A computer glitch caused travel chaos last weekend when it failed to put clocks back at Britain's second-busiest airport.

The fault at Gatwick meant arrivals and departures were advertised an hour late, and caused confused holidaymakers to overwhelm check-in desks.

The airport's computer system was supposed to update its clocks automatically when British Summer Time ended in the early hours of Sunday morning, but inexplicably failed to do so.

Incorrect times were also advertised on Teletext, Ceefax and the Gatwick website.

Gatwick spokesman Stuart McDonald said: "It was spotted at 6am. They have been working on it all day.

"It should have been automated. I have never heard of this before. It is certainly not a manual thing."

"It is Londoners' huge tax payments that allow Scottish politicians to offer voters free universities, care homes and prescriptions"

The row over perks for Scotland reignited today after it emerged that Edinburgh will get £500 million extra simply because Crossrail is being built in London.

Amid signs that the Tories will present themselves as the "English party" at the next election , David Cameron said for the first time that he would review the controversial Barnett formula that allocates cash to different parts of Britain.

The Standard has discovered that, under the formula, Scotland will automatically receive a huge payment to compensate for Crossrail's £16 billion worth of spending in the capital.

The revelation prompted fresh claims that the cash windfall will be used to subsidise free university tuition, elderly care and other perks.

(London Evening Standard)

CHILDREN KEPT INDOORS 'FACE DANGER ON INTERNET'

Parents are so afraid of letting their children play outside that they are leaving them open to the dangers of internet predators, according to a Government adviser.

Tanya Byron, the television parenting guru who is now heading a Government review into the impact of the internet and violent computer games on children, said many parents were ignorant of online content.

She said: "We have just got to understand that putting your kids in front of a PC is not the same as putting your kids in front of a TV.

"It's like opening your front door and saying, 'See you later'."

Speaking at the London Games Festival, she said parents should learn about the internet and establish a balance so that children could access beneficial online sites — but they must also be allowed out to play.

"We live in such a risk-averse culture that everybody is too scared to let their kids outside, which is a tragedy.

"Kids can't even play conkers at school any more.

"It's all about challenging that," she said, adding that parents needed to help children "manage and understand risk".

In his book "No Fear: Growing up in a risk averse society", which is published today, Tim Gill, a former Government adviser who headed a major review into children's play, says that the normal rough and tumble of childhood is vital to ensure their proper development into confident and resilient adults.

He accepts a need to protect children from paedophiles, child snatchers, thuggish contemporaries and fatal accidents, without "bubble-wrapping" them.

However, children today spend about four times as much time being looked after by their parents as children did in 1975. This restricts their play, limits their freedom of movement, corrodes their relationships with adults and constrains their exploration of physical, social and virtual worlds, he said.

"My worry is that if we don't reverse the trend then children will find it much more difficult to cope with socially difficult situations. We will see a rise in levels of anxiety, and either these children will be frightened of contact with other people or they will have conduct disorders and will go off the rails."

Policymakers came in for criticism for their "knee-jerk" reactions to protecting the young that in reality do them more damage than good.

The £83 million the Government spends vetting child abusers, he said, would be better spent on training and raising awareness since most children are abused by family members.

Police are, he said, too quick to impose formal sanctions for insignificant misdemeanours. "It is crucial to distinguish between minor skirmishes amongst children or between children and adults, and more serious thoughtless or deliberate antisocial acts."

(Daily Telegraph)

A LOS ANGELES BUSINESSMAN, identified only as Arnold G., proposed to his girlfriend Carol in 1984 and asked her parents for their consent.

After the engagement had been announced, Carol's father took Arnold aside and told him his daughter was born by artificial insemination because he was unlikely to father a child.

He named the sperm bank, which turned out to be one that Arnold had donated to as a student.

Arnold obtained a court injunction to inspect the records and found that he was the father of his bride-to-be, and 806 other children.

The wedding was called off !

Do you remember the old-fashioned pissoirs of Paris?

They were everywhere in the 50s. Nowadays they have all but disappeared, but their absence has caused problems - as this newspaper article reveals:

PARIS MAYOR MOVES TO STOP PUBLIC URINATING

The mayor of Paris has launched one of his toughest battles to date: weaning French men off their penchant for urinating in public places.

The tradition is one of the less picturesque sights met by many Britons travelling to France, the land of the pissoir.

Lampposts and road signs often prove useful stopping off points, while Paris metro users are subjected to appalling odours.

But Bertrand Delanoë, who has made environmental improvements a priority for the city, has now set his sights on cleaning up the act of Parisians caught short in public.

The mayor is responding to the clamour from a growing army of "bobos" — young, upwardly mobile bourgeois bohemians — who want more green spaces and less grime.

The symbolic last straw for Mr Delanoë was reportedly the sight of dozens of men urinating on the walls of the Paris town hall during the rugby World Cup, despite authorities erecting nearby 62 free 'Sanisettes' — self-cleaning Tardis-like booths that have replaced the iconic pissoirs.

His first revolutionary measure was to make all 'Sanisettes' in streets and parks free of charge in February last year.

Usage shot up from 2.4 million to eight million in 12 months.

However, the underlying problem remained.

Last year, some 2,080 people were fined up to £300 each, but to little effect.

The town's hygiene workers have to clean an average 56,000 sq metres of urine-splashed surfaces per month — a figure that rises to 65,000 in summer.

The highest penalty for urinating in public was dealt to Pierre Pinoncelli, a Frenchman who was fined 45,122 euros (£31,400) in 1998 for relieving himself into artist Marcel Duchamp's modern art urinal, called Fountain — said to be worth £1.9 million.

Now, however, authorities believe they may have come up with the answer: "le mur anti-pipi."

This brilliant, yet simple invention is an undulating wall that fires urine back in the direction of the offender.

"The jet of pee is rather oblique. If it meets a sloping surface it is sent back to the trousers," said Etienne Vanderpooten, a municipal architect who has been working on the problem for the past 25 years.

"It is the case of the arroseur arrosé [the sprinkler sprinkled]," he told the Nouvel Observateur magazine.

A municipal adviser added: "Those who get caught once don't come back."

A prototype is being tried out in the Cour des Petites-Ecuries in the 10th arrondissement — the quarter with the highest number of offenders.

Officials said that another prototype on trial was a sloping granite "parapet" around parks that sprayed urine back on to culprits and was difficult to stand on, "particularly after the third beer".

(Daily Telegraph)

Evidence is mounting that low cholesterol is not always good.

In some medical disorders, having higher cholesterol levels may be beneficial.

Heart failure might be one of those conditions.

A study conducted in the Royal Brompton Chronic Heart Failure Clinic in London reports a relationship between lower cholesterol levels and increased mortality in patients with heart failure.

Investigators were intrigued by earlier reports suggesting a surprising association betwen lower cholesterol levels and higher death rates in heart failure patients. So they measured cholesterol levels in over 400 patients with varying degrees of heart failure at the hospital, and followed their outcomes.

They found that in these patients, the lower the cholesterol levels, the higher the risk of dying.

Based on data from this and other studies, it can be estimated that heart failure patients whose total cholesterol is below 190 or 200 mg/dL may have a 2 to 3-fold increased risk of dying, compared to similar patients whose cholesterol levels are higher.

However, women can stop worrying immediately because high cholesterol is not a risk factor for the female sex.

Few comments have been made on this peculiar fact in all the vast literature on cholesterol. When it is mentioned at all, it is said that female sex hormones protect against heart attacks."

In fact, it seems more dangerous for women to have low cholesterol than high. Dr. Bernard Forette and a team of French researchers from Paris found that old women with very high cholesterol live the longest.

They said that death rates were more than 5 times higher for women who had very low cholesterol and they warned against cholesterol lowering in elderly women.

Are these claims correct?

They seem to fly in the face of most medical opinion.

This 'Letter to the Editor' appeared in the Daily Telegraph recently.

What do you think of the views expressed?

THE WILLIAMS TEST

Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, says that Prof Richard Dawkins has "failed to understand what Christians really believe".

Let's see if I pass the Williams test: Jesus was born to a pure virgin thanks to the good offices of the Holy Ghost. He lived a good life, preaching and performing miracles, then died, cruelly but necessarily, to redeem the original sin of all mankind.

But, many Christians tell me that "virgin" is a mis-translation of "girl". In other words, Jesus was not conceived by miraculous means, although he was still "God" in a spiritual sense, and still died to save us from our sin.

I am also told that Genesis is largely regarded as a creation myth, which, while it embodies spiritual truths, isn't literally true. So, why did Jesus have to die to redeem us from a myth? And did he live at all?

The historical facts surrounding his life are shambolically inaccurate.

Nazareth didn't exist in the first century AD, while local historians completely failed to notice the earthquake which is said to have marked his death. You'd think God could concoct a more convincing tale, if he seriously wanted anyone to believe it.

But never mind, Jesus is still wonderful; he hears our prayers, guides our footsteps and makes us good.

It's just so odd that Christianity has caused more bloodshed and misery than any other world-wide movement.

The burnings and beheadings seem to have stopped, but the ongoing "does God approve of gays?" debate is breathtakingly cruel.

In short, Richard Dawkins is probably as confused as I am.

F J Johnstone, Presteigne, Powys

Smoke without fire... a cigarette
that's legal indoors

They are already a familiar nocturnal sight on the streets of London - huddles of windswept smokers lighting up outside pubs, clubs and bars.

Now one nightclub claims it has solved the problem, allowing smokers to get their fix without having to sneak outside in mid-conversation.

Celebrity hangout Chinawhite in Soho is trying out Britain's first "e-cig", a Chinese-made device that mimics the ritual of smoking but is claimed to be entirely legal indoors.

The six-inch white plastic stick uses a battery- powered atomiser to create realistic puffs of "smoke," while the tip glows red with each suck.

The smoker even gets a strong kick of nicotine from a "nico-filter" cartridge.

Its manufacturer, the Golden Dragon Group, say the invention has no harmful side-effects because there is no smoke or tar.

A £50 starter pack includes the cigarette, one filter and a recharger for the battery. The filter will provide enough nicotine for about 350 puffs, equivalent to about 30 cigarettes. Replacement packs of six filters cost £10 each.

John Stephen, co-founder of Chinawhite, said: "Clubs should move with the times and offer members the choice to smoke outside or enjoy a smoke-free cigarette indoors.

"We're trialling these e-cigs to see if our members like them and the few that have tried them say they are amazing. In my opinion, our members who do wish to smoke should be given options that don't simply force them to light up on the street."

It may be ingenious technology, but is it likely to take off with London's style conscious-club and bar-goers? We tested the e-cigs on smokers at Beach Blanket Babylon in Notting Hill.

Nicole Cammack, 18, a student from Ashford, Middlesex, said: "I like it. I smoke every day and I miss not being able to drink and smoke on a night out. This is a good solution. It's elegant and easy to hold and it doesn't make your hands smell like a cigarette does. It's almost like a herbal cigarette or a shisha.

"I would definitely use it as an alternative. I want one."

Rex Newmark, 23, an executive chef from Hampstead, said: "It tastes like apple tobacco. It would certainly be a talking point - a new toy to impress your friends with. It's good and I enjoyed smoking it but I think it's a bit too feminine for a man to use.

"I think it could become popular. Smokers would do anything to have a cigarette at a table rather than go outside."

Phuong Nguyen, 25, a bar worker from Bethnal Green, believed the price could put some people off.

She said: "You can feel the nicotine and it gives you a good taste. In a club I'm sure it would be very successful. But £50 is a lot of money to pay for a gadget. I wouldn't pay that much."

Francisca Chinchilla, 35, bar manager at Beach Blanket Babylon in Notting Hill, would have reservations about allowing her customers to smoke the electronic cigarette indoors.

She said: "Although it clearly doesn't pollute like a cigarette, I think this would cause problems by blurring the boundaries and creating confusion.

"Because it looks quite real, other customers might see it as an open invitation to light up real cigarettes inside.

"Anyway, I think my customers are perfectly happy going outside to smoke. It's good for us because it creates a nice atmosphere outside the bar and it draws more people in."

HOW THE E-CIG WORKS

The e-cig is claimed to deliver a dose of nicotine equivalent to a strong nicotine patch.

However, the device has been criticised in China for containing 18mg of nicotine compared with 1.2mg for a typical cigarette.

The makers claim the comparison is unfair because it would take much longer to get through one filter than a cigarette.

Evening Standard columnist and GP Dr Mark Porter said: "If you use them correctly you're not getting any more nicotine than you would do from a normal cigarette, but you are not getting any of the other nasty chemicals.

"Because this device lights up like a cigarette, looks like one, handles like one and even tastes a bit like one, it can only perpetuate that habit, making it more difficult for smokers to take the final step in the process and wean themselves off nicotine altogether. I would not recommend it as a way of quitting."

(London "Evening Standard")

e-cigars, e-cigarillos and e-pipes are also available.

Visit the manufacturer's website at:

http://www.e-cig.com/shopping/shopcontent.asp?type=Home

The US may be one of the most religious countries in the West - but is it undergoing a period of doubt?

Although "In God We Trust" was declared the national motto by an act of Congress more than 50 years ago and has been stamped on the currency for longer than that, some claim that a significant change of opinion has developed of late.

It is suggested that there is a considerable increase in those claiming to be atheists.

Go to the full article at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7053157.stm

It includes these comments from readers:

I resent having to be pigeonholed into any kind of belief system - why should I have to choose between Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Atheism? I'm just me, I don't have a part of my being that needs to have a label to announce what I believe in, even if it's nothing. Come on you 'atheists', preaching to the faithful about how much better atheism is, is just making you as bad as them. Ignore the poor medieval moon woofers and get on with your own lives free from guilt, greedy evangelicals, suicidal fundamentalists, and then a bit more guilt.

Richard, Staffordshire, England

What are your thoughts on the subject?

SCOTLAND PLANS TO AXE PRESCRIPTION CHARGES

The public services "apartheid" between England and Scotland has widened again as Scottish ministers pledged to abolish all prescription charges north of the border.

While millions of patients in England will still be expected to pay for vital medication, prescriptions in Scotland will be available free of charge within four years.

The move was cited as the starkest example yet of the "unfairness" of the current funding arrangement, with English taxpayers forced to pay towards improvements to health care and education available only in Scotland.

Scottish residents already have access to free eye care and dental check ups, free personal care for the elderly, extra central heating grants and a number of drugs deemed "too costly" for the National Health Service in England and Wales.

As a result of plans announced earlier this summer, Scottish students will receive a free university education and pupils in the early years of primary school could soon be taught in class sizes as small as 18.

Under the 'Barnett Formula' – the complex calculation which allocates Treasury funding to Britain's regions – Scotland receives £1,500 more of Government funding per head of population than England each year.

(From a Daily Telegraph article)

Is this fair?

How much would it cost in extra taxes to put England, Wales and Norhern Ireland on equal par with Scotland?

PROFESSOR ALBUS DUMBLEDORE,HEADMASTER OF HOGWARTS ACADEMY IS GAY

J.K. Rowling 'outed' him while speaking to an audience of fans in New York last week.

“Dumbledore is gay,” the author said to a response of gasps and applause.

She then joked: “I would have told you earlier if I knew it would make you so happy.”

Human rights campaigners have welcomed the declaration, but Peter Tatchell said the sexuality of the master wizard should have been made explicit in the hit series of children’s books.

He commented: “It’s good that children’s literature includes the reality of gay people, since we exist in every society.

“But I am disappointed that she did not make Dumbledore’s sexuality explicit in the Harry Potter book.

“Making it obvious would have sent a much more powerful message of understanding and acceptance.”

Surely it is best left unsaid?

Or should children learn about gender orientation at an early age?

SCHOOL PROBES RACISM CLAIM AGAINST BOY, FOUR

A headteacher has defended her decision to investigate an allegation that a four-year-old boy was guilty of racism during a game of chase.

Anne Phipps acted after Rocky Smith spat at a 10-year-old black boy on the school's playing field. She said she had no choice but to pursue the accusation, despite the child's age.

The investigation, at Bedenham Primary School in Gosport, Hants, has angered Rocky's parents.

Racism campaigners have also expressed surprise at the school's actions, but insist that even very young children can be racist.

Mrs Phipps said: "When a child makes an allegation of any kind, whether it's bullying, racism, or general unhappiness, we investigate by talking to them. We couldn't dismiss this.

"A nursery nurse spoke to Rocky and I spoke to the older boy. We talked to them about what happened and why it might have happened. That's what an investigation is in a primary school.

"In this case, a little boy did think something had happened and felt he had been singled out. But after investigating, I decided this was not the case – it was just naughty behaviour."

Rocky's parents, Sarah, 35, and Iain Smith, 37, are demanding an apology from the school.

Mrs Smith said: "After it happened, I said to Rocky 'what is a racist?' and he said 'it's when you have races with your friends and the person who wins is it'. I can't believe they even called me. Rocky was wrong for lashing out and I've spoken to him about that, but how can a four-year-old be racist?

"His best friend at nursery was a boy of Indian background – colour doesn't mean anything to him. I think my four-year-old deserves an apology."

Tunde Bright-Davies, the chairwoman of the Racial Harassment Forum, said: "A very young child can hate another person because of the colour of their skin – I have met with a boy of six who said he used to be racist.

"But with the circumstances of this incident, there was no name calling, no racial connotation, no 'get away from me', so you can't found racism on just spitting.

"I don't know why it was investigated as a racist incident."

(Daily Telegraph)

(Matt in the Daily Telegraph)

NOBEL SCIENTIST SNUBBED AFTER RACISM CLAIMS

The Science Museum last night cancelled a talk by Nobel Prize winning scientist Dr James Watson after he was accused of making “racist” comments implying Africans were not as intelligent as whites.

DNA pioneer Dr Watson, who discovered the double helix with Briton Francis Crick, has been roundly condemned for saying he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”.

The 79-year-old American was due to talk at the Science Museum’s Dana Centre on Friday but last night a spokesman said Dr Watson’s comments had gone “beyond the point of acceptable debate”

He announced the Musuem was cancelling the sold-out talk as a result.

Dr Watson's comments have been fiercely attacked by fellow scientists, anti-racism campaigners and politicians.

He wrote that “there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically and is also quoted as saying that while he hoped all races were equal, “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”.

Neourobiologist Prof Steven Rose of the Open University, a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said “Making statements of that sort is certainly a great day for the British National Party but it’s a sad day for scientists and racial harmony."

Last November Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics, published a paper claiming African states were poor because their populations were less intelligent than Europeans and Asians.

However, it is agreed that there is far more variation in intelligence and genetics within racial groups than between them. It is argued that IQ tests are culturally biased and say lower average scores among blacks can also be explained by social rather than genetic factors.

Dr Watson has courted controversy before, saying darker-skinned people have a higher sex drive and that women should hypothetically have the right to abort fetuses that “may have a tendency to become homosexual”. He has also backed genetic screening.

(Abridged from a Daily Telegraph article)

OBESITY 'NOT INDIVIDUAL'S FAULT

Individuals can no longer be held responsible for obesity so government must act to stop Britain "sleepwalking" into a crisis, a report has concluded.

The largest ever UK study into obesity, backed by government and compiled by 250 experts, said excess weight was now the norm in our "obesogenic" society.

Dramatic and comprehensive action was required to stop the majority of us becoming obese by 2050, they said.

But the authors admitted proof that any anti-obesity policy works "was scant".

Nonetheless every level of society, from individual to the upper echelons of government, must become involved in the campaign against a condition which carries such great social and economic consequences, they said.

(From a BBC News article)

But surely we have to individually take responsibility for not being overweight?

Film director, restaurant critic and unabashed bon viveur, Michael Winner is a man with a vast appetite for life. But having tipped the scales at almost 16 stone, he's now slimmed down to under 12.

He explains how in his new book "The Fat Pig Diet".

If you're in, don't put food on the plate in any quantity at all. Just say: "Today I'm absolutely not going to eat much." Then see the results on the scales and be cheered - and say the same the following day."

Read more in the Daily Mail article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/thehealthnews.html?in_article_id=487816&in_page_id=1797

Parents are creating a generation of yobs by failing to teach children good manners at a young age, researchers warn today.

Infants are "naturally" aggressive and must be taught to control their emotions, it is claimed.

Academics say busy families who do not spend enough time curbing bad tempered three- and four-year-olds risk fuelling serious behavioural problems in later life, including drug abuse and violent crime.

Mothers who smoke during pregnancy and parents on low incomes are more likely to find their children become aggressive, the scientists say. The findings — in a study by Richard Tremblay, professor of paediatrics at Montreal University — will be presented at a conference in London today.

They follow the publication of a Government-backed report that found toddlers left in a nursery for more than three hours a week were more likely to develop anti-social behaviour.

Speaking before the conference at the Royal Society, Prof Tremblay said: "Physical aggression in children is a major public problem. It is not only an indicator of aggression in adulthood but it also leads to other serious behavioural problems such as alcohol and drug abuse, violent crimes and continues the cycle of abusive parenting.

"Identifying the factors which stop children becoming well socialised adults should help us design preventative measures. These should put an appropriate emphasis on the behaviour of the parents."

In today's research, scientists claim young children do not learn to be badly behaved. Instead, infants are naturally more physically aggressive and must be taught how to control their behaviour.

Children's ability to shake off violent tendencies is dependent on "both genetic and environmental factors", with some parents better at teaching youngsters how to be well-mannered and communicate properly.

The findings will fuel the debate over childhood, with academics saying that the amount of time parents spend with children has a dramatic impact on their ability to develop.

Critics say the rising influence of addictive video games and television and a decline in outdoor play has damaged young children.

A Government analysis of 800 toddlers at 100 nurseries found those spending all day separated from parents were more likely to be bossy, disruptive, attention-seekers and even bullies.

Ministers want more mothers and fathers to be given classes to ensure they bring children up properly.

Daily Telegraph

Catherine Skinner and Ian Barritt
in "Little Madam"

A new play at the Finborough Theatre in London shows a juvenile Margaret Thatcher, confined to her bedroom by her father for rudeness and consequently indulging in lonely daydreams of future glory.

"It isn’t that I always insist on being right, father, it is that everyone else always seems to insist on being wrong!"

Margaret has been sent upstairs again. And she’s not to come down from her room above the grocer's shop in Grantham until she says sorry.

But that’s all right. Because hidden in the toy chest is Teddy. And in the wardrobe is Jonathan. And under the bed is Cecil Parkinson.

Five of her cuddly toys spring to adult-impersonated life to help enact key events from her career.

And so Margaret goes on a fantastical journey, transforming from the young Miss Roberts into the formidable Mrs Thatcher, in order to escape her past, reconcile her present, and prepare for her future.

But will she be able to summon up the strength to apologise? And should she have to..?

An extraordinary flight of fancy through the political landscape of the late 20th Century, exploring the nature of sacrifice and the price of power as seen through the 12 year old eyes of Britain’s most divisive Prime Minister

"Thanks to Catherine Skinner's remarkable characterisation, by turns prim, proper, difficult and decisive, what could lapse into the emptiest kind of stale satire retains its emotional ballast.

For all its comic irreverence, the show taps into what was admirable in Britain's first woman prime minister while suggesting a personality shaped, and warped, by self-sacrifice long before Number 10."

Those were certainly her formative years.

Mothers are relying on “sensationalist” TV advice shows to bring up their children and no longer possess suitable parenting skills, Britain’s top doctor has warned.

The chairman of the British Medical Association, Dr Hamish Meldrum, blames the popularity of shows like Supernanny and Honey We’re Killing the Kids for the crisis of confidence among new parents.

Dr Meldrum said he was concerned that instead of relying on relatives’ advice and applying a common-sense approach to child-rearing, young mums were turning to ratings-driven programmes.

Do you think today’s parents lack basic parenting skills? Or are they merely relying on the media for appropriate advice?

Are children un-necessarily wrapped in cotton wool, as Dr Meldrum suggested, or is this a healthy reaction to an increasingly dangerous world?

If you are a parent, whom do you turn to for advice?

The following is from a newspaper report earlier this month:

A mother who enlisted the services of TV's Supernanny to control her unruly sons was left homeless yesterday after one of them apparently set the house ablaze.

The family are now understood to be staying in a hotel pending repairs to the four-bedroom semi in Witham, Essex, which was up for sale at £215,000.

So the strikes are over?

Perhaps this lady will soon be happy again.

(Matt)

No, not the knitting needles, crochet hooks and other instruments, used by back-street abortionists in my youth.

It has been brought up-to-date by modern drugs, as revealed in this newspaper article.

DIY ABORTIONS ARE SAFE, MPs ARE TOLD

Mifepristone detaches the
foetus from the womb

Government advisers are paving the way to making abortions more accessible for women after recommending that do-it-yourself terminations are safe to perform.

Comments by leading medical associations suggest that laws could be relaxed to allow women to take drugs that induce a miscarriage while at home.

They also conclude that women should no longer have to seek the signatures of two doctors if they want an early abortion, as it can cause unnecessary delay and distress.

The recommendations emerged in evidence to MPs who are conducting an inquiry into abortion legislation, which could be amended later this year.

Women opting for a drug-induced abortion in Britain are given two tablets under medical supervision.

The first, mifepristone, blocks pregnancy hormones and detaches the foetus from the womb. The second, misoprostol, is taken two days later and leads to a miscarriage within a few hours.

Women are currently administered both pills in a hospital or clinic but if the law is changed they may be able to take the second stage of the course at home.

The Independent Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV stated in its evidence that: "It is perfectly safe for the second stage of early medical abortion to be carried out at home within the structure of properly organised services."

However, advisers from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists gave warning that more research was required before any changes were made to the law.

Their report says: "Regarding abortion at home, there is an increasing body of evidence from both developed and developing countries that home use of mifepristone/misoprostol is safe, effective and acceptable to many women.

The drugs are not licensed to be used in the home and the second drug can only legally be given by a registered medical professional.

I wonder how long it will be before these drugs will be available on the Internet?

Perhaps they already are.

Hang on there !

Yesterday I wrote about an American man who faced 30 years in jail for stealing a doughnut."

I commented 'Only in America" - but I was wrong.

£4,000 COURT COSTS FOR CHILD'S SAUSAGE ROLL THEFT

A police force hauled a child through the courts at a cost of £4,000 for stealing half a sausage roll it has emerged.

It has been accused of wasting “millions” in taxpayers’ money and unnecessarily criminalising young people purely to meet its detection targets.

Other “crimes” deemed worthy of arrest included stealing a 1p nail and an 8p marble.

In each case the youngsters were given three month referral orders and ended up with criminal records.

Now probation officers have complained they are being swamped so badly with petty offences that they cannot concentrate on helping real problem youngsters.

Martin Spragg, the head of Devon’s Youth Offending Service, said only an eighth of the 1,570 10 to 17-year-olds the service had seen in the last year were “serious offenders”.

Children involved in minor shoplifting offences and “a push and shove” between friends were arrested by Devon and Cornwall police officers unable to use their discretion, he claimed.

Another youth was taken to court for criminal damage – for running through a hedge. All generated large amounts of “hugely costly” paperwork with the total cost for some cases reaching £10,000, he said.

Mr Spragg hit out: “What we are doing is criminalising all these young people unnecessarily. It is a Home Office mess linked into this target culture.

“I just think it is a silly way to deal with things. It is inefficient and slow. He said front-line policeman "cannot give informal warnings or simply find a resolution of the matter with parents and victims because if they do it does not count as a detection.”

“If a youth steals a Mars bar, for instance, instead of returning it to the shopkeeper, arranging an apology and speaking with the parents the officer is forced to make an arrest,” he went on.

“He then has to interview, fingerprint and take a DNA sample, arrange solicitors and parents to attend for an interview and complete masses of paperwork."

This is hugely costly and takes the officer off the streets for hours.

“If the police are called to a push and shove between school friends they are likely to be arrested and given a reprimand for common assault.”

Mr Spragg said the force had a policy of taking juveniles to court for a third offence, no matter how small.

Even if cases were not taken to court they were referred to the Youth Offending Team which was required to hold a series of meetings with the child and family.

He said those convicted were left with criminal records which could affect them in later life.

“I am not saying ignore it but don’t leave children with the stigma that will cause damage to them in the years ahead,” he said.

“If a child is granny bashing then I am favour of the courts taking punitive action, I am not saying ignore bad behaviour or advocating going soft on crime.

“We are wasting taxpayers’ money – it is costing millions of pounds nationwide.”