@chestnut
I was referring to Scotland where the population has been fairly static since 1939. I can assure you.
Changing from a Manual car to an Automatic after driving manual for around 50 yrs
Gransnet forums
News & politics
Rough sleeper gives birth to twins outside wealthiest Cambridge college
(445 Posts)Rough sleeper gives birth to twins outside wealthiest Cambridge college. Woman delivered premature babies in front of Trinity College on Monday
A homeless woman gave birth to premature twins while sleeping rough outside Cambridge University’s wealthiest college.
The woman, believed to be about 30, gave birth outside Trinity College. She was helped by members of the public, who called an ambulance, according to reports.
A witness told Cambridge News she had seen the new mother and her two children wrapped up in blankets inside ambulances when she cycled past at about 7.15am on Monday.
“They were all in the ambulances by the time I cycled past,” she said. “My workmate was first on the scene, and luckily Sainsbury’s was open early that morning and she ran in there for help.
“I’m hoping she gets given somewhere to live and the babies are ok. With what people are doing right now with Corbyn’s Christmas Challenge [a social media fundraising effort in response to Labour’s election defeat] what happened is very relevant to many people.”
Is rough sleeping getting worse?
The government claims rough sleeping in England fell for the first time in eight years in 2018, from 4,751 in 2017 to 4,677. But the body that oversees the quality of official statistics in the UK has said the number should not be trusted after 10% of councils changed their counting methods. Rough sleeping in London has hit a record high, with an 18% rise in 2018-19.
The numbers of people sleeping rough across Scotland have also risen, with 2,682 people reported as having slept rough on at least one occasion.
Shelter, whose figures include rough sleepers and people in temporary accommodation, estimate that overall around 320,000 people are homeless in Britain.
What’s being done about rough sleeping?
The government’s Homelessness Reduction Act 2017, which places new duties on state institutions to intervene earlier to prevent homelessness has been in force for more than a year, but two thirds of councils have warned they cannot afford to comply with it. In 2018, James Brokenshire, the housing secretary, announced a one-off £30m funding pot for immediate support for councils to tackle rough sleeping.
How does the law treat rough sleepers?
Rough sleeping and begging are illegal in England and Wales under the Vagrancy Act 1824, which makes ‘wandering abroad and lodging in any barn or outhouse, or in any deserted or unoccupied building, or in the open air, or under a tent, or in any cart or wagon, and not giving a good account of himself or herself’ liable to a £1,000 fine. Leading homelessness charities, police and politicians have called on the government to scrap the law.
Since 2014, councils have increasingly used public space protection orders to issue £100 fines. The number of homeless camps forcibly removed by councils across the UK has more than trebled in five years, figures show, prompting campaigners to warn that the rough sleeping crisis is out of control and has become an entrenched part of life in the country.
Is austerity a factor in homelessness?
A Labour party analysis has claimed that local government funding cuts are disproportionately hitting areas that have the highest numbers of deaths among homeless people. Nine of the 10 councils with the highest numbers of homeless deaths in England and Wales between 2013 and 2017 have had cuts of more than three times the national average of £254 for every household.
What are the health impacts of rough sleeping?
A study of more than 900 homeless patients at a specialist healthcare centre in the West Midlands found that they were 60 times more likely to visit A&E in a year than the general population in England.
Homeless people were more likely to have a range of medical conditions than the general population. While only 0.9% of the general population are on the register for severe mental health problems, the proportion was more than seven times higher for homeless people, at 6.5%.
Just over 13% of homeless men have a substance dependence, compared with 4.3% of men in the general population. For women the figures were 16.5% and 1.9% respectively. In addition, more than a fifth of homeless people have an alcohol dependence, compared with 1.4% of the general population. Hepatitis C was also more prevalent among homeless people.
Sarah Marsh, Rajeev Syal and Patrick Greenfield
East of England ambulance service told Cambridge News that paramedics went to the scene just before 7am on Monday. The woman and her children were taken to Rosie hospital, a specialist maternity hospital on the outskirts of Cambridge.
