Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that this Times article about selfish mothers is vile

352 replies

mumbot · 14/11/2009 10:11

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/janice_turner/article6916343.ece

A bitter and one sided view of motherhood. Do you agree?

OP posts:
malung · 14/11/2009 22:54

Janice, tell your parents we are not all like the ignorant prats they had the misfortune to encounter.

Swolo · 14/11/2009 23:04

I agree wholeheartedly with the article. It's like those bloody "Baby on Board" stickers in rear windows. Having a child doesn't mean that the rest of the world should bow down and treat us like royalty.

mellifluouscauliflower · 14/11/2009 23:08

Not that old chestnut. It's for the emergency services if there is an accident they know to look for a child first.

mybabywakesupsinging · 14/11/2009 23:15

I use the bus lots with 2 + 4 year old ds 1 and 2 (they love it for some reason). Ds 1 is fine standing, ds 2 is not safe so if there is no seat for him I hold him. We don't tend to be offered seats. I don't let either of them sit in the seats for disabled/older/pregnant people, ever. Neither of them is in a buggy - maybe if you have an older child in a buggy you need a bigger buggy? I always had loads of crap essential stuff on my buggy - would not have taken up any less space folded, so I would wait for a less full bus, I think. Agree completely reasonable for people with mobility problems to use P&T spaces , although at our local there are much more likely to be disabled spaces free than P&T spaces.And when I sit in the back of the car it is because the front is full of suitcases, not children...
I have no "me" time. Instead I am lucky enough to spend all my free time with my children. Ds2 and I spent all day in the kitchen today, me cooking and him "helping". Was fun (although not terribly efficient). I have friends (young adults) who for various reasons may not live to have children so moaning about lack of "me" time due to having kids would be somewhat ridiculous.
I don't disagree with the sentiment of the article that much but wish she hadn't tared all with the same brush.
Also (trivial moan but shows total lack of research effort!) Quinny Zap are titchy!

muminthemiddle · 14/11/2009 23:18

I agree with unexpected and what is so bloody newsworthy about this article? err nothing.

Find something else to write about love, I could have made that crap piece up myself! and I am not a so called journalist.
Probably why I hardly ever buy a so called "newspaper".

skinsl · 14/11/2009 23:18

Wilfsell and unexpectedwasabi.. you are spot on.

Jodie0.. yes there is something else she is annoyed about, can't quite get it

Completely agree that original starting point of the article was awful for the disabled parents.. but she does take the rest of it to the extreme.
would try and articulate my argument a bit better but had a few drinks cos I have had such a hard day and I DESERVE IT! Being a mother has never been such a doddle...you must be kidding!

Swolo · 14/11/2009 23:19

All very well saying the "Baby on board" stickers are for the emergency services but no-one takes them off when they're travelling without their kids do they? Kinda makes a mockery of the whole idea if emergency services have to look for non-existent kids don't you think?

purpleduck · 14/11/2009 23:21

I notice the article seems to focus on MOTHERS ("sister", etc)

Again mothers get it in the neck.

Agree with alot of what she said. To a point.

DandyLioness · 14/11/2009 23:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TheCrackFox · 14/11/2009 23:30

But don't you know that absolutely everything that is wrong with the World is all the fault of Mothers?

malung · 14/11/2009 23:32

Janice Turner is not talking about 50/60/70yr old healthy strong people who are jealous/envious of parents nowadays.

Her parents are in their 80's , both disabled and in genuine need of a place in the car park/seat on the bus etc.

There is no child hating agenda to her article as far as I can see.

Give and Take. Respect and manners. If we are lucky enough to get to our 80's,we too will appreciate the same consideration.

edam · 14/11/2009 23:51

mellifluouscauliflower, afraid it's the emergency services line that's the chestnut - Baby on Board stickers are not and were never designed for that purpose. It's a myth. Swolo's right, it wouldn't work anyway as people don't take them out when they are travelling without their children.

nooka · 15/11/2009 01:20

I quite enjoyed the article (and it wasn't in the newsish bit of the paper, just the twaddle part). Some of the comments were really unpleasant though. I don't understand why people expect to take huge buddies/prams on the bus. I had a second hand silver cross for going to the park (walking) and a umbrella type for the bus/train. Folding it was a pain, but just what had to be done. I guess the trouble with having virtually all buses with a space for pushchairs is that people get accustomed to it and start thinking that they will never have to fold (and possibly some parents might not even know how to fold them). I don't think parents should be subservient, but I don't think that they should demand concessions from everyone all the time either. And some do, and because they tend to be aggressive/noisy about it, they get noticed.
However there would be nothing to write about if we were all nice all of the time.

piscesmoon · 15/11/2009 08:39

'Not that old chestnut. It's for the emergency services if there is an accident they know to look for a child first.'

If this is the purpose then I think people are putting the emergency services at risk of having to find a baby when they are safely home in bed. I would be very rich if I had £1 for every time I saw the sign in a car with a lone driver! The sign should be removed everytime the child is removed-I bet that no one can say they do that.

Rollmops · 15/11/2009 09:09

malung et al, the thread about the 'incident' was clearly not written by the author of the article [rolls eyes].
Another shining example of journos gathering little real life gems from public forums - and running with them.
However, the article had a point and was well written so no harm done

sprouting · 15/11/2009 09:21

Why is Dullwitch saying that she is Janice if she clearly isn't

ronshar · 15/11/2009 09:45

I worked for the ambulance service for 5 years. I am sorry to dis-illusion you ladies but at NO point were we ever trained to look in the back window of a car to check if we should be looking for a child. Generally the screaming of an injured parent/child is enough of a clue. Car seat is also another obvious clue!
Those signs are actually supposed to give a warning to other drivers not to get too close to the back of your car. Nothing more. I have seen some now with the name of the precious little bundle inside printed for all to see. Hello! Would you put your name on your back window? They would probably be the first to bleat about a stranger calling the child by its name.

bellissima · 15/11/2009 09:58

I'm an old bag who remembers the notices on buses about children paying half fare giving up their seats. So yes she has a few points. On the other hand, hypocrite that I am, I don't like my small(ish) children standing up and holding a pole as the bus careers around corners. But I do make them bunch up and the younger one sit on my knee when it's crowded.

As to supermarket parking, maybe it would be a good idea if supermkts used some of their profits to employ a warden in the car park. It makes me furious to see 'ordinary' (ie non disabled/non small child accompanying) drivers take up either P&C or disabled places. It also makes me furious to see perfectly able bodied folk jumping out of cars with blue badges without any disabled passenger/driver. The writer failed to mention that a significant number of blue badges are stolen/borrowed - in London it's an amazing proportion, and maybe that makes people cynical. A warden could also discourage this. Yet I have only ever seen one ( a Morrisons in the Lake District as it happens).

And maybe we just all feel 'entitled' to have a parking space. My mother had a double push chair that probably didn't fold at all - it was walked to the local shops/school. Again, I am of course being a hypocrite here as I use the car.

piscesmoon · 15/11/2009 10:00

Therefore if we only have elderly, teenagers and other adults in the car, the one behind can get as close as they like!!! 'Let's hit the car in front-there is no baby on board!'

bellissima · 15/11/2009 10:00

NB pushchair went to school with younger siblings in - not those of us of school age! We had Shank's pony.

ronshar · 15/11/2009 10:05

Not quite but I think that was the original intention of the daft window stickers.
To be honest I fail to understand why anyone needs to draw attention to the fact they have children in the car!
Just another example of the useless crap that new mothers are told is an essential piece of nursery equipment.

yayitstheweekend · 15/11/2009 10:18

I don't see the problem with the article. I am perfectly happy for a disabled badge holder to park in a mother and child space, and I agree that there's no need for the M&C to be at the front of the store, they're there so that there is more space to get children and prams out, once the child is in the pram surely one can walk a few more steps.

Likewise, I always expect my children to stand on a busy bus or train just as I would also stand if I saw someone older or more needy than myself needing a seat.

I don't really have an opinion on parents sitting in the back, I just don't do it because it's not very comfortable and I prefer the kids in the back

Article seems fine to me.

justaboutautumn · 15/11/2009 10:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Jedward · 15/11/2009 10:26

what does willsell say?

DandyLioness · 15/11/2009 12:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn