A Drop of Claret Never Hurt My Little Darlings
THE TELEGRAPH: The latest health fatwa is aimed at the wrong target, as usual, says James Delingpole.

Liam Donaldson's strictures are directed at the wrong target. Photograph: The Telegraph
This weekend I shall sit down to Sunday lunch with my children, splash their glasses with a drop of claret, and drink a hearty toast to the departure of the Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson. My children are nine and 11, so I know Sir Liam would disapprove – indeed, he told us as much in his latest fatwa. "Children under 15 should not drink alcohol at all," declared his new health guidelines on children's drinking. "Those between 15 and 17 should be supervised by their parents if they are drinking and should limit alcohol intake to one day a week."

The cheek of it! Was there ever a hectoring, busybodying government directive better guaranteed to have the opposite effect of the one intended? That was certainly its impact upon me. Normally at Sunday lunch, my children only have half a finger's worth of wine in their glasses – just to give the water a bit of colour, and make them feel grown-up. But after Sir Liam's nannying strictures, I'm tempted to treat the little darlings to a magnum each.

What's even more galling about strictures like this is that they're directed at the wrong target. We all know where Britain's most serious child-drinking problems lie: on sink estates and among broken homes where rudderless urchins are routinely downing alcopops and cans of super-strong lager before they've reached their teens. >>> James Delingpole | Friday, December 18, 2009

Sir Liam Donaldson: Parents 'Fuelling' Binge Drinking


THE TELEGRAPH: Liam Donaldson to retire after dealing with swine flu: Sir Liam Donaldson, the governments chief medical officer, will retire in May next year, it has been announced. >>> Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor | Tuesday, December 15, 2009

THE TELEGRAPH: Why I will let my children drink alcohol: Liam Donaldson's latest recommendations on teenage drinking will work in theory but not in practice, writes Cassandra Jardine. >>> Cassandra Jardine | Thursday, December 17, 2009

More Twaddle from an Effete Government Representative
As far as I am concerned, Liam Donaldson is talking bollocks! The worst thing you can do for a child is forbid something. Forbidden fruits always taste the sweetest; and that's a fact! Further, the only people I know that went off the rails came from homes which banned alcohol completely.

The best way is to allow children of a certain age to have very small amounts of alcohol to feel included in any family gatherings. By not offering them any, the mystery of the demon drink will only grow.

Liam Donaldson's judgment is questionable. This is the man who said he was happy when smoking was banned in pubs, for he said now he can take his children to pubs for Sunday lunch without them having to inhale second-hand smoke. Somebody should have told him that children do not belong in pubs. Indeed, when I was growing up one had to be sixteen even to enter such a public watering hole. Pubs were not conceived for children, but for adults. The proper place to take a child for Sunday lunch if one is not cooking at home is a restaurant. Not a pub!

It seems that he has no better judgment on children drinking a little alcohol.

The true reason for children getting sozzled is that so many of them come from broken homes. Children need stability at home, not prohibitions. –© Mark

Five-year-olds Need to Play with Dinky Toys Not Learn about Sex! Children Need Their Innocence and Fantasy for Healthy Development
THE TELEGRAPH: Sex and drug lessons will be compulsory under plans announced by the Schools Secretary.

Under the new curriculum, pupils as young as seven will learn about puberty and the facts of life and five-year-olds will be taught about parts of the body, relationships and the effects of drugs on the body.

Once they reach secondary school, pupils will learn about contraception, HIV and Aids, pregnancy and different kinds of relationships - including same sex unions and civil partnerships.

So-called Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education is to become compulsory in both primary and secondary schools from September 2011, and will be enshrined in new legislation.

Faith schools will not be able to opt out of any part of the new statutory curriculum, Ed Balls also confirmed today, although they will be able to teach topics within the ''tenets of their faith''.

Under current rules parents have the right to withdraw their child from sex education classes up until the age of 19. Sex and drug lessons from age 5 >>> | Thursday, November 05, 2009

Children Whose Mothers Work Are 'Less Healthy'
THE TELEGRAPH: The children of working mothers are less healthy than those who stay at home, according to an authoritative study by British researchers.

Almost two out of three mothers with children under five work in Britain with numbers expected to rise, but new research has shown this can affect children's health.

In a study which will cause renewed debate over who have to divide their time between caring for their offspring and going out to work, the researchers found children whose mothers worked were more likely to be driven to school, to watch more than two hours of TV a day, and have sweetened drinks between meals.

Children of mothers who worked full time also ate less fruit and vegetables, the study suggests.

Middle class families suffer the same problems as the findings remained similar even when household income was taken into account, the paper said.

Encouraging mothers to return to work has been a key Labour policy and Patricia Hewitt said in 2004 when she was Trade and Industry Secretary that mothers who do not return to work were 'a real problem'.

The research, on more than 12,000 British children aged five, was published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. >>> Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor | Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Working Mums Have the Unhealthiest Children, Research Finds
TIMES ONLINE: Children brought up by mothers who work are less healthy and more likely to have poor dietary habits and a more sedentary lifestyle, research suggests.

Mothers in full-time work, including those who work flexible hours, were found to have children who eat too few portions of fruit and vegetables, watch more television and consume more fizzy drinks than the children of mothers who stay at home.

The research, published today in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, involved more than 12,000 British schoolchildren born between 2000 and 2002 who are part of the Millennium Cohort Study. Trends being explored include the rise in childhood obesity and policies that have encouraged women to return to work.

Researchers questioned mothers about the hours they worked and their children’s diet, exercise and activity levels when the youngsters were aged 5. They also asked how long their childdren spent in front of a TV or computer. About 30 per cent (4,030) of the mothers had not worked since giving birth but the rest (8,546) were employed. On average they worked 21 hours per week and for 45 months.

Catherine Law, of the Centre for Paediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Institute of Child Health, University College London, told The Times the analysis showed that mothers who worked full-time had the unhealthiest children, followed by those who worked part-time.

Making use of flexible working arrangements while in full-time employment did not appear to improve a child’s habits, she added. “We have seen the rising rates of childhood obesity and the rise in initiatives to get women back to work, and that is what this research explores,” Professor Law said. >>> Sam Lister, Health Editor | Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Sheikh Khatib: We'll Never Give Up Al-Aqsa
YNET NEWS: Islamic Movement leader tells Arab children Israeli occupation of Jerusalem must end

Thousands of Arab children headed to Jerusalem Saturday to celebrate the annual festival of the Al-Aqsa Children's Fund initiative, which prompts Muslim youngsters to donate their allowance in favor of the mosque and Islamic Movement institutions.

The movement's Northern Branch's Deputy Chairman, Sheikh Kamel Khatib, spoke to the children and stressed that Muslims will never give up any parts of the holy Muslim site.

About 200 buses packed with children from Arab communities nationwide headed to Jerusalem since early morning hours. The children presented the cashboxes from their communities, and Islamic Movement officials estimated that a total of NIS 3 million (roughly $750,000) was raised this year. The event was attended by movement heads, sheikhs, and Arab dignitaries, including Sheikh Khatib who arrived with his four children.

'A big lie'

In his speech to the youngsters, Khatib said: "We have no partners here at the mosque," referring to Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovich's recent visit to the site. "The al-Aqsa Mosque is a holy and occupied place, just like the whole of Jerusalem, which was occupied by the IDF in 1967. The occupation must be removed from the mosque in particular, and from Jerusalem in general."

"The Jews should not be thinking that they can build their Temple on the ruins of the al-Aqsa Mosque," Khatib said. "This day won't come. Those who dream that we, the Muslims, will renounce part of the al-Aqsa mosque should know that their dream will not see the light." >>> Sharon Roffe-Ofir | Saturday, July 18, 2009

Revealed: Government Helpline Tells Children 'Cannabis Is Safer than Alcohol'
Absurd and disgraceful! How low will this dreadful government stoop? - Mark
THE TELEGRAPH: Children calling the Government's drugs helpline are being told that cannabis is safer than alcohol and that ecstasy will not damage their health, an investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has found.

Advisers manning the “Frank” helpline are informing callers they believed to be children as young as 13 that alcohol is a “much more powerful drug than cannabis” and that using the illegal drug recreationally is not harmful because it “doesn’t get you that high”.

Callers are also being told that taking ecstasy will not lead to long-term damage and that if they are in doubt, to “just take half a pill and if you are handling that OK, you can take the other half.”

They are even being told that they would be able to smoke a cannabis joint, on top of ecstasy, with no ill-effects.

The advice, given to reporters who rang the helpline posing as young people, has alarmed anti-drugs campaigners who branded it “scandalous” and “irresponsible.”

Health experts have condemned the advice given to children as “frankly appalling”, “factually incorrect” and “worryingly cavalier”. >>> By Julie Henry, David Barrett and Alex Ralph | Saturday, April 18, 2009

Somebody, at Last, Speaks Some Sense on the (British) Family!
DAILY MAIL: Family breakdown is a "cancer" behind almost every evil affecting the country, a senior judge will declare today.

Mr Justice Coleridge blames youth crime, child abuse, drug addiction and binge-drinking on the "meltdown" of relations between parents and children.

He warns that the collapse of the family unit is a threat to the nation as bad as terrorism, crime, drugs or global warming.

The speech to family lawyers contains a fierce attack on the "neglect" of successive governments.

The 58-year-old judge, who is married with three grown-up children, will say family breakdown is an epidemic affecting all levels of society from the Royal Family down.

It is "on a scale, depth and breadth which few of us could have imagined even "a decade ago. It is a never-ending carnival of human misery. A ceaseless river of human distress.

"I am not saying every broken family produces dysfunctional children but I am saying that almost every dysfunctional child is the product of a broken family."

The judge, who is in charge of family courts across South-West England, will say he has a duty to speak out.

He will call on the Government to put the family at the top of its agenda, alongside the economy and the war on terror - and make it "rather more important than taking oaths of allegianc" [sic].

His speech will say: "Families are the cells which make up the body of society. If the cells are unhealthy and undernourished, or at worse cancerous and growing haphazard and out of control, in the end the body succumbs.

"In some of the more heavily populated urban areas, family life is quite frankly in meltdown or completely unrecognisable . . . it is on an epidemic scale. In some areas of the country family life in the old sense no longer exists." Family Life Is in 'Meltdown': Judge Launches Devastating Attack on Our Fractured Society >>> By Steve Doughty

Mark Alexander

Four-Year-Olds Must Learn about Same-Sex Families!
DAILY MAIL: Teachers should not assume that their pupils have a "mum and dad" under guidance aimed at tackling antigay bullying in schools.

It says primary pupils as young as four should be familiarised with the idea of same-sex couples to help combat homophobic attitudes.

Teachers should attempt to avoid assumptions that pupils will have a conventional family background, it urges.

It goes on to suggest the word "parents" may be more appropriate than "mum and dad", particularly in letters and emails to the child's home.

When discussing marriage with secondary pupils, teachers should also educate pupils about civil partnerships and gay adoption rights.

The guidance - produced for the Government by gay rights group Stonewall - will be formally launched today by Schools Secretary Ed Balls.

It states that children who call classmates "gay" should be treated the same as racists as part of a "zero tolerance" crackdown on the use of the word as an insult.

Teachers should avoid telling boys to 'be a man' or accuse them of behaving like a "bunch of women".

This sort of rebuke "leads to bullying of those who do not conform to fixed ideas about gender", the guidance states.

At the same time, schools should encourage gay role models among staff, parents and governors. Homosexual staff should be able to discuss their private lives after the consultation with the head teacher. Better not say mum and dad! Four-year-olds must learn about same-sex families, says guidance >>> By Laura Clark

Mark Alexander (Paperback)
Mark Alexander (Hardback)

Children Could Get Involved in Citizenship Ceremonies
THE DAILY MAIL: Teenagers may be called on to attend citizenship ceremonies side by side with immigrants under plans to improve relations with the newcomers.

They would be asked to go to their local town hall to pledge allegiance to the Queen, just as immigrants must do to win British citizenship.

The idea is to establish a bond between those born here and those who choose to make Britain their home. Teenagers could be told to bond with immigrants (more) By Steve Doughty

Mark Alexander

’Slave-Driving’ Our Children to Perform
THE TELEGRAPH: It was Charles Dickens who gave us the eternal image of the child-hating beadle who screws up his face with revulsion at the sight of a child in need, but that facial expression is greatly in evidence nowadays. Britain's disadvantaged children are, according to a major report on Sunday, a year behind in education by the age of three.

Only a few weeks ago, we heard of schools that proposed to ban break-time, and now news arrives of a massive survey conducted by researchers from the Institute of Child Health at University College London, which suggests that a quarter of Britain's children are obese before school age. Might I be permitted to put up my hand and ask a question: what are we doing to our children?

Some we exploit, some we pollute. Some we spoil and others we ignore. Some we nurture and some we fear and some we mess up and others we enthral. But mainly what we do is subject children to an excessive number of examinations.

Too often we forget that childhood should be a magical place, a zone of enchantment, discovery and - most of all - a kind of freedom many people will never see again. Yet, increasingly, we subject these children to tests and exams and score charts and point averages, as if we can't wait to throw them into the rat race of adult competition. I thought we’d abolished the workhouse (more) By Andrew O’Hagan

Mark Alexander