Research by the Guardian last year identified Trinity as the wealthiest of all the colleges in both Oxford and Cambridge Universities, with published assets at the time of £1.3bn.
A crowdfunding campaign set up to raise money for the woman decried Cambridge as a place of “extraordinary inequality”. Jess Agar, who started the fundraiser, wrote: “Imagine giving birth alone on the pavement, in the shadow of the richest college in Cambridge.
“Whether we are religious or not, many of us will be familiar with the Christmas story of a mother who gave birth to her child in poverty, seeking refuge in a stable. This is the reality for many people living on the streets.”
Contributors have so far donated more than £9,000.
uk.yahoo.com/news/rough-sleeper-gives-birth-twins-144402965.html
They were logical fallacies. A strawman is a logical fallacy put into an argument where it is nothing to do with that argument, i.e. it is fallacious with regard to that argument.
There's worse things than being called a pedant.
little friends
inkycog: Some posters put their head in the sand and some posters swallow a line fed to them by the Daily Mail and/or a taxi driver and/or somebody they overheard talking in Waitrose cafe.
I think you are replying to me, but I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about, you have lost me completely. Try to stick to facts or direct replies instead of a ramble about things which have no connection to anything. .
I'm not sure exactly what this has to do with the current OP. Nobody knows whether the lady who gave birth to twins has mental health issues.
From what I know, some of the people who were sent to live in the community did find it difficult, but they were closely monitored, often by the same NHS staff who had worked in the institutions.
I can't remember exactly when it was (about 10 years?) their care was transferred from the NHS to social services. My sister who worked at Rainhill Hospital became a community psychiatric nurse and eventually a regional manager. From what she's told me, the problem with the transfer to social services and councils was that they didn't have the expertise to deal with people with mental health issues. The care they had received in the big institutions was inadequate and, in many cases, not therapeutic. It was a case of keeping people with inconvenient social habits out of sight and out of mind. Social services didn't have a clue what to do with them and, by then, mental health services had been severely decimated, so there wasn't any support.
PS. There were never enough mental health beds for those who needed them, so it's not true that anyone with a mental health issue was housed in an institution.
I would BoB, if I knew what I am supposed to have dismissed and where - the date and time stamp, please.
Jane10's points were not fallacies.
As I said, the ultimate in pedantry which could have been dealt with nicely, but wasn't.
Argument in a paper bag comes to mind.
Oh for goodness sake. Why argue over this tiny point?
You and others continued it Jane10. There was only one of me and I was only making one point. You threw in the fallacies that kept it going.
I didn't question JN information. Obviously if she worked there, she is very knowledgeable. I couldn't square it up in my mind how anybody with MH issues was in a residential setting.
I have had an explanation for that.
Since you ask, I see with my own eyes a lot of unwell people drifting around. Many of them go to charity shops for some human contact.
Is this whole argument hingeing on nitpicking or the ultimate I peasantry?
Surely it would have been easier to have asked lemongrove if she actually meant anyone used to be or most used to be?
However, that way it wouldn't have been possible to create an argument.
So I, one person, caused an argument while all the little friends that piled in, including you it seems, diverted the very small point I made built it up and attacked me personally. Now it seems you add pedantry to your name-calling.
So be it. I will still say that throwing such exaggerated claims into a fairly difficult discussion means they need to be corrected back to something resembling the facts.
I forgot to add to my last post that any decision made by anyone with capacity, whatever their problem or disability is regarded as a life style choice.
I also object strongly to my post and and experience was dismissed by Gracegran, an apology would be accepted.
Oh for goodness sake. Why argue over this tiny point? If we'd all been talking rather than typing it would have been easy to see that remark for what it was and move on.
It's obvious that some people need care and protection which can be very hard to provide for a whole host of reasons. There used to be many, many large institutions but these no longer exist and people who would once formerly be seen as needing admission to one are in the 'community' with all its many challenges.
What have you seen with your own eyes inkcog that you think others may not have done?
Do you have vast experience which you could share with us please?
It is a long time since I worked in the mental health sector.
Oh, for goodness sake!
The original statement made by lemon was:
Anyone with diagnosed mental health issues used to be housed in institutions, sometimes for life, sometimes for extended periods etc.
The word that GGMK3 is having an issue with is anyone. The implication of lemon's statement is that all people diagnosed with MH issues were admitted to MH institutions. GGMK3 is saying that that is not correct. That's all...
She's not denying that those institutions existed.
Those women who had been 'put away' by their families for having an illegitimate child did find it difficult to cope, as did many others who had been 'institutionalised'.
Shutting such institutions in favour of care in the community did result in chaos in the community in many cases as many patients knew no other way of life.
MS your mother isn't "Anyone with diagnosed mental health issues" She was someone, one person. It was never anyone with a mental health diagnosis.
I have been consistent in what I have argued against, including in the posts you quoted Chestnut when you so carefully excluded the bit I was actually saying, again, and again and again. It was never "anyone" it was "some people" and, as I said, LG has now fled the scene of her hyperbole and left you all to deal with it.
I'm afraid some posters on here simply put their heads in the sand and refuse to believe what people have seen with their own eyes if it doesn't match their own opinions
My comment was in response to this. Some posters put their head in the sand and some posters swallow a line fed to them by the Daily Mail and/or a taxi driver and/or somebody they overheard talking in Waitrose cafe.
Not I peasantry
Autocorrect rules
ultimate in pedantry
Gracegran, I must disagree with you. May because your mum is diagnosed with demetria its different, but I can assure you in my case it was completely different.
My son and I got PoA for daughters finances when she went to live under care in the community, on her own but with care coming in. As she had capacity, so say, we could only do anything with her finances with her permission. If she said she didn't want her electric bill paid, then I couldn't legally pay it. Yes we had a bank account set up using our POA and managed her money as best we were allowed.
It became obvious to everyone that she didn't have the capacity for finances so a Safe Guarding meeting was held in which everyone, social workers, Dr, myself,, son, care manager and others decided she did not have capacity and was at risk.
But it didn't make it legal, the Court of Protection were then presented with a the evidence and it took 14 months for them to make a decision in our favour. The wording on the document and letter was only the Court of Protection has the power to determine someones capacity.
So there you go.
No, Joelsnan is not correct. She claimed that anyone with a mental health issue was housed in an institution. It is simply not true that there were mental health places for everybody with mental health issues.
Rainhill Hospital, which was just south of Liverpool, had over 2,000 patients and closed in 1992, but even that didn't house everybody with mental health issues. One of my sisters worked there and some of the patients didn't even have mental health issues at all. Some of them had been placed there because they were "socially deviant" eg they'd had an illegitimate child. They had become institutionalised, which is why they sometimes found it difficult to cope outside the institution and were drugged to keep them calm.
Institutions for people with learning disabilities were something else and there have never been enough places for all of them either.
Is this whole argument hingeing on nitpicking or the ultimate I peasantry?
Surely it would have been easier to have asked lemongrove if she actually meant anyone used to be or most used to be?
However, that way it wouldn't have been possible to create an argument.
[sigh]
You should be able to find your own post GGMK3. I'm not going to trawl through them again.
MS, of course you didn't imagine it and it must have been a terrible time for you.
I just don't see howeverybody suffering from MH issues was in an institution. JN, explains it as a change in attitude and I think she's right.
I think most people would agree that a combination of safe care and actual properly rescourced care in the community would be a good thing.
Simple Jane10. LG does not like to be disagreed with. I did. She had declared that "Anyone with diagnosed mental health issues used to be housed in institutions, ..."
I disagreed with the word "anyone" nothing else. But as aways others piled in - she couldn't be wrong, could she? How working in a mental health institution decades ago has anything to do with whether "anyone" or a rather more measured "some people" were sent to these institutions I have no idea. Perhaps someone can explain.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »