Ainulindalë

Dear Mr. Pratchett or When the Meaning of Life is so sacrosanct that it is farcical

2010-02-05T18:03:00.005Z

Dear Mr. Pratchett,

I would like to thank you for your Dimbleby Lecture. It was insightful, honest and, as always, humorous. I support your arguments and have done so for many years for many real, true reasons. I also do not feel that my position is in conflict with my dearly held Christian beliefs.

Exodus 20:13 is the root of the problem. It is regularly translated as "Thou shalt not kill." Such a nice simple phrase that is easy enough to understand that even those who are mildly mentally challenged can comprehend it. However, in the translators' zeal to make the Holy Word accessible, they failed in their duties.

The accurate translation was presented to me by a friend who was studying Hebrew back in 1987. Joe already held a degree in history when he began his studies at Seminary. He was shocked, even angered at the mistranslation. He told me that the correct words should be, "Thou shalt not commit murder" or even more accurately, "You should not take life unjustly."

Somehow this seems to make sense when you look at what follows. There are literally chapter after chapter of various crimes and social mores that if broken will find you being taken to a place to be stoned to death. Stoning obviously is a method of killing, and therefore, contradicts "Thou shalt not kill."

It would seem to me that killing someone unjustly, taking a life without due cause and concern, to remove life by violence or intent to harm, is far different from someone who rationally wishes to end their life.

I have seen life extended for no good reason other than to make those who would be "left behind" feel good. It is an emotional bandage that keeps their loved ones hostage to their failed, decrepit corps . I worked in what you called "Death's Waiting Room" and I saw and I learned.

One young man was horrendously brain damaged after resuscitation from his suicide. His parent's had found him and didn't want him to die. Is his alive? Does he really have life? Rather than deal with his death, his parents now must deal with his continued existence. He doesn't (didn't) know them and was unable to give them the love emotion they wanted. I wonder what will happen when they die and can no longer pay for his stay.

I have seen children resuscitated from death who have suffered massive brain damage. They have been saved because the parents, again, insisted and threatened with legal action. We regularly accuse doctors of playing God, yet is it the lawyers who are doing this?

I am now watching my mother die the very same horrendous death you wish to avoid. I wish she could have had the death you will have. She deserved that. Everyone does.

Yes, Stephen Hawking isn't ready to die. He is, rightly, allowed to do whatever he sees fit to continue his life. If we are going to allow people to live who would normally die due to disease by the application of scientific method, then we should equally allow people to end their mortal existence by using the same means. If we can't discriminate against colour, religion, sex or gender, then why can we do so when it comes to terminal illness and death?

I believe that God, Our Father, wants us to have full, meaningful lives. He doesn't want us to live in pain. He doesn't like us to suffer. He has given us the information, knowledge and method to stop disease. He has also given us a mind to know when it is time to join Him. If you are terminal, then all you are waiting for is the machine that is called your body to stop working.

I thank you for speaking out. You are not alone in your beliefs and your desires. If life is meant to have real, dignified meaning, then death must also have a real, dignified meaning. I am unable to present it better than you did. Your eloquence will be deeply missed when you take your brandy cocktail with a side of Thomas Tallis.

Looking forward to your next book.
Yours sincerely,
K.

Dinner: $100. Friendship: Priceless

2009-12-13T02:03:00.002Z

Yeah, I know it's trite, but alas, it's true. I just came back from a trip to see my old school buddies in the USA. I have to admit that the very thought of seeing them after over a quarter of a century had me in a bit of a state. I was so nervous that I barely able to sleep the night before and two hours before the event was to take place, I was uncontrollably weeping due to fear.

It was all for nothing.

Time seemed to have stood still.

We met at a "family" restaurant because it seemed to be the best and most neutral location and would probably have something everyone could eat. But it was the conversation. It seemed to pick up right from where we had left off. The incessant teasing, the double entendre, the shared history took me back to my late teens. There was no awkwardness. There was no fear of putting a foot wrong and offending. The conversation flowed as if we had never been apart.

I suppose that is what makes friendships so incredibly special. Yes we have gone in different directions and are doing things today that we could never have envisioned ourselves doing 25 years ago. Yes, we have a few gray hairs and some extra poundage that wasn't there upon our graduation from high school. Yes, we each have had some harrowing experiences that have given us a maturity that would shock many of our old teachers. But we came together as we are now, remembering who we were then, and still enjoyed acceptance.

We remembered our extended friendships and wished they were with us. By the time the evening ended, if everyone we discussed had shown up the party would have been over 50 people!

And we promised we would do it again with everyone there.

But why is this important? Why do we need to keep contact with people we haven't seen for over half our life? Who are they really? They are some of the most important people we will ever know. They are the people who helped mold us into the adults we are today even if they don't realise it. They are the first people we freely chose to take into our confidence outside our immediate family. They are the first people we stood up and defended when our parents gasped in horror. They are the people with whom we had many of our "firsts" on the way to adulthood.

Did everyone turn out to be a perfect, gleaming, Disney-fied adult? If I'm any thing to go by, the answer is no. But I became an adult. And so did my friends. And in the 25 years I kept them close in my heart, they also did not forget me totally.

Will it happen? Will we come together again? Oddly, I think it will. The net of friendship has been cast out far and wide. Our "lost" ones are slowly being gathered back in. Will we be closer and have more to share with each other? Yes. How do I know this? Because true friendships never die.

Dinner: $100.

Friendship: Priceless.

What I Learned On My Summer Holiday

2009-09-09T12:23:00.005+01:00

This is the text I sent to my cell group from Church because I am due to be out of town dealing with my Mum again.

Dear Everyone,

Isn't email great? I can be both with you and in my home town at the same time! Gotta love technology sometimes.

When I received Julia's email regarding testimonies about what God has done for us this past summer, I knew I had to respond. After all, I have had a rather interesting summer (and spring and winter....). At the bottom of the email, Julia put and I quote, “His grace is sufficient for this day.” I can only say Amen to that. I'm sure that you all are familiar with the poem “Footprints”. Personally, I can't read it without becoming all soppy because, for me, that is just more than true. It is my life.

Now those of you who know me closely know that I have managed to pack 3 lifetimes into my 45 years. I have done so much – both good and evil – to the point that many folks think I suffer from a hyper-active imagination. As a person who (also) writes novels, I will tell you honestly that if I were to create the character Kay Guinness, I would NEVER give her the trials and tribulations I've been through. No one would believe me! But God has given them to me and for a very good reason. It is through them I have gained understanding (not wisdom which is different) and with that understanding I hope to be able to help others. There is a purpose in all things.

I understand in the most intimate of ways that I have not walked a step alone in my entire life, even in my most evil of days and in the time of my rejection of His Grace, HE still walked patiently beside me. But I digress.....

I haven't been to see y'all recently because at Easter, 2 weeks after I returned, I had a heart attack. Fortunately it was caught on the heart monitor I was wearing and from that point onwards lots of things medical began to happen. I had another one at the beginning of July which made me basically bedridden until my surgery on 13 July. If you want details of that surgery, I'm sure the (rather pointed) email of my experiences can be dug up from an archive somewhere. The thing that is important is that during that surgery, my heart was stopped. For all intents and purposes, I was dead.

I learned a lot from that very long 15 seconds. Firstly I learned that the body does not like death and will do everything within its power to fight it. The instinct for life is so strong that when it is thwarted, it hurts in a way that only the word Hell covers. At the time I was on 30 mg of morphine and I was screaming it was so intense. I was in a form of Hell. My body wanted to live.

Secondly, I learned a bit of what Jesus Christ willingly went through.

Death is usually a permanent condition for the body. It is also something we, as humans, spend a lot of time thinking about how to avoid. Who would I die for? Who would I suffer that agony again for? Obviously, my children. I think most parents would be willing to give up their life for their offspring. They are my genetic material; my hopes and dreams; the bearers of my future and of our world. Yes, I would die for my children.

Given I would die for my children, would I die for my husband? Truthfully, I would have to think long and hard over that. I can't give you an honest answer out of hand. It would depend on the circumstances.

Would I be willing to die for the benefit of someone I don't know but who could be important to the world as a whole? Probably not. Sad but true, my selfish gene just showed up.

Would I be willing to die for the benefit of someone I don't know but who will be living in 1900 years? NO WAY. That would be foolish.

That is why Jesus is divine. He could do that. He could die for His friends right then and there. He could die for His community's future. He could die for me.

I “died” so I could live. Jesus “died” so I could live. Therefore, logic would take this argument here: I must “live” so that I can die yet live. My temporary death had a purpose. Jesus' temporary death had a purpose. Therefore my life must also have a purpose and it must be worthy of the sacrifices made for it.

Working to God's plan for me means that my life in some way will be worthy and will fulfill the promise made that though I was dead, yet shall I live.

So far, this is not rocket science. This is basic Christian doctrine. But do we understand it?

The pain of my heart being stopped and then restarted was incredible and intense. To think that Jesus Christ went through that pain and more as His heart ripped (very common occurrence with crucifixion, hence the comments about hearts “breaking”), yet Jesus didn't scream or ask for morphine or grind his teeth. His death on the cross was horrible. So horrible that all civilised countries ban crucifixion as a method of execution. And He would have been fighting His human body that wanted to live. The Roman soldiers weren't being cruel when they broke the legs of the condemned – they were being kind by trying to shock the body to a quicker death. And Jesus didn't even get that.

From what I experienced it humbles me to such a level to think that He would endure such agony for me. Even IF Jesus was just a man, such an action shows a level of love and dedication beyond human capacity that would transform Him beyond mere mortal.

Yet Jesus is divine: The Prince of Heaven. He knew what He was doing (sorta like I did) and He knew the pain involved (unlike me) AND HE STILL CHOOSE TO GO THROUGH WITH IT.

I wouldn't.

I now know too much. I may have a divine spark or burn with a holy fire at times, but only the truly Divine would.

What have I come to understand? Nothing I can sensible articulate beyond this:

I have begun to understand:
1.The true meaning and sentiment behind the words of the Passion and text of the litany.
2.The true level of sacrifice Jesus made on a human level.
3.The very beginning of the meaning of Grace.

I'll see y'all in October.

The Fourth of July

2009-07-04T15:39:00.002+01:00

Today many of my friends and a few of my family will be playing softball, eating ice cream, swimming and attending a national barbecue followed by enough fireworks to upset the air traffic control of the world. Today they will, for the most part, be enjoying themselves just being themselves.

And we will hate them for it.

And we will wish we were there.

I feel somewhat sad that the English have chosen to have little to celebrate. Wimbledon is a wash...again. Not even a brave Scot could save "British Tennis"... again. Associated Football last gave us a thing to celebrate in 1966 and we wait for a repeat. We won The War in 1945 -- yet VE goes unnoticed. We won The War in 1918 -- November 11th is not a day for bunting but reflection. The Colonial Wars are all but forgotten except for a few memorials dotted around and A Level history students (who will forget them once they are in university). Yet, American's have a national blow-out party for a single action that actually took place on July 3rd, 1776.

We don't like them because they took OUR place. One hundred years Britain ruled the world and told everyone how to behave. Now we have to be the Junior Partner to a group of people we consider uncouth and unfit to sit at a table with us. We cut them by claiming they have no culture and their football is a bastardised Rugby. We think they are simple minded for being so devoutly religious. We think their cities are dens of inequity and all who enter have a death wish.

And then we whisper that we wish we could live there.

The Loud Americans with their big cars and horrendous clothes care little for us or so our media masters say. Americans, as put by the country music star Charlie Daniels, "might have done a little bit of fightin' amongst ourselves,", but today they celebrate being a single people. With the exception of the Native Americans, they know they have come to this peice of land from all over with a single dream of creating a place worthy of life. Yes, they have made a mess of it at times. Then again, so have we. Yet, they do care about us because they remember that once their family wasn't there. And on this day Americans will celebrate both how they are different and how they are the same.

Perhaps we should look carefully at what Americans are celebrating. They too have a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-religious society that is filled with debt, disease and fear. Yet they seem to rise above it better than we do. And yes, their national holiday is in the middle of summer which is a grand time to have party. Our forgotten St. George's Day(23 April) is usually raining and cold. They do not equate love of country with racism or a political party. They are proud to fly their flag and ask for God's blessings on their country. Most Americans still consider the single most important character trait is honesty.

July 4: another reason to hate Americans for getting something right.

Another reason to wish we were there.

Smoke and Mirrors

2009-06-26T13:01:00.010+01:00

I realise that this post is a bit late but I have enjoyed a summer cold. Summer? Or is it Global Warming? Or is it Climate Change? That is the question. Much like the weather, the latest UK governmental education initiative is more smoke and mirrors than actual substance.

Apparently now homeschooling parents must be placed on a register in order to monitor them for abuse. I would laugh most caustically if it weren't for the fact of the abuse at a nursery in Plymouth. It is obvious that the government feels it is necessary to be "seen" doing something rather than actually doing something. Handgun crime has not fallen as predicted after the draconian gun laws instituted after Dunblane. This register, like the removal of legally owned and held handguns from innocent private citizens, will not solve a problem that is endemic in society. It merely attempts to distract the public from the true depth of horror this nursery abuse exposes.

As I have said before, abuse is part of our society. Children abuse children -- we call it bullying and try to claim it is character building. Teenagers abuse teenagers -- we call it gang violence and blame parents for not controlling their children. Adults abuse adults -- we call it lots of things from "Office Politics" to "Spousal Abuse" to "Crime". But if we look carefully at our society -- the whole thing worldwide from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe -- it is obvious that mankind is little better than the animals. Registers for the reporting and prevention of abuse will only be useful if someone somewhere is willing to do something about it.

The Homeschooling Register will not stop abuse. Nursery Workers in the UK, like teachers or anyone working with children, must have a criminal background check. I have had several. Yet, Vanessa George and Angela Allen had these and nothing came to light. To their employers at Little Ted's they were safe, acceptable workers who could be trusted with small children. If the authorities are unable to identify abusers they have done a CRB on, how do they think they will be able to spot abusers in a homeschooling situation?

The claim that homeschooling makes abuse more possible is an interesting question. In my years of teaching I ran across one, what I thought was real, case of abuse. I did as I was instructed to do, informed the various authorities and ... nothing happened. Actually, that is not true. The family moved 4 months after the initial investigation to another part of the country. Did the investigation follow them? I doubt it. From what I can tell of the homeschooling community, most parents take this difficult, expensive and emotive decision to homeschool ONLY after all other options have been closed to them. Many enter into homeschooling because their children have been abused by the failures of the education system to either educate children or protect them from harm.

So what is the point of this new layer of intrusive bureaucracy? It is to distract people from the real issue that state controlled education is a fiasco with little ability to meet the most basic of mandates: a literate populace. It will provide those finger pointers with yet another tool to damn those who wish to teach and learn outside of state controlled parameters. It will allow the Local Education Authorities to attempt to control more of the non-traditional classrooms. It will make the Government look responsive. It will do everything BUT address the real issue.

Smoke and Mirrors. Where'd'ya look? Where'd'ya look!

Who is Testing Whom?

2009-05-06T21:22:00.004+01:00

As could have been predicted by those who know these things, I now have my children out of school. As I said in the previous post, this was a matter of necessity due to my mother's health more than me making some type of formal stand against the system. And it seems that I don't even have to make a such stand as the "professionals" are doing it for me. They have decided to fight the Government on the Key Stage exams. About bloody time, too.

It was first time I watched a child really fall apart with the Key Stage exam when I began noticing that my youngest was becoming a very unhappy, argumentative and clinging little boy. I asked other parents if their children were experiencing the same thing and they said yes to various degrees. Then my 6 year old told me that he was being kept in at his break times and a bit during his lunch times so that he could finish his work and be prepared for these exams. He came home with two revision booklets that he was supposed to work on during the holidays. I was floored. HE IS SIX!!!!

Beyond the age issue comes the real question: Who is this test for? It is not for the students. It is for the school and is the measure by which they are ordered in the League Tables. More importantly, the Key Stage 1 exams which are given to all Year 2 pupils in England are not formal written exams. The grades are based on what the TEACHERS feel the child has accomplished. So why the pressure cooker? If you can't teach them basic reading, writing and maths in the 3 years before the exam, why try to force it into them the last term before you "mark" them?

Furthermore, if it is the TEACHERS doing the grading, isn't it rather cruel to the Year 2 teachers to take the flack for the failings of the previous years educators? How can the burden of fixing two failed years of education be placed on the shoulders of a small group of Year 2 teachers and assistants? Like all things in the education system, it is not properly thought through or implemented.

"So what is the answer, O Wise Woman?", you might ask. My answer for education is the same for riding horses. Do Less: Achieve More.

My children's curriculum was loaded with lots of things for them to do and accomplish, but how much has any real value? From what I have discovered, not much was learned or valued. Since I have been homeschooling for over a year now, I don't feel that I am such a novice at this business. I can see what the children are needing and I fill that gap. What I have learned my children need are the basic skills that make any and all real education possible.

My children can now add and subtract and understand that although this is abstract it is also concrete: it matters a lot that 2 + 2 = 4 especially when it is your allowance (money) involved.

My children are becoming very good readers which has opened up to them a new world of discovery: The Public Library. Because they can read and read well, more of the world's wonders (astronomy, history, geography, Star Wars, art) are available to them and filling their minds and their curiosity.

My children are now able to write properly which means they can use a pen and a piece of paper and explain, discuss and tell what is in their imagination and knowledge. Time spent learning how to form letters correctly builds an ability to spell independently of a spell check and allows them the opportunity of self expression at a moment's notice.

They are doing less by the standards of the National Curriculum and the various Key Stages, but they are learning so much more. They have a new appreciation of their world. The games they are playing are far more complex than those of other children. My elder two have begun to make games that they want to share with the world: one is a fantasy story and the other is a war game based on WW2. They are finding that maths is fun because it has a purpose. It is as if someone has lit an educational fire beneath them.

Okay, so it works for them, but will it work for everyone? No.

"No" is not a politically positive word. In fact, it is very negative. And that is the problem with education currently. No one wants to say "No." Politicians are elected on their promises of fixing the education system. Tony Blair & Barack Obama both achieved the highest office in their respected countries on the basis that they could solve the mystery of bad education. Everyone knows the system doesn't work, but no one is brave enough to say, "STOP!"

The education system must stop. We need the education system to stop. Completely. Then we need to figure out exactly what the purpose is and how best to achieve it. The banking system failed and the governments stopped it. They are now putting things in place so that such a disaster can't happen again (yeah, right). Assets were frozen, liabilities were weighed and job loses happened. It wasn't and isn't pretty, but it is necessary. Banks aren't the only industry to have experienced this -- telecoms and dot-coms have all gone through the same process. Why should education be any different?

The system isn't failing, it's dead. It is at the original position of 'would someone turn the light out when they leave'. There is no amount of testing at any age of any pupil that will resurrect it in its current form. There is no amount of psychological anguish that justifies a system that fails not only a community, but a country and world as well. There are no amount of prayers to God to save a child who truly does not understand what he/she has been taught for YEARS (!) that should allow this system to continue.

Education will not be saved by the politician, but by the parent. Education will be saved by the people who do not value their offspring as a political commodity, but as the future. Education will be best served when it is not the master of the society's ideals but the servant that fulfills them. Education must cease to be the goal and become the tool.

Our children's future must be removed from the ambitious, trough seeking politician and returned to those who have a vested interest in the success of the child. Am I saying that education should become a parent run business? Yes. And with all the checks, balances and financial wherewithal that responsibility brings. Children are not yet the property of the government and we must being to realise that.

Again, this is not incredible insight. It is just a voice in the wilderness stating the facts. Britian built the world in the Industrial Revolution and created the modern lifestyle with the emphasis on well learned basic educational skills. I am not ready for the slums of Manchester again, but if we don't teach our children to read, write and do maths, the slums of world will be on our doorstep.

My answer: Do Less. Do it right. Take time so that there is understanding. Know the reason why you are doing what you are doing.

DO LESS: ACHIEVE MORE.

Understanding Vs. Egocentrism

2009-04-14T07:38:00.004+01:00

Nearly a year ago my friend, Sanely Maniacal, wrote about the path that he was heading down now that his mother has Alzheimer's (AD). I was truly sympathetic to his situation and we had some seriously close calls with his mental health due to the stress of situation. His road has been tough but he has survived and even grown from the experience -- profit is perhaps too strong a word to use. I listened when he needed me to and offered a shoulder to cry on or a kind target when he needed to scream.

Then last November, my world fell apart. My mother was diagnosed with AD.

I tried hard to be her carer -- after all, I had all the knowledge that Sanely has provided and began to read all I could on early AD treatment. I knew that she needed to have a schedule that was calm and somewhat set; she needed good balanced meals that would provide all the vitamins and minerals; she needed things set for in her in the same place each day; and, most important, she needed to take her tablets as directed. Unfortunately, Mum did not read the same books.

I should have been more realistic and less positive that I could manage her disease when the first day we came together as a family she overdosed on her medication because she didn't understand how to take it. Fortunately she has a stomach that can reject things quickly and she wasn't poisoned too badly. I didn't see the sign-post. Or I didn't want to see the sign-post.

Mum began spending 12 to 14 hours in bed. She claimed that she was always cold and I was to "feel my hands" -- which warm to hot, but she was cold. We couldn't get the house warm enough even at 27 degrees and such heat made the boys sick with respiratory infections. She didn't want to eat (but she did most of the time) and every meal she complained I served her too much. She was eating less than my 6 year old! She said I was trying to make her fat so that I felt better about myself. ARGH! But she would eat chocolate...by the pound. Thornton's stock must have gone through the roof with all I bought her over the last 4 months (perhaps that is why they didn't go bankrupt like everyone else on the High Street).

Mum also decided to make things awful. Intentionally or not, she ruined Christmas, New Year and my eldest's 10th birthday. She was becoming nasty and very rude to the point of referring to her granddaughter as "That Girl With the Long Blonde Hair". But mostly she was becoming violent. Her favourite target was her 6 year old grandson. Then she punched me.

My husband and I decided that she was unhappy and anxious about being in our home and this was the root of the violence, so we decided that our marriage was strong enough to survive our being apart for awhile so I could sort some type of home nursing help for Mum in her own home. So in February I took the children out of school (permanently-more on that later) and returned to my mother's home. According to the books this was to make things better, but in fact all it did was reward "bad" behaviour and she became even worse. She stopped taking her medicine and accused me of poisoning her. At the beginning of March, Mum was so out of control that I was in fear for my youngest constantly while the others sat in a confused daze as to what had happened to Grandma. I took the only step I could and put her into a full-care facility.

This was supposed to make things better and in some ways it has. We now know that her rapid degeneration is due to both AD and cancer. With Mum in a place that could take care of her and deal with her violence, I could then help my traumatised children. I also had to deal with the fact that I had failed. I could not care for my mother. So I went home.

The fact that I failed made me both angry and depressed. Neither of these emotions are in the least bit useful and are very destructive. I attended a support group (which I will return to when back at Mum's) which is excellent. I quickly learned I was not alone on this horrid road and that these people were not only carers to their loved ones but to each other. I really miss them now. This helped my depression but did not help my anger.

I was angry that God had put me into this position. As you know, I am Christian and take that responsibility very seriously. And I was furious with the All Mighty. How dare HE do this to me. Where is all the "I will always be there for you" and "I will love you until the end of your days" things? If this is how the faithful are treated, then perhaps the Old Testament is a very clear picture of who HE really is -- and it isn't very pretty. Perhaps this Jesus thing is just a bunch of spin doctoring PR. So I shouted at HIM all my anger.

The thing about yelling is that you don't have time to listen. Fortunately, God and Jesus are slightly above such things -- sorta. Eventually, I got shouted back at and told, "Shut UP, you silly child! This isn't about YOU." Needless to say, this was not the answer I was looking for. But it is the correct one.

We do reap what we sow. My mother's life was one of contradictions and extremities. She smoked, drunk and swore like a sailor, yet she prayed and praised each Sunday. She was violent with her children (at a level today we think is unacceptable but not so in the 1960s) yet taught us to meak and kind like Jesus. Thus her life was chaotic, so will be her death. Yet the process allows those Christians who are fullfilling their mission to do God's Will. My mother is treated with a loving dignity and care by people who believe that this where their lives have been purposely led. It isn't about me. It's about them.

Jesus healed the sick and helped the poor. I suppose that He could heal my mother but for what purpose? She is 83 and has lived a full measure of days. I hope I am granted the same, but only the Father knows these things. Jesus could not do the miracles He did if it weren't for there being sick and poor people. The Doctors and Nurses treating my mother and others with AD could not do their mission if there were no Alzheimer's Disease.

It is hard to accept that bad things happen to good people. But when it does happen it allows people who spiritually gifted in these areas to be released to do the work and show God's power and mercy.

It sounds so pat ... so trite. It isn't clever or complicated. It isn't fancy or have flashing lights or fireworks. It's hard and it's dirty -- like working in a Garden -- and it is the way God works. God will make us depend on each other as much as we depend on HIM (the Golden Commandment) and when Adam and Eve sinned, HE told us what to expect.

So, it's not about me. I'm glad. I'm relieved. I can start to continue living my life the way HE wants me to. Oh, it's also not about Mum either.

It's all about God.

And There were Shepherds

2009-01-08T21:36:00.015Z

Christmas has passed (and for that matter so has summer and autumn. And the garden was beautiful this year) with all the usual hub-bub and manicness that the "Special Season" brings. In the midst of this madness I was hit by a random thought: Why the shepherds? This all came about on Christmas Eve as my youngest was dressed to go to the annual crib service. I, being the well organised Mum that I am, opted for the great last minute costume of dressing gown shepherd ("No dear, they didn't have Bart Simpson on them but I am sure God knows what you are meaning") with tea towels held on by a curtain sash cord ("No, you don't look silly with it on and I am sure somewhere in the Holy Land there was a shepherd with a green checked head covering"). Of course the youngest wanted to carry a light saber to ward off any Romans who would want to crucify Baby Jesus. That was met with a stern statement of notification to Father Christmas should such an implement make it into church.

As I sat and watched my children be amazed by the Angel Gabriel (and argue that her name was really Kristy and that Gabriel was a stupid name for a boy anyway) I started to wonder, "why the shepherds?" Overall, shepherds aren't big characters in the Biblical narrative. Yes, David was a shepherd at one point, as was Able for a short time and Joseph's brothers. The way the Old Testament deals with this occupation is rather similar to how we view fast food workers: a brief nod and let's get on to the politicians.

Putting things in a historical context led me to a brief troll on the net regarding life spans. Most of the articles confirmed what I already knew: People who were 30 years of age were a rare and wondrous thing. They were considered a blessing of the gods. Granted there were exceptions, as there usually are, such as Pharaoh Pepi II who lived for nearly 100 years, reigning 96 of them. Now Pepi had all the advantages that the wealthy and powerful had, The Shepherds did not. It is a well documented fact that the further down one is on the standard of living scale, then shorter your life expectancy is. This is as true today as it was 2000 years ago. So why the shepherds?

Shepherds are simple folk. They have the advantage of not being financially enslaved to religion. The birth of Jesus, now at the accepted time of 3BC, was during the Roman occupation of the Holy Lands. The Roman system of belief was complicated and expensive. It was more important to be seen "doing the right things" than "believing the right things." The Romans were generally tolerant of different religions providing these beliefs did not openly constitute a threat against imperial power. Rome was willing to work with the Hebrew state/religion so long as peace was maintained. The benefits of Roman occupation were well known as living standards and life styles improved due to trade and, ultimately, the security the Roman Army provided. To progress socially was to embrace all that Rome offered. This would cost money as well as ideals. The Shepherds were outside of this circle, therefore free to embrace their beliefs fully in what meager ways they had available. Still, why The Shepherds?

I am coming to idea that The Shepherds fell under the radar of Roman observation. They were poor -- but employed, therefore not really a threat as who would listen to them? They were not highly educated and therefore could be dismissed as 'incapable of understanding the complexities of life'. They were not in a powerful position so therefore anything they said would not cause political unrest. They could be, as we do to people in the same socio-economic position today, ignored. Therefore, when God The Father had his Angels and Arch-Angels announce the birth of His son, He used whispers rather than shouts.

Now you might counter this by pointing out that God put a whopping great star in the sky. True. And if we saw such a thing today we might think, "Wow! Isn't that pretty. I wonder why it is there." And that is about all we would do. Life would crowd in on us and by the end of the first week we probably wouldn't even notice it anymore. You see, somethings never change. And how do I know that my idea could be valid? When the Wise Men from the East appeared at Herod's court, Herod became worried and all Jerusalem with him (Matt. 2:1-3). The star was obviously well noted, yet the King, the Chief Priest, the Scribes and everyone who was anyone didn't get the meaning. Rich people wishing to give gifts to a child in Bethlehem could spell massive trouble with the Roman authorities from whom Herod got his power. Shepherds giving gifts, worship and adoration would never be noticed. For the second time, the Angels had to save the blessed ones from Earthly authority (Matt 2:12, 13).

Alright, if God whispered, then what about the Angels appearing and giving glory? That surely would have caused some noise. Probably, but then one might need to be in the right place at the right time. From the maps I have looked at regarding settlement area around Bethlehem, there are not a lot of people either now or then. Unlike the USA or Russia, or even, the UK, Israel and the West Bank are small. There is a patch of arable ground directly outside of the city to the east, but not much than 5 to 10 miles further in that direction and one would find oneself in the Wilderness of Judea. I'm not in good shape, but even I could do 5 miles in about 90 minutes. The Shepherds were in good shape and had to be just in order to survive. There is a bit of "wilderness/nomadic sheep farming" south of Bethlehem. This could be easier to walk from into Bethlehem.

However, how many of us actually hear what is happening on the other side of town, much less 5 miles away in the middle of the night? I live less than a half mile (as the crow flies) from a football ground. I can just hear when the local team has made a fantastic something and 10,000 people scream with joy. I am also not likely to hear much once I have gone bed. For the sake of the argument,from October to February the sun sets between 5 pm and 6 pm. Most people would be in their houses and probably sleeping by 9 pm as the sun rises at 6 am. As this was a pre-electrical, agrarian place where the lives of the inhabitants would be dominated by the sun, the only folks out at night would be those who had to be. That would include The Shepherds.

The last thing to think about here is the topography and population. Even in the time of Herod I Bethlehem was considered a bit of a back water. A 1945 Census shows the population at 8,820. The town had been sacked and rebuilt on numerous occasions as early as 529 AD. There is even an archaeologist who says that there is no evidence that the area of Bethlehem was even populated at the time of Jesus' birth. (Aviram Oshri, "Where was Jesus Born?", Archaeology, Volume 58 Number 6, November/December 2005.) I do find this to be a bit hard to believe, but I do accept that Bethlehem, for all the importance now attributed to her, was tiny. I would think somewhere in the order of 100 people. If Herod I did slaughter the innocents, it would have been of a very small number and with a mind toward causing fear of him rather than any serious attempt to murder a Messiah. Even if a whole town of 100 saw the Angels singing, that is only the start to a whisper campaign.

Not forgetting the lay of the land, populations may grow but the land doesn't change that much when it is rugged terrain. The land surrounding Bethlehem hasn't changed that much in two millennium. We are told in the Bible that people grazed sheep there and we see the same thing today. This is sheep grazing land and not good for arable farming except in small strips. Hills may have blocked the view of those folk who may have been up so late at night on that first Christmas.

So why the Shepherds? They were perfectly placed to pass on the message. They could tell their families and friends the wondrous things they had seen and would, possibly, be taken seriously. They could help "prepare the way". They could continue to tell the tale each year with virtual impunity. Many would have listen and believed. John the Baptist was one of many preachers of the time. During the lifetime of Jesus, several movements began, each calling for an apocalyptic and messianic end to Roman rule arose. Those shepherds may have been a part of this or certainly would have had more intimate knowledge of the Almighty's plan. What is interesting is that when Jesus began His ministry, he did not have to wait long or work hard for followers. The way had been very prepared. I think this was partly due to John and The Shepherds.

I think it is amazing that the Father Of All, God of the Universe, regularly choses to do HIS work in a small and quiet way. As life is becoming even more noisy for us, it is important to remember that we listen and we hear. We are so used to the spectacular as normal that we miss the miraculous in the reality. That is not to say that The Creator can't do big when he wants to. The stars prove that. HE just likes to work in the nitty-gritty of life where it is even more important to us.

So HE chose The Shepherds. And I believe they helped pave the way. And when Jesus reached maturity, He still chose the simple, common people to touch. The people who sought peace and hope. People like us.

Perhaps the message to us about them is to be a shepherd and not a king.

Report: The Garden

2008-05-31T21:39:00.005+01:00

I did promise you in the beginning I would let you know how my foray into gardening would progress. Being a self-confessed terrible gardener, I am currently bursting with unexplained pride (or half a bottle of good Spanish red). In the last several months I have learned several things: 1) only put in plants that you know what the leaves look like; 2) nothing beats good compost and lots of work with a fork; 3) weeds always spring up after rain.

For some of you this is a "duh!" set of realisations. However, for me this is a revelation.

I was cruel in the winter/spring and ripped out every known and possibly unknown plant in my various beds. My neighbour who really should be at Chelsea (the major garden show in the UK and possibly the world) has patiently sighed and groaned over my confusion between a clematis and a convolvulus. Many a fine clematis has died unnecessarily. Using much hard labour and an extreme number of green garden bags, I finally found the bare Earth. Starting at ground level has meant that I can spend lots of time with garden books and my neighbour Sarah discussing what is going in, what type of soil it needed (this also came as a shock to me -- seems there are lots of different types!), when it would bloom and, most importantly, WHAT THE BLOODY LEAVES LOOK LIKE. I now know when I am killing a convolvulus, I am killing a convolvulus!

Having access to horses makes the whole fertilizer problem much easier. The problem is bringing it home. I, no matter what people say, do not live at the stables. In fact, they are 8 miles away. This means taking the ubiquitous green bags with me and filling them with Mikey's little gifts to the garden and bringing them home. Even well rotted, these bags contain something that has more than a gentle perfume. And when placed upon the bare soil of my garden beds, my dear neighbour begged me to get it worked in as soon as possible because she could not open her windows. Sarah does not really like horses in any form. More work with the garden fork and my hard packed earth now is looking crumbly (like the books say it should) and I am finding that I can remove things like convolvulus roots and nettle roots (second most hated thing in garden because they sting!) with ease. Things are looking up.

So I carefully planned what I wanted to buy, took Sarah with me to the various garden centres (I'm learning only a fool ignores an expert), purchased the pots needed for the different soils, purchased the different soils, several pairs of gloves and spent enough money on plants to have paid for a trip to Ibiza. I planted it all up about 8 weeks ago and have sat waiting for things to die.

So far nothing has died even in the torrential rains we have had the last week. In fact every single thing looks great! I have fox gloves and lupines and red hot pokers shooting up and blooming. I have poppies about to pop. I have sun flowers that are nearly half a metre tall. I have rhododendrons and magnolias and camellias blooming. AND I have weeds. All my ground preparation did nothing to stop these little buggers. Rain and Mikey's digestive system seemed to have helped them considerably! But now that I know what my leaves look like and the beds are filled with soft crumbly earth, it took me about 2 hours to weed my beds. And they do look great.

Have I become a gardener? I would not go that far yet, but at least I have learned a thing or 3 about how I needed to do it. I am proud of what I have accomplished and it does look nice. The real test will be whether I can keep this up over the course of the summer. Will I remember to water and feed the "babies"? Will I end up like Prince Charles and talk to them??

Watch this spot......

WHO'S GOING NUTS FIRST?: WALKING THE PATH OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE--A Caregiver's Diary

2008-05-26T17:29:00.000+01:00

WHO'S GOING NUTS FIRST?: WALKING THE PATH OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE--A Caregiver's Diary

You're Nuts -- A Clarification

2008-05-26T16:49:00.006+01:00

Sanely Maniacal recently wrote about his experiences as a carer to his Mother who is beginning to suffer from Alzheimer's. Ok, I know the sister and her family and I can tell you that it has had a profound effect on them and on their relationships. I know that this disease has pulled them closer together and that the next profit for BT will be because of the telephone bills they have run up discussing what to do next. It seems a shame, but ever is the way, that it is a tragedy that pulls families back together. At least they are together again.

Sanely tosses some terms around that I thought would be best if they were defined. As Dumbledore said in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, "Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself" (pg. 216) In the case of Alzheimer's, fear abounds because we, as humanity et al, don't understand the disease. Therefore, what is "Vascular Dementia" and should we be frightened?

Wikipedia provides an understandable basic definition:

Multi-infarct dementia, also known as vascular dementia, is the second most common form of dementia after Alzheimer disease (AD) in the elderly (persons over 65 years of age). The term refers to a group of syndromes caused by different mechanisms all resulting in vascular lesions in the brain. Early detection and accurate diagnosis are important, as vascular dementia is at least partially preventable.

The main subtypes of this disease described at the moment are: vascular mild cognitive impairment, multi-infarct dementia, vascular dementia due to a strategic single infarct (affecting the thalamus, the anterior cerebral artery, the parietal lobes or the cingulate gyrus), vascular dementia due to hemorrhagic lesions, small vessel disease (which includes vascular dementia due to lacunar lesions and Binswanger's disease), and mixed Alzheimer's and vascular dementia.

There are links here which will take you to the land of medical-ese, but will provide the reader with lots of information. The most important statement is that this "at least partially preventable", or in my friend's case, treatable.

Sanely's Mum also has the problem of denial or, at the very least, not being able to remember that she has this disease. A good source of information about what to do can be found through at www.alzheimers.org.uk/ where there are further links as well. Getting the elderly to take their medication is often very difficult and, having met Sanely's Mum (who should be included in ANY definition of stubborn), I can see he has his hand's full. Even so, a support group for him or any other member of his family could provide the mental release they will need should the disease progress to a debilitating level. I am sure there are similar organisations in the US. I do think training, in any event, is necessary in order clear the mist from what is "normal" and what is "The Disease".

As humanity all grows statically older due to better nutrition, education and housing, more and more of the population will be struck with this disease. It is important that is be understood and prepared for properly in the manner we have used for illnesses such as cancer rather than continue to act in a fearful, superstitious way only later suppling information and pity on the families of those affected.

Sense for fashion

2008-05-15T21:48:00.005+01:00

You are what you eat. Or so we are told. I am sure that in some physical digestive cell replacement manner, I am. However I also think that I am more than the sum total of Quarter Pounders with Cheese, chicken kievs and onion bhajis. In fact to look at me, those may or may not even come to mind. Like most humans, I do not express myself in the food I consume (unless it is a dinner party I've cooked for my friends), but in the clothes I chose to wear.

Clothing has made a major social imprint since Adam and Even donned the first leaf. Through out history the type , styles, colours and fabrics which covered our nakedness have been regulated either by law or social standing. Today what governs your clothing choice is the amount of money you are willing to invest in a single garment or a whole wardrobe.

So far all of this is not earth shatteringly insightful, but basic statements of fact. However, with so many styles and colours available to us, why do we choose what we choose? Why do we stand looking at two seemingly identical pieces of sewn cloth and choose one over the other? Why does the fashion industry spend billions (pick your currency) to make us desire a fashion only to tell us 9 months later we look bad? Is it all economics?

Some if it is. A major portion of the world's employment, hence economies, is tied up in the ready to wear industry. They do need us to keep buying so that those workers, usually poor and ill educated, will have money to support themselves and their families. Yes, there are craftsmen and women in the Haute Couture who are truly artists with fabric, but this type of fashion is far beyond the means of most mortals. The Mexican/Indonesian/Thai/Chinese/Spanish/Indian textile worker is low paid and is often a "piece worker". As long as the product he sews is sold, he stays a step above starvation. This is possibly the best reason for changing your wardrobe completely once a year.

And the rest of those questions? OK, utility can be a factor in my choice. Sometimes I need to replace clothes that are indeed worn out. With all the horses and riding we do, jeans have a life span of about 4-6 months -- providing the children haven't grown too much (HA!). Therefore, do I choose Tesco value at £2.75 to £4 or Levi's 501s for £30 to £50? Both are made in countries that specialise in intensive manual labour that the mass clothing industry requires and aren't Fairtrade. The choice is obvious from a financial viewpoint. I can buy 10 pairs of of Tesco for every 1 pair of Levi's -- unless I am buying to Impress.

Now we come to the crux: "Dress to Impress". Impress WHO? Ourselves? Our Mates? Our Partners? Our Family? Our Boss? Our Secretary? The Public? The Builders? WHO??

Girls as young as 8 are wearing seductive clothes because they "want to look sexy". From the over simulating, over sexual media campaigns, These innocent children have been taught to equate looking nice with sex. Who in their right mind would market lacy bra-like things and transparent tops for children? Yet, they do. Who is type of dressing aiming to Impress? Why are high heeled (2 inch plus heels) available for children whose feet and legs are still soft and growing? We won't let them do en-pointe ballet because it will ruin their feet, but we will let them wear heels for school? Who is this for? It isn't only girls. Boys' shirts, tees, piques, and button front, are covered with images which are mostly violent and rebellious. The fashion is either athletic, military camouflage or slummy. Who is supposed to be impressed by this?

Adults may be thinking that dressing their 8 year olds this way is humorous. The messages on boys tee-shirts warning us of the approaching danger in the form of a toddler or child may bring a wry smile to other parent's faces. However, if this is the messages we give them at 8, when they are very impressionable, is it any surprise that they are over sexed, violent, low esteemed teenagers?

Stop and look at what your kids are wearing! What are you putting them in? Is this a reflection of yourself or how you really want your children to be viewed? Is this how you want your teenage son or daughter? How can we really be taken seriously when we tell them underage sex is wrong, yet dress them in the types of clothes we used to wear to nightclubs? Who are we telling them to Impress and for what reason?

Our own clothes reflect this principle too. I have seen lots of "mutton dressed as lamb", both male and female. Our body image obsessive society bombards us with airbrushed images of "perfection" that if we could only attain, then we would enjoy the wonders of "perfect" hedonistic pleasures. And we, the moronic consumer, must follow what we see. The result is people with dun-lop disease (their belly dun lopped over their belt) parade the streets of our towns and cities wearing crop tops, short tight tee shirts, hipster jeans and Lycra believing they are sexy. Not only is it a fashion offense, they look silly and don't realise it! Then there are the pregnant ones who do the same thing only to show us their unborn's movements and new acquired stretch marks. As one is pregnant, one is therefore sexually active and attractive to someone. The look is not complementary -- even if one is a famous "A-List" star.

Christians have it hard. They would like to be fashionable, yet not look immoral. They are told to be modest and conservative, but that is a hard look to achieve without looking dowdy. Mainstream Christians are often uncomfortable with, and sometimes unkind, to the more Fundamentalist types who wear a specific fashion to point out that they are different. Christians also like to Impress. But the question remains: WHO? For them, the answer should be easy, but the temptation is great.

Your clothes say a lot about you. We need to get the perspective right. Yes, there is a time and place to look sexy. However, is it right when it is a child? And there is a time took look athletic...but everyday and for every occasion? There is a time to look a mess in butt ripped and patched jeans, but is Church the right place? Ecclesiastes says there is time for every purpose under Heaven. We just need to use a bit more discernment and wisdom when we get dressed in the morning. People see your appearance long before your Big Mac.

Happy Pentecost

2008-05-11T20:49:00.004+01:00

Oh, Dear....

As I was in the sacred Household Reading Room Which No Child Dare Disturb, I perused a copy of Nature magazine. As I flipped the pages one small article jumped out at me. On page 1030 of Vol. 451, 28 February 2008, blazed the headline "Lone Star vs creationism", "The battle against anti-scientific literalism continues. Next stop Texas."

What the article is saying in a nut-shell is that the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board should not grant the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) the right to grant Master's Degrees in science education because (1) ICR believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible, (2) Nature magazine believes Creationism is irrational, (3) ICR asked people to pray for it. It says nothing about the quality of the education that being offered or the success of the candidates who have earned their degrees in California. It does say without offering proof, only opinion, that "The ICR has managed to con its way into the California educational system for decades." Nature has managed to insult the State of California for a lack of proper educational assessment follow up, but also the all the people who worked hard for their degrees. Yet this attitude is not shocking, it is to be expected.

I regularly hear and read that Christians are unwilling to enter into a "rational" debate regarding the Creationism-Evolution argument. What I find hard when I do enter into the fray is remaining rational when all around me have lost their perspective. Instead of engaging me mentally, I am often insulted before we begin. I read Matt Ridley's book, The Red Queen, and on page 17 I was informed that if I believed in a "being with a long grey beard" that there was no point for me to continue because I had closed my mind to the [obvious] evidence. Really?? Then I think all you wanted, Mr. Ridley, was the money for the book and a veneration of your opinion. I did read the rest of the book and found it to be the usual mix of science, science fiction and "faith" that all would soon be revealed. I have also read Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion and found the same attitude expressed on page 31. New Scientist jumped with joy and clapped its literary hands in the 1 March 2008 issue declaring that gaps in the fossil record are not that big and that there is proof of evolutionary change within the Ceratopsians. True, there is change in the species, but they fail to explain or show me how, where or when the Ceratopsians (ie. Triceratops) became dinosaurs from the lower orders of the reptile/lizard kingdom. How did life in the Permian and the earlier Carboniferous become so large in the Mesozoic? There's a gap there I would like filled. I have a hunch, but I am regularly told I am too stupid with my BSc, Masters, PhD and a religious background to understand.

In all these cases, there is an underlying belief that Freedom of Speech and Belief is perfectly fine as long as one believes what "The Scientists" are saying. Most religious people I know would welcome open debate but are tired of being insulted and screamed at. Yes, there are some interesting parts of the Bible that do require faith. Equally, there are gaps and guesses in the scientific doctrines of Dawkins, Hawking and Gould that require equal amounts, if not a bit more, faith. In all cases, there are extremes on every end and they must be looked at, weighed intellectually and debated for value and worth. If they are found lacking, then they must be discarded. Because one is a member of the Populist Science belief with a contract from Harper-Collins does not make one automatically above examination and criticism. This I believe is what would be considered a rational approach.

And this is why Pentecost is such a wonderful thing. In 30 AD (according to modern scholars and historians) when the original Pentecost miracle occurred, the Disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit and were given the gift of speaking in languages so that all men would understand them. The miracle was treated with both awe and derision (Acts 2). And this is what Christians need to pray for today. We need the language of science. We need to speak to this atheists and explain to them where they have misinterpreted their information. All humans make mistakes, even the most eminent scientific scholars, and understanding and interpretation is an area where people are at their weakest.

We all need to embrace them with love and patience, but not apathy and disdain. Jesus said his followers would be persecuted and to find this joyful. I can see why. No one gets het up over "foolish nonsense"and "weird beliefs" unless they aren't that foolish or weird and have something truthful about them. For over 6,000 years people have worshiped, praised and adored Jehovah. At times there has been and swelling of belief and, at other times, a serious contraction, but there has been belief. There is nothing new under the sun and the vitriolic sputterings against those of us who do not follow Populist Science are akin to those uttered against us once upon a time in Rome, Lyon and Antioch. Hiding in fear was never part of the Plan.

So enjoy the Pentecost. Use it to boldly embrace a new language and understanding. Use it to make yourself strong, to go forth and speak, to raise awareness to the Truth. God, The Father, does not fit in a box or a scientific equation. He is greater that the sum total of ALL our parts as humanity, including all the atheists mentioned. Let go and see where He will take you this Pentecost.

Oh Dear, He Failed...Hurray!

2008-04-21T20:21:00.004+01:00

Realizing that the way I speak of my eldest son would lend one to think he would be up for Messiah of the Year Award, I wish to confirm that my boy is clearly on Tera Firma and has totally human feet. He is so human that he failed his math test today. What was surprising was his response to having failed the test.

In my experience, when a pupil fails a paper or test the first thing they look for is a scapegoat. In their mind this saves them from having to take the responsibility for their lack of preparation or concentration during the examination. It is a lot easier to blame the kid sitting next to/behind/in front of them for any and all problems. And we, as adults and teachers, allow them to get away with this behavior by not forcing them when necessary to take responsibility for their work.

If the pupil is unable to find a convenient scapegoat or is denied one by a teacher who is not willing to be the mug, what is displayed is anger, sometimes to the point of rage. How dare a teacher mark the paper in this manner? Who the hell do they think they are? I have been greeted more than once with these words and accompanying body language; however, my personal favourite is, "I'm going to get my dad on you and then you will be sorry!" I remember standing in one maths class and being told this. The school had in-class telephones, so I picked up the receiver and asked the boy for his dad's phone number. He backed down and proceeded to threaten me with the infamous "I know where you live". All this anger because the student felt, believed, or was taught somewhere along the line that you don't have to prepare for tests either in school or in life.

The third most common variation of behaviour is sullen silence. I do get worried with this one. The other two are easy, but this one does lend me to visions of children being beaten severely for bad test marks. I would like to deny that this happens, but unfortunately this is a trigger for abusive parents looking for a reason. Those pupils prone to sullen silence were invited to see me either after class or after school, lunch time or break time. We would talk the paper through and see if there was any way of salvaging a desperate situation. I do have to admit, I did get some improvement from these pupils.

So what did the boy do today that shocked me? He screamed that he wanted to resit the paper immediately before I had even marked it. The thing is that his "school room" is on a different floor of the house from where I was (doing the ironing). He brought me the paper and was crying harder than the last time he fell off his horse and nearly broke his leg. This near hysteria was from the fact that he had to take responsibility for failing that paper and none of the usual behavioral responses fit.

After nearly a half an hour of calming him down, I realized that we no longer allow our children to fail. Failing is now so taboo in our society that we go to extreme lengths to make sure that the developing young people never experience this -- until it is too late. Every so often I watch "The Apprentice". I see young and middle age people vying with each other for this coveted position. I can see the mistakes they are making and cringe because I know that Sir Alan will have them for toast. What is more interesting is the excuses they make for having failed. I have yet to see one of the contestants say, "Yes, I made of mess of it and he was right to fire me because I failed."

Failure is worthwhile. If you fail and keep your head, then you can actually learn something from the experience. Yes the idiots will say it is character building, but in truth it is intelligence building. It is not the successes that make the man but his failures and how he dealt with them. Back in the dark ages of the the 1980s I had a post graduate teaching position in an American university. I tried to fail a student in one of my classes and was immediately informed by my Department Head that I could do no such thing. His parents were major donors to the school. So I had a tough choice: my academic integrity or my PhD. What did the young man learn? That if you have enough money, then you never have to take responsibility for your actions.

Not having properly learned that one can not fail pupils, five years ago I tried again. I had another boy in my class who was not hopeless mathematically, he simply could not count, add, subtract, multiply or divide, and he did not care. His parents were insistent that he take the Higher OCR Maths Paper. There was no way that he could have passed it. I told my Head this. I told the School Governors this. In fact, I told them that the boy was failing and would be given an "F" grade for class and home work. I, in return, was told in no uncertain terms that the boy would not fail his math class because "we don't fail pupils at this school. It would cause untold psychological damage." The boy's result came back as a "U" and I took the heat for it.

So our children are not allowed to fail because of the psychological damage it will cause. We allow pupils to flow through the education system and teach them all the excuses they might need, but none the practicality that failing might. We teach them to blame others and not take responsibility for themselves. We don't show them with the little failures how to remedy the situation. And when they fail their GCSEs, A-Levels, university degrees and they are damaged to the point of suicide, we, the well meaning teachers of the world, ring our hands and wonder what went wrong.

So he failed today. Yet, he learned more about himself and world in that F than any top mark lecture or project could have taught him. And he knows that every failure has the chance to teach him what will be required of him in "The Real World".

He unexpectedly re-sat the test this afternoon when his brothers and sister came home from school. It was different paper but the same problem type. He didn't mess around or look for a reason to get out of it. He scored 19 out of 22.

And to this day, I hate being referred to as Dr.

The Next Chapter....

2008-04-20T12:37:00.003+01:00

It has been a (long) while since my last post and much has happened which is why I haven't had the time to blog properly or otherwise. The big thing has been that my 10 year old is no longer in school. After much soul searching and bouts of neurotic fear, we decided to home school.

Home schooling is not something I would recommend that one enter into lightly. We, my husband and myself, were given very little choice in the matter. The Local Education Authority became involved when my son achieved a full half term of unexcused absences. Apparently sending in to the school letter after letter stating my son was unwell and meetings with the school that included his psychiatrist and psychologist does not constitute a proper excuse for being ill. Mental illness is not an acceptable reason for missing school -- especially when it is the school that is the cause of the mental illness, in this case severe depression and anxiety. I met with the LEA representative and was informed that either my son was in school for the full of the following half term or he was officially withdrawn. If he was not officially withdrawn, then they would go to the courts and get a Mandatory School Attendance Order. Knowing the child was in no shape to attend school, we were forced to withdraw him and to commence home school.

As a teacher, I had always been informed, taught, led to believe, that the worst people for teaching children was in fact the parents. Parents are ill prepared and lack the necessary objectivity required for the proper education on young people. Parents lack the ability to discern the correct method to instruct children because they are blinded by the emotional tie that is present in the parent-child relationship. Not being a professional, parents bring to the educational atmosphere an almost voyeuristic, Münchhausenian expectation of their child's development. In other words, parents who home school are doing it for the benefit of themselves and not their the children.

This is utter rubbish.

With this having been beaten mentally into me, I was terrified of teaching my son. I have been observed and judged by OFSTED as an excellent teacher. I have helped my former pupils to high GCSE results. I have worked with educationally challenged teenagers and helped them to become academically achieving students capable of doing A-Levels. I know how to get children and teenagers to produce to the Government standard without them going insane. So why couldn't I do this with my own kids? My husband watched for years as my school pupils were able to take advantage of my knowledge and leadership while our own children suffered under less competent colleagues. It has only been through his support that I have been able to do this.

So what have I learned? Home school requires excellent time management skills and a knack for multi-tasking. I have learned that I can sort the laundry (forever the laundry!) and discuss political changes brought forward during the reign of Elizabeth I. I have found that a good discussion about the nature of various animals can be done while I iron (laundry part two: The Nightmare). I have also learned that I can cover the National Curriculum in about a day and half -- roughly 7 hours a week if I move at a medium pace. So what are they doing the other 3 1/2 days they are at school?

I learned that all text books that any student could possibly want are readily available for purchase and many come with a learning scheme. Perhaps things have changed, but I had been taught that parents who home school do so without the benefit of proper resources. OK, so I can't pop into my local WH Smith or Waterstones and pick up the latest version of a geography textbook, but I can sure order it on line. I also have the luxury of being able to drop the parts of the National Curriculum which are nothing more than governmental propaganda -- something a state school teacher can not do for fear of losing their job. The education my son is now receiving fits and benefits my son. Will this make him a better "citizen of the future"? Who can tell? All I know is that he will be a thinking member of society who will be able to form his own thoughts, opinions and judgments with minimal government spin.

In the last 12 weeks I have watched my "failing" and "emotionally immature" (directly from his school report) son become a calm, competent learner. For a boy who could not sit still and learn his multiplication tables, he is now able to long multiplication and division, understands equivalent fractions, the nature of contentious religious divides, how to properly use adjectives in his writing, the nature and purpose of plants, how weather affects the local environment and how to confidently complete a 9 fence show jumping course.

My son wasn't failing. The school and educational system failed.

Is there a bully in the house?

2008-01-30T21:18:00.000Z

I was greeted this morning by my eldest son thusly:
"Do I have to go to that pile of bricks today?"
He backed himself up against the radiator on the far side of his room and prepared himself a truly defensive position that many combat soldiers would have envied. As it was 6:50 in the morning I gave him a very blank look.

"Mum, I can't go and I won't go." My mind clicked back into reality. The horrid reality that had been our lives for the last 4 months. As terror emanated from his body in such a manner that it was palpable 8 feet away, all I could do was gently tell him, "You're not going today. Or tomorrow. Or next week." For the last month this phrase had broken the tension each morning, but today was one of his "bad days".

It is now 9:29pm and I am trying to get him to go to sleep. He has trained himself to stay up as late as possible with books and torches (flashlights for the Americans) so that when he sleeps it is the rest of the exhausted. I am hoping that by 11 tonight he will be asleep. Then, maybe, I will be able to sleep some before he begins tossing and turning which causes his bunk bed to squeak something awful. And then we will start the cycle again tomorrow.

For some of you, this will be a very recognisable situation. For some of you, this will seem like the start of a horror novel. For me, this is life. My son has been destroyed by children.

According to Kay Morgan-Gurr, General Director of Children Worldwide, bullying occurs every 7 minutes on our playgrounds and every 25 minutes in our classrooms. Only 4% of bullying incidents are seen or noted by the teaching staff. Do I doubt her and her statistics? No. I have been dealing with this issue for that last 7 years as both a parent and a teacher. In truth, I do not know if I helped the children in my care any better than the teachers at my son's former school.

Why is bullying so endemic in our culture? Why can't it be eradicated in our schools? I have several theories on both these questions, but I have no answers.

Why do people feel the need to intimidate others, to crush others physically and emotionally? I believe it comes from a culture that puts children under severe pressure; a culture that is overstimulating in negative messages; a culture that is too frightened to take personal responsibility when a government will happily do it for them; a culture of isolation.

Children are under incredible pressure to perform. I was stunned when my 5 year old came home with an assignment to write a 7 line poem making sure lines 2 & 4 and 6 & 7 rhymed. The poem was due back in to the teacher in 5 days. The topic was "food I don't like". I found it a bit tricky and I have 37 years and a degree in English on the tyke. Yet, he had to do it. Then my six year old came home with a multiplication worksheet: 2s, 3s & 5s. My 8 year old was asked to spell words like "carbohydrates", "vegetables" and "anthology". You can imagine what my 10 year old had...."Preparation for KS2 Exams". This is madness! And who is this really benefiting? When do my children have time to play in the park? When do my children have time to be a child? They don't and this causes anxiety and anger. They don't know why and they lash out.

So why do they lash out and not negotiate or talk? Why can't children simply "work it out between themselves" as we did? Take a good look at what you give your children. Cartoon Network is filled with images that excessively violent, and unlike Roadrunner and Coyote, when the character is dead, it is DEAD. And the violence used in killing is rewarded. Ben 10 is a hero. Power Rangers are heros. The most popular games for Play Stations, Game Boys, Game Cubes and the like are violent fantasy. My 10 year old asked his best mate what he wanted for his birthday present and we were told "some cool violence like Spiderman 3". I'm not some pansy, softy parent who doesn't want my Little Johnny hurt. My kids play rugby and ride horses competitively -- boys and girl, but I fear that my mother's joke about "hit 'em first and argue later" is now the mantra for our society. This is a bad omen for our society. By giving our children violence we sow the seeds of our destruction.

It is sad to say that the most influential thing in a child's life is advertising. We would love to think that it is family or religion, but truthfully it is the messages they receive from the ever more vacuous media. An advertising media who will spend over £20 billion this year wooing the children of the UK. Have you ever looked carefully at the cover of a glossy magazine? Women and men told daily, weekly and monthly that they are not fulfilled, not worthy, not beautiful, not capable. Most adults can see through this for what it really is: advertising for a "miracle" that will only cost you (if you are lucky) about £30. Children and young people do not have the discernment to realise what the real purpose is. This is not only the territory of print media -- TV is just as vile and just as damaging. There is now serious proof that this is damaging children's health as nearly 30% of young girls under the age of 10 are claiming to be or currently on a diet to improve their appearance. The highest area of growth for eating disorders is now with teenage boys who want to be as thin as their airbrushed heroes. If we are not crushing their minds, then we are filling them with self loathing for failing to meet some fantasy of physical beauty and strength. And what happens to them when they realise they are never going to be "ideal" or "beautiful"? They lash out and crush any perceived competition.

So why don't we, the adults and parents, do something about it? Sometimes we try and soon discover that it is simply too difficult. These are our children we cry-only to be reminded that experts are available and will solve the problems for us. Experts. My dear father always said that an expert was someone who lived out of town and owned a brief case and usually didn't have clue. As he spent 37 years as a trial lawyer (barrister for those of you in the UK) and used experts regularly, I suspect he knew what he was talking about. To change this culture of pressure and emotional extortion upon our children, parents must accept and take back the responsibility for rearing their children. Our children belong to us. They are not the property of the government or the educational system. We decide what they are going to watch and read and listen to. Children do have some rights but all rights are tempered by responsibility. Children are not allowed to do certain things because they do not possess the knowledge or experience exercise the responsibility demanded. As adults and parents we are supposed to. Being a 30 year old teenager is simply uncool to the whole of society.

I believe that the greatest weapon the government, and the media by extension, has is fear. In the film of JK Rowlings book, Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix, Luna Lovegood makes a very profound statement, "If I were You-know-who I would want to keep you alone because then you aren't such a threat." What a wonderful insight and truthful comment on the whole of our society. As long as our fear keeps us closed up in our small, cheaply built little houses with gardens not large enough to properly exercise in, then we will fill our time with a diet shallow, critical, mentally vacant entertainment that we have been told will make us happy. Having children happily playing together in parks means that parents meet and talk. They become friends and have an influence on each other. Children playing in parks, taking the fresh air and arguing with each other in a wholesome and normal way (without ninja kicks), might also become adults who have "ideas". I have been told that "ideas" are dangerous and can lead to problems for the government. So we keep our children locked away, filling them with fear that every slightly old man with a nasty smell is a pedophile, that every person of a different colour to them is "out to get them", that every hoodie is criminal, and our reward for our protectionism is a society filled with angry, limited, pushed, neurotic children looking for something that will quell the ache.

I don't blame the teachers. The government has made it nearly impossible to do the job. I tried for 8 years before I decided that, in spite of loving working with the children and teenagers, I could no longer tolerate being pushed, pressured and forced to do the impossible. And before you ask was I one of the 25% of teachers who will admit to bullying pupils, I will confess that I think I was. I too had to create a miracle and get pupils through GCSE examinations I believed they should never have attempted. And I was told these students HAD to make a C or above. Between doing that and the mountain of paperwork and planning, I could no more be part of the solution to the problem than the Expert who evaluated the school for the government.

As I said, I don't have the answers. Suggestions maybe, but nothing definite. It is now very late and I am sure my son is asleep. I suppose I should get my rest as the battle for his heart and mind begins again tomorrow morning at 6:45.

Why Ainulindalë?

2008-01-28T21:52:00.000Z

Yet another site from a Tolkien freak? Perhaps, but probably not. Yet the word is probably one of the prettiest in the Tolkien lexicon. For those of you who have not delved into the Mines of Moria or the appendix at the Return of the King or felt the need to be engrossed by The Silmarillion, I shall explain. Ainulindalë is "The Music of Ainur" -- the creation of Ea, the world. Iluvatar (God) creates first the Ainur (Angels), then gives them a musical theme which they use, embellish and ultimately create the world.

So what will the purpose of this blogspot be? Just that -- to discuss and explore music, God, religion and belief, hope and failure, children (not necessarily mine) and the impact the World has on each of them. Sorry, but you will have to search for Tolkien at a different site.