville, who has been headteacher at St Gregory’s since September 2008, defended the decision to adopt “a traditional schoolboy haircut or a ‘short back and sides’”, saying the school served an area where there was gun and knife crime, much of it gang-related, and haircuts were often “badges” of gang culture. “Our uniform and haircut policy for students other than sixth formers is a critical part of our strategy for maintaining excellent behaviour, for keeping gang mentality out of the school and for ensuring that students do not adopt attire or haircuts that may encourage that mentality,” he told the court. Prindiville said that although there was no specific connection between cornrows and gang culture, any exception to the strict rules on hairstyles could lead to a breakdown in discipline. “For example, the school ban on shaven heads is part of a conscious determination to avoid white boys, whether English or, say, eastern European, adopting any form of ‘skinhead’ styles with all the negative, and sometimes racist, connotations that go with this”. But Mr Justice Collins said the school, which is rated as excellent by Ofsted, must make exceptions in the future on the basis of ethnicity or cultural beliefs. The judge added that he would not rule if the boy’s banning from the school was unlawful, adding that an ongoing county court case, if the family chose to pursue it, would decide that. After the ruling, the family’s solicitor, Angela Jackman, from Maxwell Gillott, said: “This is an important decision. It makes clear that non-religious cultural and family practices associated with a particular race fall within the protection of equalities legislation.” She added: “For G, wearing his hair in cornrows is a fundamental cultural practice, which would have had no adverse impact upon the school. His wishes, however, were dismissed by the school without any consideration. Whilst schools face the challenges of maintaining good discipline, a community environment and their particular ethos, this case is a reminder that they must do so within the boundaries of the law.” In a statement after the ruling, Prindiville and chairman of governors Alloysius Frederick said the school had always tried to ensure that its uniform policy was fair, and offered its best wishes to G and his mother. “We believe that St Gregory’s is a happy and successful school with highly supportive parents and with a student body fully reflective of the racial diversity of the local community.” They added: “[We are] naturally disappointed by this decision of the high court. St Gregory’s is proud of its rich cultural and ethnic diversity, and is run on the belief that everyone at the school is equal and made in the image of God. “The school’s governing body will now consider whether to apply to the court of appeal for permission to appeal against the judge’s determination.” In a statement to the court, G, who is now at another school, said: “I love my [new] school, everyone is different and the teachers only care that I am learning – they don’t have a problem with the way I look.” London Schools Matthew Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …High court rules against London secondary school after boy was refused entry for breaching ban on ‘gang-related’ hairstyles An 11-year-old boy who was turned away on his first day at secondary school for wearing his hair in cornrows, has won his case at the high court after a judge ruled the school’s policy resulted in “indirect racial discrimination”. The boy, now aged 13, was refused entry to St Gregory’s Catholic Science College in Kenton, Harrow, north London in September 2009 because his hairstyle did not comply with the strict uniform policy. The school only allowed a conservative “short back and sides” hairstyle for boys amid concerns that other styles could encourage “gang culture”. But at the high court in London on Friday , Mr Justice Collins said that although the school’s “short back and sides” policy was “perfectly permissible”, it should have taken into account individual pupils’ family traditions. “There are a number of Afro-Caribbeans for whom cutting their hair and wearing it in cornrows is a matter of their cultural background … and can work against them on the basis of their ethnicity,” said Collins. “There is no question of this school being in any way racist. This was an honest mistake … it was an error. But I am satisfied that if the policy is applied without the possibility of exception, then it is unlawful. I have decided that there was unlawful indirect racial discrimination that was not justified.” The court heard the boy, known only as G, had not cut his hair since birth and wore his hair in cornrows as part of a family tradition. In a statement to the court, he said he was shocked at the school’s decision, adding that all the male members of his family wore their hair in cornrows. “I really like my hair and it’s been that way all my life. This problem at school was the first time me and my mum ever talked about my hair, it’s so normal to us … I really like my hair, my brother and dad have cornrows and we all like it. I really don’t want to cut it off. This was the first time I had to ask the question, ‘what’s wrong with my hair?’” His mother told the court the style was “of great importance to his cultural and racial identity”, adding that her son, who had been looking forward to starting secondary school, suffered a “major blow to his self-esteem” after being turned away minutes after arriving. The school said the ban on the cornrows hairstyle was part of its strict uniform code designed to deter gang culture and create a safe environment for all its pupils. Andrew Prindiville, who has been headteacher at St Gregory’s since September 2008, defended the decision to adopt “a traditional schoolboy haircut or a ‘short back and sides’”, saying the school served an area where there was gun and knife crime, much of it gang-related, and haircuts were often “badges” of gang culture. “Our uniform and haircut policy for students other than sixth formers is a critical part of our strategy for maintaining excellent behaviour, for keeping gang mentality out of the school and for ensuring that students do not adopt attire or haircuts that may encourage that mentality,” he told the court. Prindiville said that although there was no specific connection between cornrows and gang culture, any exception to the strict rules on hairstyles could lead to a breakdown in discipline. “For example, the school ban on shaven heads is part of a conscious determination to avoid white boys, whether English or, say, eastern European, adopting any form of ‘skinhead’ styles with all the negative, and sometimes racist, connotations that go with this”. But Mr Justice Collins said the school, which is rated as excellent by Ofsted, must make exceptions in the future on the basis of ethnicity or cultural beliefs. The judge added that he would not rule if the boy’s banning from the school was unlawful, adding that an ongoing county court case, if the family chose to pursue it, would decide that. After the ruling, the family’s solicitor, Angela Jackman, from Maxwell Gillott, said: “This is an important decision. It makes clear that non-religious cultural and family practices associated with a particular race fall within the protection of equalities legislation.” She added: “For G, wearing his hair in cornrows is a fundamental cultural practice, which would have had no adverse impact upon the school. His wishes, however, were dismissed by the school without any consideration. Whilst schools face the challenges of maintaining good discipline, a community environment and their particular ethos, this case is a reminder that they must do so within the boundaries of the law.” In a statement after the ruling, Prindiville and chairman of governors Alloysius Frederick said the school had always tried to ensure that its uniform policy was fair, and offered its best wishes to G and his mother. “We believe that St Gregory’s is a happy and successful school with highly supportive parents and with a student body fully reflective of the racial diversity of the local community.” They added: “[We are] naturally disappointed by this decision of the high court. St Gregory’s is proud of its rich cultural and ethnic diversity, and is run on the belief that everyone at the school is equal and made in the image of God. “The school’s governing body will now consider whether to apply to the court of appeal for permission to appeal against the judge’s determination.” In a statement to the court, G, who is now at another school, said: “I love my [new] school, everyone is different and the teachers only care that I am learning – they don’t have a problem with the way I look.” London Schools Matthew Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
GOP presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty was hit with pink confetti by gay right activists Thursday during a book-signing in San Francisco. (June 17)
Continue reading …
GOP presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty was hit with pink confetti by gay right activists Thursday during a book-signing in San Francisco. (June 17)
Continue reading …
Searching for airfares often seems like a game passengers are set up to lose. There’s no way to guarantee the best fare, but as AP Airlines Writer Scott Meyerson explains, there are things you can do to get a better deal. (June 16)
Continue reading …Searching for airfares often seems like a game passengers are set up to lose. There’s no way to guarantee the best fare, but as AP Airlines Writer Scott Meyerson explains, there are things you can do to get a better deal. (June 16)
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media What Tim Pawlenty is finding out–or maybe he already knew–is that the GOP has descended into a John Birch/John Galt party because of the FOXation of the party and some of its members reveling in racism. Mother Jones: During his recent swing through New Hampshire for CNN’s presidential debate, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty courted more than a hundred Republicans at a house party in the town of North Conway. But the Pawlenty campaign’s choice of a host for the event, which was arranged by the candidate’s regional field manager in the Granite State, was nothing if not controversial. The party took place at the home of Ray Shakir, a local Republican activist and retired construction executive, who calls President Obama a “jungle alien,” Hillary Clinton “Osama’s dream girl,” and once labeled certain disabled children “uneducatable” and thus undeserving of taxpayer-funded schooling. In an interview, Shakir says Pawlenty addressed tough issues at the house party, such as cutting subsidies for corn ethanol and implementing right-to-work legislation, which would allow employees to opt out of union membership but still receive union-won benefits. Shakir praises Pawlenty as “a real nice guy, very gregarious,” adding, “at this point in the game, Tim Pawlenty is my choice for president.” The Breitbarts of wingnutopia can scream the word racism as much and as loud as they want in an attempt to cheapen its meaning, but it doesn’t change the fact that that’s exactly what the party has embraced. We saw it during the August Townhall meeting during the health care debate and Pawlenty is actively courting them on his presidential run. Check out some of the other insane things Shakir has said in the past: You can call me a birther if you want.” Shakir claims the long-form birth certificate recently released by the Obama administration is merely a clever forgery. (The Pawlenty campaign did not respond to a request for comment.) Moving to other issues, Shakir called human-caused climate change “bullshit” and accused liberals of “trying to destroy this country.” “They’re brainwashing people,” he says Shakir has a history of rhetorical flamethrowing. He’s referred to President Obama as “Borat Hussein O’Bummer” and suggested he is “a radical, subversive, con-artist fraud.” — In response to a special education official who said there was “no such thing as an uneducatable person,” Shakir told a gym full of citizens: “I would dispute that fact. There are certainly individuals that are uneducateable. I am simply suggesting to you and everybody else that there should be a line drawn where the taxpayer is responsible to educate certain people.” Shakir’s statement drew a chorus of boos, calls to resign, and even a comparison to Hitler. To which Shakir responded, “If you don’t like it, that’s the way it is. You people are divorced from reality.” Andy Kroll asks a question in his great piece that he really doesn’t answer: Q) But why did the Pawlenty campaign, running on a “Time for Truth” message, turn to Shakir, an activist whose eyebrow-raising comments on a range of topics fly in the face of that theme? enlarge A) Because that’s who the GOP of today are. Simple.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media What Tim Pawlenty is finding out–or maybe he already knew–is that the GOP has descended into a John Birch/John Galt party because of the FOXation of the party and some of its members reveling in racism. Mother Jones: During his recent swing through New Hampshire for CNN’s presidential debate, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty courted more than a hundred Republicans at a house party in the town of North Conway. But the Pawlenty campaign’s choice of a host for the event, which was arranged by the candidate’s regional field manager in the Granite State, was nothing if not controversial. The party took place at the home of Ray Shakir, a local Republican activist and retired construction executive, who calls President Obama a “jungle alien,” Hillary Clinton “Osama’s dream girl,” and once labeled certain disabled children “uneducatable” and thus undeserving of taxpayer-funded schooling. In an interview, Shakir says Pawlenty addressed tough issues at the house party, such as cutting subsidies for corn ethanol and implementing right-to-work legislation, which would allow employees to opt out of union membership but still receive union-won benefits. Shakir praises Pawlenty as “a real nice guy, very gregarious,” adding, “at this point in the game, Tim Pawlenty is my choice for president.” The Breitbarts of wingnutopia can scream the word racism as much and as loud as they want in an attempt to cheapen its meaning, but it doesn’t change the fact that that’s exactly what the party has embraced. We saw it during the August Townhall meeting during the health care debate and Pawlenty is actively courting them on his presidential run. Check out some of the other insane things Shakir has said in the past: You can call me a birther if you want.” Shakir claims the long-form birth certificate recently released by the Obama administration is merely a clever forgery. (The Pawlenty campaign did not respond to a request for comment.) Moving to other issues, Shakir called human-caused climate change “bullshit” and accused liberals of “trying to destroy this country.” “They’re brainwashing people,” he says Shakir has a history of rhetorical flamethrowing. He’s referred to President Obama as “Borat Hussein O’Bummer” and suggested he is “a radical, subversive, con-artist fraud.” — In response to a special education official who said there was “no such thing as an uneducatable person,” Shakir told a gym full of citizens: “I would dispute that fact. There are certainly individuals that are uneducateable. I am simply suggesting to you and everybody else that there should be a line drawn where the taxpayer is responsible to educate certain people.” Shakir’s statement drew a chorus of boos, calls to resign, and even a comparison to Hitler. To which Shakir responded, “If you don’t like it, that’s the way it is. You people are divorced from reality.” Andy Kroll asks a question in his great piece that he really doesn’t answer: Q) But why did the Pawlenty campaign, running on a “Time for Truth” message, turn to Shakir, an activist whose eyebrow-raising comments on a range of topics fly in the face of that theme? enlarge A) Because that’s who the GOP of today are. Simple.
Continue reading …