Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Other subjects

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

For all who want GF banned from MN - so does she!!

857 replies

mummygow · 11/05/2006 18:41

As you are all prob aware I follow the Gf routine and am also on her website and this was posted for us to see.

Dear Members,

In response to your emails regarding the statement in The Times Newspaper on 9th May 2006. We would like to confirm that neither Gina or her lawyers have put pressure on Mumsnet regarding the criticism that her methods receive on their forums. Gina was forced to seek legal
advice regarding other very serious issues with Mumsnet, and we will in the near future make a public statement as to her reasons for this. It would appear that some Mumsnet members are demanding a ban of the
Gina Ford name on the site. Gina herself would welcome this, as her forthcoming statement will confirm, she has for very valid reasons, no wish to be associated with the Mumsnet site.

OP posts:
Tutter · 11/05/2006 19:40

or Forldermort even

morningpaper · 11/05/2006 19:41

Forldemort

I think it will stick

Grin
Harpsichordcarrier · 11/05/2006 19:41

yes that is interesting twiglett. that's the heart of it, isn't it? there is an underlying philosophy to GF's books about human nature, and about babies
that writer has put his finger on it
[arfy - no nothing much has been going on here. all a bit dull really GrinGrin]

Filyjonk · 11/05/2006 19:42

MN is a parenting site. Its bloody ridiculous if we can't disucss GF, she must be the best selling baby writer. (if only it were dr sears, but hey).

I cannot get over this, she's trying to ban all mention of herself from a parenting site with 40,000 members? With 2 books and guides in every Mothercare? WTF is she playing at?

If a parenting guru I trusted, like dr sears or deborah jackson or the late, great john holt tried to pull a stunt like this, I would sharply reconsider whether I would continue to follow their methods.

mummygow · 11/05/2006 19:42

Harpsichordcarrier, I'm not really aware of what is legal or libellous, but I guess whatever she has taken to her lawyer must have something or else would they not just have to her that she was wasting her time?

OP posts:
Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 11/05/2006 19:43

was john holt the freedom in education type guy?

Filyjonk · 11/05/2006 19:45

think so, jimjams, certainly that ballpark. Unshcooling, home education, proper rights and responsibilities for children, that sort of thing.

Harpsichordcarrier · 11/05/2006 19:45

that's what I said once before Filyjonk. if in my professional life I was in line for so much criticism and strong feeling, I would like to think I would take a hard look at myself first. and call the lawyers later. much later.
never happened though because I was shit hot at my job of course Grin

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 11/05/2006 19:46

ah yes that makes sense, know where I've heard of him now.

Harpsichordcarrier · 11/05/2006 19:49

ah mummygow you have a lot of faith in lawyers Grin

Filyjonk · 11/05/2006 19:50

don't think the nct was too impressed either, from what I've heard. wonder if she's taking them on?

PinkKerPlink · 11/05/2006 19:51

this is going to be deleted soon#

AllieBongo · 11/05/2006 19:53

oh yes it is!

Filyjonk · 11/05/2006 19:54

mummygow, um, ime lawyers quite like cases where its not 100% clear whether there is a case. Imagine, they get to spend hours doing archive searhes for mrs voldemort. They get paid quite handsomely for this, btw.

mummygow · 11/05/2006 19:55

lol Harpsichordcarrier - would they ring me dry!!

OP posts:
Filyjonk · 11/05/2006 19:56

depends mummygow, take it you're insured for mumsnetting?

WWWontSlagOffAnyone · 11/05/2006 19:56

There's is a thread that is less than kind (to say the least, there are personal remarks) about GF's methods on the Guardian talk boards and it's still there. Interesting.

kiskidee · 11/05/2006 19:57

mummygow, taking mn to court would mean shutting down the website because mn does not have the money to fight GF and keep this site operational. it has nothing to do with winning or not winning a court case - or having one for that matter.

WWWontSlagOffAnyone · 11/05/2006 19:57

ha ha at being 'insured for mumsnetting!' No, I haven't any previous claims or convictions or unspent offences, no, I never post when drunk, etc.

Filyjonk · 11/05/2006 20:00

out of interest, do people honestly think mn would be shut down? I'm quite optomistic someone would help fund the case-it would become a freedom of speech issue.

morningpaper · 11/05/2006 20:02

The insurers don't cover Acts of Cod

advocateofthedevil · 11/05/2006 20:02

\link{http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0091882338/sr=8-1/qid=1147374011/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-0811385-1383920?%5Fencoding=UTF8\Amazon.com}

AllieBongo · 11/05/2006 20:02

bugger me..people get let off for hijacking a plane for 4 days, and get to stay in wonderful blighty.. but don't slag off Forldermort or we'll take you daaaaaannnnn

Harpsichordcarrier · 11/05/2006 20:03

Grin mp
no they wouldn't necessarily bleed you dry...
but I have yet to meet a lawyer who would say - ah no your case has absolutely no chance of success whatsover. Please, do not let us do any work for you. Close the door on your way out Wink
or maybe I just consort with the charlatans

mummygow · 11/05/2006 20:03

kiskidee I know and that would be truly awful because mumsnet provides such a great place that encourages all types of mothers to share their experiences and pass on advice, but I think it did get to a stage that was just too far, infact over the last couple of days I thought MN was going to blow up with the arguing amongst each other - I was horrified at what people had being saying about each other, people that feel they have come to know each other never mind someone you dont know!!

OP posts: