Category Archives: Children

Just under one in ten children in England are obese by the time they begin primary school.

The same NHS figures which highlight this statistic (9.1 per cent) among reception age pupils also pinpoints a stark rise in the issue by the end of primary school. By the time 11-year-olds are ready to move on to secondary school, 19.1 per cent are classed as obese and about a third – 33.2 per cent – are either overweight or obese.

Those figures are clearly a cause for concern. As Public Health England notes, these children are also more likely to miss classes as a result of being ill and suffer from ‘health related limitations’ – with conditions such as diabetes, asthma, sleep problems and mental health disorders all related to obesity.

So, what can be done to tackle a problem on this scale?


The fact that obesity rises among children during their days at primary school suggests that this is a natural first port of call. Schools need to be setting their children up for an active and healthy lifestyle – showing them the benefits of exercise and the right diet through science, cookery and, of course, physical education.

Many schools do this already, of course, but it’s clear that they need support to do it better. That means better resources – help with the equipment to be able to deliver cookery lessons properly on the right scale or a batch of new PE equipment from Davies Sports.

It also means specialist expertise. More than a quarter of primary school teachers feel unqualified to teach PE – they are crying out for a little assistance to deliver active lessons in a fun and rewarding way. Expert sports coaches need to be made available to either train teachers or deliver more sessions themselves.

Around the home

The simple fact is that schools can’t do it all. Parents and families have to take their share of responsibility for fostering a healthy lifestyle for their child with the right balance of meals and enough physical activity. Children are said to spend an average of 17 hours a week in front of a screen – more than double the amount of time they spend playing outside. Children need to be encouraged to put down their phones and games controllers a little bit more if they are to avoid falling into the obesity trap.


The Government can also do its bit and step in to legislate. It’s clearly not easy – if there were a silver bullet it would have been fired by now – but there are things that can be done to help. The latest idea being trialled is a ‘sugar tax’ on the soft drinks industry, which aims to wean children off the sugary drinks that they enjoy. It has been controversial and has plenty of critics, so close attention will need to be paid to whether this is the right approach or if, alone, it is enough to deal with the scale of the problem.

Sports clubs

Finally, there is a role for sports clubs across the country. These are in constant need of new recruits to stay alive, so reaching out to encourage kids at the earliest possible age is crucial to them as well as the children who need help to stay active. These are the organisations that can, for example, provide the training and support for teachers. Bigger clubs – Football League clubs, rugby and cricket teams, say – can also dish out free or cut price tickets and throw open days to do their bit to foster a love of sport early on. Young fans are likely to want to ‘give it a go’ themselves, after all.

Tagged , , | 1 Comment

More must be done to give the UK’s most vulnerable children a fairer start in life

UNICEF’s long-running Report Card series provides a regular assessment of how rich countries fare in promoting child well-being. The latest Report Card, Fairness for Children, assesses ‘child well-being gaps’, which measure the distance between the most disadvantaged children and the ‘average’ child in each country. While much of the debate about inequality today focuses on the top 1 per cent, these measures capture the extent to which the most disadvantaged children fall behind the levels of well-being their peers can expect. This focus on so-called ‘bottom-end inequality’ therefore captures the extent to which each country allows their most vulnerable children to fall behind.


The Report Card examines four domains of child well-being ­– income, education, health, and life satisfaction – and the UK’s performance can be summed up as ‘could do better’. Overall, the UK is ranked 14th (from best) out of 35 countries (Figure 1). It ranks mid-table in three of the four child well-being domains: 25th out of 37 countries on educational achievement gaps; 19th out of 35 countries on health gaps; 20th out of 35 countries on life satisfaction gaps. The UK, in common with many other countries, has made little progress in reducing gaps in these child well-being domains since the 2000s.

The UK does rather better in terms of protecting the incomes of the most disadvantaged children, ranking 7th out of 41 countries. But while the gap has narrowed significantly since 2008, this is because the incomes of children at the middle of the income distribution have fallen rather than as a result of a dramatic improvement in the incomes of children at the bottom of the distribution. Hardly, in other words, a good news story.


That said, there is a good news story here: the incomes of the UK’s poorest children did not dramatically fall following the recession. Clear contrasts can be drawn here with many other countries hit hard by the economic crisis, particularly those in Southern Europe. This reflects the comparatively strong role social security benefits have played in protecting the incomes of many families with children in the UK. Indeed, across Europe no other country’s social security system does more in reducing the gap between the incomes of the poorest children and the average child (Figure 2).

However, social security protections for working age people have been the major focal point of the UK’s austerity agenda. Ongoing cuts to social security provision are likely to affect the well-being of the poorest children in the UK in future years, and risk widening inequalities in child well-being still further. Indeed, theResolution Foundation and the Child Poverty Action Group have warned that low income working families face losing relatively large amounts of income because of recent changes to Universal Credit that are about to take effect.

Unicef_report_cardMoreover, the UK’s social security system has to work harder than those of most neighbours because underlying levels of inequality are comparatively high. While the government’s ‘National Living Wage’ is a step in the right direction here, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) suggest it will have little impact on poverty or inequality. In fact, after modelling the cumulative impact of recent changes to tax, benefit and labour market policies, the IFS is projecting a rise in relative child poverty from 17 per cent in 2014-15 to 25.7 per cent in 2020-21 and a rise in absolute child poverty from 16.7 to 18.3 per cent over the same period.

The analysis presented in the UNICEF Report Card suggests the government may struggle to improve child well-being outcomes without addressing rising income differentials. Countries that protect the incomes of the poorest children most strongly tend to have higher levels of overall child well-being. More generally, countries with more equal income distributions also tend to be those that do better in minimising adverse child well-being outcomes.

Newly released data from the latest (2014) wave of the Health Behaviours in School-Aged Children (HBSC) survey included in the Report Card shows that, across rich countries, children living in less affluent households are more likely to be unsatisfied with their lives than their peers. This confirms patterns found in the 2002, 2006 and 2010 HBSC data. It is hard to imagine a more powerful argument for addressing social inequalities among children than the fact that across all rich countries, and on every occasion this century they have been asked, children from economically disadvantaged households are consistently more likely to have told HBSC researchers that they are unsatisfied with their lives.

Child well-being gaps are a concern in their own right, but a further reason for policy makers to prioritise reducing them is that smaller gaps tend to benefit all children. Fairness for Children shows that countries with more equal child well-being outcomes tend to also have: fewer children living in poverty; fewer children lacking basic educational skills in reading, maths and science; fewer children reporting ill-health on daily basis; and, fewer children reporting very low levels life satisfaction.

UNICEF ’s report cards suggest the UK has made progress in addressing overall levels of child well-being since being ranked bottom of the table in the early 2000s. Stephen Crabb used his first speech as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to pledge ‘a relentless focus on improving life chances’ by mobilising ‘all parts of government to tackle poverty’ and creating ‘a welfare system that does protect the most vulnerable’. If the government is serious about this agenda then it must to do more to close child well-being gaps and give the UK’s most vulnerable children a fairer start in life.

This article by John Hudson and Stefan Kühner, was first published on the British Politics and Policyblog

Tagged | Leave a comment

Children and youngsters spend more and more time online (as do we all), often alone or at least only in touch with others remotely through the internet. This poses various questions for parents concerned about what their children now spend much of their days doing.

A recent survey of headteachers reported a growing number of children self-harming as mental health problems among pupils rise. This has led to calls for improvements to children’s mental health care.

Last year, it was reported that heavy web use harms a child’s mental health, with each extra hour online compounding the problem. And research collated by Public Health England in 2014 reported that ChildLine now receives greater numbers of calls linked to internet-related problems such as cyberbullying.

What’s the implication here? That children are facing real and growing mental health problems? Or that parents, teachers and doctors are more aware of mental health problems among children?

Looking more closely at the suggestion that the internet is to blame, the headteacher survey didn’t track an increase in actual numbers over time, but rather asked head teachers if they perceived an increase – not exactly a rigorous standard of evidence.

I’d rely more on the representative national surveys of children conducted as part of the Good Childhood Report 2015, in which four waves of surveys from 2009 to 2013 revealed little change in the self-reported “subjective well-being” of British 10-17 year olds, neither for better nor worse.

Another, the Key Data on Adolescence report covering 1997-2015, agrees that “the majority of young people rate their well-being as good”, although there is older data that shows around 10% of five- to 16-year-olds suffer from a diagnosable mental health disorder. As they add, even though three quarters of mental health problems start before the early 20s, funding cuts mean that we lack up to date evidence on whether mental health problems are rising – or not.

It’s no surprise that critical sociologist Frank Furedi says that it’s time to stop getting anxious about the anxieties it’s claimed are found in children.

Guilt by correlation, not causation

The implication that the internet is responsible for these problems in children ignores the many alternative causes. The increased exam pressure, for example, or expectations for success weighing children down. We should also consider the debate over the reality of what internet or gaming “addiction” might really mean – the statistics are slight to say the least, and don’t really bear out the public’s concerns.

Blaming the internet for everything underplays the potential benefits, for mental health or otherwise, from internet use which may compensate for any drawbacks. The Children’s Commissioner for England reported that children are seeking mental health advice onlinein preference to asking their doctor or school nurse, for example. And ChildLine reported that most (82%) of their counselling sessions about suicide in 2013/14 were conducted through email or one-to-one online chat – a considerable increase.

Unhappy, but what’s to blame? Eakachai Leesin/

ParentZone has just released some new research on the subject. There are some interesting findings in the report, but one point especially jumps out and helps make sense of my doubts about the “evidence” or otherwise regarding children and the internet.

The survey of students aged 13-20 and teachers is a small sample, but it suggests a great difference in perception between the two groups. Around a quarter (28%) of students felt that the internet is bad for young people’s mental health, while the perception that it was bad for children rose to around half (44%) among teachers. Around 45% of students said they would follow advice read online, but 86% of their teachers thought that their students would.

Asked about the biggest influences on young people’s mental health, teachers felt that family (49%) was a positive influence but saw the peer group (27%) and the internet (24%) as negative influences. Yet they rarely saw parents (9%) or family (8%) as negative influences, in stark contrast to the reasons children give for calling ChildLine, for instance, which are topped by family and school problems.

We cannot identify from this the true source of children’s difficulties. But it’s striking that teachers are more negative about the internet than their students are – and more negative about their students, too, thinking of them as gullible or uncritical about their use of the internet. Given this, it’s hardly surprising that headteachers blame the internet for the problems in children’s lives. And the space between these views makes it all the more important for more rigorous research to be carried out.

So I’m not arguing that the internet isn’t bad for children’s mental health. But I am arguing that we really don’t know either way – despite the overwhelming anxieties portrayed in the media. And given the amount of attention that continues to be devoted to this question, that’s a sorry state of affairs.

First published on The conversation

Tagged | Leave a comment

Changing the Law Alone Will Not Put a Stop to It

Today Parliament is debating the Policing and Crime Bill which contains provisions to end the detention of children with mental health problems in police cells. These measures are welcome and long overdue. Whilst our understanding of mental health may have grown in recent years, there remains many elements of mental health care that have no place in the 21st century; locking up a very ill child in a police cell is one of them. Yet despite these welcome proposals, changing the law alone will not be enough to put a stop to this practice.

The Bill, if passed, would ban the use of police cells as places of safety for children with mental health problems, and will prescribe that they are only used in exceptional circumstances for adults. It also proposes to reduce the maximum length of time a person can legally be detained whilst waiting for a mental health assessment from 72 hours to 24 hours.

These changes look good on paper but they will not solve the problem of why professionals are often left with no other option but to detain sick people in police cells or why assessments take so long in the first place. To tackle these challenges, the Government must address the lack of appropriate alternative places of safety for children and young people, the shortage of trained professionals to carry out the assessments, and the severe pressure on hospital beds for those that need inpatient care.

The choice of places of safety that can be used for a mental health assessment is incredibly limited and does not reflect the diversity of the communities they serve. Despite being over represented in detentions under the Mental Health Act, there is a lack of culturally sensitive places of safety for black African Caribbean men; and many places are not able to accept under-18s due to safety and safeguarding requirements. The Care Quality Commission has reported that there isn’t a single health based place of safety that can be used for under 16 year olds in many local authority areas including Devon, Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Bristol and Bath.

Likewise, reducing the time limit for a mental health assessment will not guarantee that there will be enough trained professionals to complete the process within 24 hours. The CQC’s review of crisis care in 2015 found that the most common reason for delayed assessments was the lack of specialist doctors, nurses or Approved Mental Health Practitioners (AMHPs) to carry out an assessment. An FOI request in 2013 found that the number of AMHPs had fallen in almost half of councils.

If a person does need to be admitted to hospital then current guidance states that the assessor should not complete their assessment until they have found a bed for the person to go to. Yet, as pressures on the system grow, this is becoming more and more difficult. It is estimated that around 500 people with mental illness have to travel over 50km to be admitted into hospital every month, a figure which has risen in recent years. Last year leaked emails revealed that hospitals were being advised to adopt emergency procedures and admit young mental health patients to adult wards because of a national shortage of places for children. 391 children were placed on adult mental health wards last year alone, an increase of 10% on the year before.

Without reforms to tackle the root of the problem – lack of capacity – there is a risk that the proposals in the Policing and Crime Bill will add pressure to an already pressured system and bring unintended consequences. Professionals may be forced into the impossible situation of having to choose between sending someone who needs inpatient care home or breaking the law because they haven’t been able to find them a bed within the 24 hour window. The CQC has recently warned that the burden already placed on AMPHs could be leading to people being detained unnecessarily under the Mental Health Act because it’s the only way to guarantee a patient will get a hospital bed.

The changes we are debating today have the potential to make a big difference to some of society’s most vulnerable people. However for this to be achieved, the Government must show they have a plan to translate this legislative change into reality on the ground. How many additional places of safety will the Government commission and how will they be paid for? How many AMPHs will be needed to meet these new requirements and will the Government commit to funding them? What action are Ministers taking to ensure that we have enough inpatient beds and what are they doing to improve outreach and triage support in the community to ease the pressure on the beds we do have? These are the questions that the Government must answer robustly. Otherwise, they are in danger of making yet another promise on mental health that they are not able to keep.

Tagged | Leave a comment

Fizzy drink companies should put child-friendly labels on the front of their products spelling out the sugar content in teaspoons, in a bid to beat tooth decay and child obesity. The Local Government Association (LGA), which represents more than 370 councils – with responsibility for public health – says many youngsters and parents are unaware of the high level of sugar in fizzy drinks.

The call, which comes ahead of the Government’s forthcoming child obesity strategy, follows research that shows some energy and sports drinks have 20 teaspoons of sugar in a 500 ml can – more than three times the daily allowance for adults – while some popular juices and soft drinks contain between five and 15g of sugar per 100ml. A typical can of fizzy drink has around nine teaspoons of sugar.

As well as being a key driver behind obesity, sugar is also a major cause of tooth decay, with a recent survey finding that 12 per cent of three-year-olds in England suffered from poor dental hygiene.

Tooth decay was the most common reason for hospital admissions in children aged five to nine in 2012/13. Damning figures also reveal that in the same year, more than 60,000 children under 19 were admitted to hospital for removal of decayed teeth – half of which were aged nine or under.

Treating obesity and the effects of oral diseases costs the NHS a combined £8.4 billion a year in England.

With research showing it takes an average of just 15 seconds for shoppers to decide on an item, the LGA is calling for prominent and clearer labels on the front of fizzy drinks – spelling out the sugar content in teaspoons so that all shoppers can see it instantly.

Youngsters in the UK are the biggest soft drinkers in Europe – with 40 per cent of 11 to 15-year-olds drinking sugary drinks at least once a day. Poland is the second highest at 27 per cent, and Germany third with 18.5 per cent.

Under-10s get almost a fifth of their sugar intake from soft drinks and for 11 to 18-year-olds, that figure is nearly a third.

Better labelling of sugar quantities will raise awareness in children of sugar levels, and ensure people are as informed as possible to help them make healthier choices.

Unless radical action is taken now to tackle obesity, councils are warning that the next 20 years will see the number of obese adults in the country soar by a staggering 73 per cent to 26 million people.

Cllr Izzi Seccombe, LGA Community Wellbeing spokesperson said :

“While we acknowledge that many soft drinks manufacturers are heading in the right direction with sugar reduction, the industry as whole needs to go further, faster and show leadership on the issue.

In many cases, parents and children are unaware of exactly how much sugar these fizzy drinks contain, which is why we are calling on manufacturers to provide clearer, front-of-product labelling that shows how much sugar soft drinks have in teaspoons.

On average it takes just 15 seconds for shoppers to decide on an item, so we need to have a labelling system which provides an instant at-a-glance understanding of sugar content.

Raising awareness of sugar quantities and giving families a more informed choice is crucial if we are to make a breakthrough in the fight against tooth decay and obesity.”

Tagged | 1 Comment

A recent study of poverty in the UK has revealed that parents in poverty are going without necessities to provide for their children. Children are at a higher risk of going without essentials than adults. However, among adults, those who live with children have higher poverty rates than those who do not. Indeed, rates of poverty among this sub-group of adults are higher than among children themselves. Living in a workless household increases the risk of child poverty (mirroring official statistics), but a substantial majority of poor children – 60 per cent – live in households in which at least one adult works. These findings pose a challenge to government policy and rhetoric which positions poor families as trapped by a benefits system which does not provide the appropriate incentives for work, and poor parents as lacking the skills to provide for their children.

Using an individualised poverty measure developed in the UK Poverty and Social Exclusion Study, which takes into account the shared resources within a household (household income), and how resources in the form of ‘socially perceived necessities’ are distributed among household members, we found that 22 per cent of the overall population were in poverty, compared to poverty rates of 27 per cent among children and 32 per cent among adults living with children. These findings have come at a time when the government is seeking to change the way in which child poverty is measured and currently governed by the 2010 Child Poverty Act. The Act was passed with cross-party support in 2010 and introduced several measures of poverty, based on equivalised household income or a combined measure of income and access to essentials.

familyImage credit: mrhayata CC BY-SA

Prior to a House of Lords defeat, the present government was proposing to drop these measures in favour of measuring the proportion of children in workless households, and the educational attainment of pupils at age 16. In doing so, the government is acting against the majority of expert advice it has received on the matter. The future of these proposals is currently unclear. Yet changes to the Child Poverty Act have been proposed amongst a raft of austerity policies. Austerity was initially positioned as a necessary response to the financial crisis with the promise that ‘we’re all in this together’ – that is, no particular section of society should suffer more than another. But in reality the proposed austerity measures, many of which have been defeated in the House of Lords or challenged through the courts, have targeted specific groups more than others. Targeted groups have included:

  • Young people, through removing their entitlement to housing benefit and increasing conditionality on income-related benefits;
  • Families, through restrictions on tax credits and Universal Credit limiting them to two children;
  • Working-age adults (including families), through freezing working-age benefits rates for four years, increasing the rate of reduction in tax credits as earnings increase, reducing the income threshold for tax credits, and lowering the benefits cap;
  • Disabled people, through the reduction of Employment and Support Allowance for those in the work-related activity group to Job Seekers’ Allowance rates.

Redistributive policies are rooted in the idea that structures within society unfairly disadvantage some people and groups. In contrast, individual and cultural explanations of poverty are rooted in the idea that poverty is the result of poor individual choices and behaviours. These may be ‘transmitted’ from one generation to the next resulting in ‘cultures of poverty’.

In contrast to Labour policies prior to 2010 which were anti-cyclical in nature and favoured (at least in part) redistribution, Coalition and now Conservative policy and rhetoric indicates a preference for individual and cultural explanations of poverty. This can be seen in decreasing social security entitlements and increasing conditionality. It can also be seen in how poor people are described: they live in ‘troubled families’, and may be ‘skivers’ who need motivating to ‘take responsibility’. Extra money is seen as unlikely to help, as ‘feckless’ parents may spend it on drink, drugs and gambling rather than on improving their children’s well-being. As a result, the problem of how to address child poverty is transformed from one best addressed through providing additional resources to poor families, to one best addressed by helping poor parents to overcome personal shortcomings.

To assess the Conservative approach, we examined access to resources and economising behaviours among adults and children in poor households. We found that very few adults – around 1 per cent – had adequate resources themselves and lived with children who did not have adequate resources. In contrast, we found that 16 per cent of adults went without necessities themselves, but lived with children who did not go without necessities. This suggests that adults living on very limited resources may be sacrificing their own needs in order to provide for their children. Additionally, adults living in households with poor children were much more likely to engage in economising behaviours and many reported that they had:

  • Skimped on food so others would have enough to eat;
  • Bought second-hand clothes instead of new;
  • Continued to wear worn-out clothes;
  • Cut back on visits to the hairdresser or barber;
  • Postponed visits to the dentist;
  • Spent less on hobbies;
  • Cut back on social visits, going to the pub or eating out.

Perhaps most striking of these was our finding that 69 per cent of adults living with poor children reported skimping on their own food so that others would have enough to eat. While the House of Lords defeat is to be welcomed, the future of the Child Poverty Act remains unclear. The fact that parents are having to make these sacrifices, in many cases despite being in work, challenges both Conservative explanations of poverty and the rationale for proposals to remove income and material deprivation from poverty measures. Indeed, increasing the financial resources available to families to help ensure decent living standards for all is indicated.

First published on the British Politics and Policy blog

Tagged | Leave a comment

There is increasing awareness of the need to maintain our own health; messages encouraging us to eat ‘5 a day’ exercise regularly and stay well hydrated, are familiar, simple to communicate and easy to understand.

What is less tangible is the process of both maintaining our mental health, the ways in which mental illness really presents and how best to treat such conditions.

What is not fully acknowledged is the fact that physical illness impacts on mental health and wellbeing, and that mental illness can impair a person’s ability both to maintain their physical health, and to access care for physical health needs.

We are all aware of the current economic climate, and the fact that difficult decisions are constantly made about which services to keep and how other services can be streamlined.

On a positive note, services are increasingly developed and improved by partnership working between service users, service providers and key stakeholders. This has led to acknowledgement of the need for community based care, and for services to be integrated. If a young adult has chronic asthma and significant difficulties with anxiety then it is reasonable for them to expect that they can attend appointments for both conditions in the same place and possibly on the same day, and that with their consent service providers will communicate with each other and work collaboratively. Similarly, if the young person with asthma experiences a deterioration in their breathing through smoking, and the clinician starts to see signs of undiagnosed ADHD, then the young person is more likely to engage in a mental health assessment in a familiar venue.

Thus the case for ‘one stop shops’ that will offer comprehensive care is clear. What is also increasingly recognised is the fact that young people want to access the same services whether they are 17, 18 or 20. It is widely acknowledged that 18 year olds often still have a lot of ‘growing up’ to do. When we are able to offer services to vulnerable young people that are truly ‘barrier free’ regardless of whether they primarily affect physical or mental health, and services that they can access throughout college and in the first sensitive months of a first job or apprenticeship, while they transition from family life to their first flat or from being looked after children to being care leavers. Then we will truly be making steps to ensure that the excellent public health messages about wellbeing and health are accompanied by responsive services that are easily accessible when health problems occur.

Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust is committed to providing flexible and accessible services to all children and young people within Manchester and Salford. Adolescents are able to be seen in settings of their choice, for example colleges and their local general practices. Furthermore, there are outreach services for vulnerable young people such as young offenders. Finally, CMFT is proud to offer a wide range of services, for example services with specialist skills in working with children with learning disabilities or children who are looked after.

Leave a comment

About half of all households in the UK have a pet, with cats and dogs being the most popular. There are many benefits to having a furry four-legged family member – but did you know protecting your children against allergies is one of those benefits?

That’s right, alongside being a loving companion, lowering stress, providing a more harmonious dynamic for the family and aiding in a child’s physical, social, emotional and cognitive development, they also protect against allergies! Are there any negatives to having a pet?

There are, of course, conflicting arguments, with some believing that exposure to pets early in childhood is a risk factor for developing allergic disease. In fact it has been suggested that pets are the major cause of allergic disease – with half of all asthmatic children allergic to cats and 40% allergic to dogs.

However, new research is now suggesting that this is more likely to be the other way around and early exposure to pets may protect them against allergies.

Scientists have long argued that kids who grow up with a pet, like a dog or cat, or live on a farm with plenty of livestock are less likely to develop asthma or allergies. But, they didn’t know exactly what protected these kids. There was speculation that modern lifestyles are too clean and therefore immune systems aren’t exposed to enough bacteria, viruses and parasites to build up proper immunity.

Now a new study has found that infants in homes with furry pets were found to share some of the animals’ gut bacteria – which could go some way to explaining how early animal exposure may protect against some allergies.

The research used an ongoing probiotic study of pregnant women with a history of allergies. The participants included 51 infants of families with furry pets such as dogs, cats and rabbits, in the home and 64 infants with no pets in the home.

When the babies were one month old fecal samples were collected from their nappies and tested for the DNA of two types of Bifidobacteria that are specifically found in animal guts: B. the rmophilum and B. pseudolongum. One third of the pet-exposed group had the animal-specific bacteria, compared to only 14% of the comparison group. This is because when children live in close proximity with an animal, there is likely to be a transfer of microbiota, when the dog licks the child, for example.

At six months old the babies were tested for allergies to various allergens such as cow’s milk, egg white and bananas – 19 infants had reactions to at least one. None of the babies who reacted had the B.thermophilum bacteria in their fecal.

Human Bifidobacteria has beneficial health effects and the research would suggest that the animal-specific strains might also be beneficial to us.

While this research is part of a small preliminary study, it does suggest that we shouldn’t rule out owning a pet during pregnancy or the first few years of our children’s lives – quite the opposite!

So, before you stock your cupboards full-to-bursting with potions and remedies, you might want to check out the pets for sale from Freeads. But remember, pets are for life not just to prevent your children developing allergies!

Tagged , , , | Leave a comment
A Labour Mayor needs to take a strong, pro-active approach to children’s mental health.  To deal effectively with the  rising number of children and young people with mental health problems, the Mayor must develop a strategy for supporting families and supporting schools to understand what is needed for good mental health.  Parenting support needs to be made available where families are struggling to cope with difficult or worrying behaviours.  Schools need to be resourced to ensure that services are in place for children whose mental health is fragile.  In order to identify those children, teachers need to be trained in child mental health, which the mayor should campaign for alongside many professionals in the field.
Children and young people who enjoy good mental health contribute positively to safer, happier communities.
Leave a comment

It can be hard enough to find child care for a healthy child. But, for those who have children with special needs, it can be much, much, more difficult. Here are some ways to find the best care possible for a child that needs just a little more help.

Consider a Special Needs Daycare Center

Finding good child care is difficult when you need it for your special-needs child. The American Disabilities Act doesn’t allow day care centers to refuse to admit a child because of a disability. But, not all daycare providers have the knowledge and expertise to care for all types of children either.

This is where a special needs daycare center can help. To determine if your child would benefit from a traditional vs a special needs daycare, start by listing your child’s strengths. Most parents start out by naming their child’s disabilities. While it’s important for a daycare center to know this, it’s also important for the provider to understand what your child can do.

Rate your child’s ability to communicate and socialize on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being very functional. If your child is below a “5,” then consider a specialized provider.

Reach Out To Trusted Resources In Your Community

Don’t be afraid to reach out to a trusted source in your community. Once you’ve decided that a daycare center focusing on your special needs child is the best option, you still need to actually find such a center.

Ask around in the special needs community – support groups that cater to families with special needs children. Also, join a Listserv that caters to families with children that have special needs.

National childcare referral agencies are another option. The National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities ( and Child Care Aware ( are two such agencies that can help you find daycare or childcare center that’s appropriate for your child.

Some local organizations, like Easter Seals, might also be able to help.

Friends, family, your church, and other social organizations might also be able to help. Don’t discount them or forget about them. If you don’t know where to turn, your priest may be the best help in your community. Churches, and other similar social organizations, often have a social leader that is well-connected with the rest of the community.

Assess The Environment Of Ordinary Childcare Facilities

If you decide to place your child in a specialty childcare center, you should ask yourself several questions:

  • How will this provider handle behavioral challenges that my child displays?
  • Is the environment safe for my child?
  • Can this center cater to my child’s special needs?
  • Does this childcare center have the staff and training necessary to care for my child?
  • Is this center too restrictive or too free for my child’s needs and abilities?
  • How will the childcare center handle discipline?

While non-specialized facilities can sometimes cater to children with special needs, you must assess each provider individually, meet frequently with the person giving care, and keep the facility updated about any changes in your child.  Do they have suitable toys?

The center will probably also want to interview your child, spend some time with him or her, and assess the staff’s ability to care for the child.

Many times, a primary caregiver needs to be appointed for the child, and if this can’t be done, the childcare center will refuse service because they’re not equipped to care for your child.

Hire A Specialized Provider or Nanny

Sometimes, there’s not a perfect solution in the local area. If you feel more comfortable hiring a specialized nanny for your child, search for one who has experience working with special-needs children.

Child care search engines like,, and have filters for finding special nannies and sitters that have experience with children that have special needs.

Do a background check to make sure that the person you’re hiring doesn’t have any criminal history. The more severe your child’s disability, the higher the risk for abuse by childcare providers, nannies, and sitters.

Regardless of your choice, you should also consider a “nannycam” which will monitor your home, giving you valuable insight into what happens when you’re not around.

Cameras inside the home are sometimes viewed as an invasion of privacy by some nannies, but this is really for the child’s protection. If a caregiver has a problem with this, it’s best to choose another provider. Your child is worth it.

If your child has a rash because of diapering, child care should use cloth diapers instead of disposable diapers. Cloth diapers are toxic-free, good for baby health and therefore prevent diaper rash. Remember choose best cloth diaper from the popular brands before placing your child in a child care service.

Melissa Strong works in childcare. She is a mother of three and has a passion for trying to help others with her support and ideas. She writes regularly for a number of family-orientated websites.

Image credits

Tagged | Leave a comment

There are clear links between childhood poverty and adult health. Even if one manages to escape from the situation of poverty as one grows into adulthood, a disadvantaged start in life can leave lasting health problems, both physical and psychological. Studies have shown that children living in poverty are less healthy in nearly every way than those in well-off families, and even small differences in economic and social status can have a significant effect on childhood health.

Disadvantaged from the start

Statistically, poor mothers are more likely to have underweight babies, and as their children grow, they are likely to be an average of three centimetres shorter than their better off counterparts. This is not genetic, but a failure to reach full height potential caused by factors such as inadequate nutrition and unsuitable living conditions.

As well as this initial handicap, poor children are also far more prone to such conditions as respiratory and gastrointestinal infections, nutritional deficiencies, dental problems and impaired eyesight. Again, nutrition and living conditions are mostly to blame, as poor families struggle to afford consistently healthy food in adequate amounts, and often live in homes that may be cold, damp, affected by mould and so on. Healthcare and suitable clothing are also harder to afford.

Psychological, emotional and developmental disorders should not be discounted either, often caused by the family stress that is an inevitable result of economic hardship. Finally, we must not forget that poor children likely live in a harsher environment with fewer basic amenities; statistically they are more likely to suffer childhood injuries in accidents.

The link to adult health

Medical conditions such as asthma, acquired in childhood, are hard to shake off even when one’s living situation is greatly improved. Similarly, physical strains on the young body can weaken it for life. Many disadvantaged children do not manage to escape the poverty trap and so remain poor and unhealthy. This obviously puts greater strain on the health service, with higher costs and higher numbers of individuals requiring more care in later life.

Tackling child poverty in the UK

Successive governments have vowed to combat or eradicate child poverty in the UK. In 1999, Tony Blair pledged to end child poverty in a generation by moving more families off benefits and into work. The coalition and current Conservative governments have adopted similar strategies, emphasising improvement to educational opportunities and living standards alongside encouragement to work full-time.

Nevertheless, charities such as the Prince’s Trust have taken up much of the burden. The Trust helped over 750,000 young people turn their lives around between its beginnings in 1976 and 2013. It is helped in this work by a number of generous donors, including Lord Laidlaw. Laidlaw has donated over £2m to the Trust. He also founded the Laidlaw Youth Project in 2004 to help disadvantaged youngsters in Scotland. Lord Laidlaw believes education is the best way out of poverty and has supported several Scottish schools as well as providing scholarship funds to universities.

There can be no doubt that poverty is linked to poor health, especially for children. Health problems in childhood can blight one for a lifetime, to the detriment of society as a whole. It is in all our interests to make childhood poverty history.

Tagged | Leave a comment

Living in the modern world, we would think we’ve evolved beyond things like polio, smallpox, and death by abscessed tooth. And, for the most part, it’s true. But, according to the Centers For Disease Control, we’re not out of the woods yet. Many children still suffer from tooth decay – about 1 in 5, or 20 percent aged 5 to 11 suffering from tooth decay, and roughly 13 percent aged 12 to 19 having at least one untreated decayed tooth.

In fact, it’s the most common chronic condition of childhood in the U.S. Here’s what you need to know to protect your children.

Establish Good Hygiene Early

Good hygiene involves brushing and flossing. In general, children should brush every day, twice a day – once in the morning after breakfast and once before bed after the last meal. Flossing should be done with brushing.

Many busy moms and dads assume that their children can handle brushing on their own after a few crash courses in brushing. But, children don’t always pick up good habits right away. You need to start as early as a few days after birth, cleaning baby’s mouth and gums with a clean and moist gauze pad or washcloth after feeding.

When teeth start to breath through, decay can occur, so it’s important to clean them after meals. Until you’re comfortable with your child’s ability to manipulate and use a toothbrush properly, you should do the cleaning.

If you need a children’s emergency dentist like, keep it on speed dial. Children do sometimes have the tendency to accidentally swallow toothpaste or gargle, so be careful and watch them closely.

Establish Good Dietary Habits Early

Good dietary habits can be difficult to instill in your child if you yourself don’t have good habits. Children learn from you, so if you want them to have good teeth you will probably need to make changes yourself.

Here’s what you need to focus on:

  • Nutrient-rich foods.
  • Low-sugar and starch foods.
  • Diets that are high in natural fat, which contain fat-soluble vitamins.
  • Diets that are low in processed foods.

Mostly, this means eating a lot of foods like meats (including liver and other organ meats, as well as bone marrow or supplementing with cod liver oil for vitamins A, K2, and E).

For children under 3, pay extra-special attention to the amount of nutrients you’re feeding the child. Eliminate all sources of junk food and processed food and feed your child nutrient-dense fresh foods (vegetables, meat, low-sugar fruits, and some nuts). Make sure the child gets plenty of fats, because children (especially babies) need a lot of fat in their diet.

Some of the best foods include butter from pasture-raised cows (rich in vitamin A, vitamin K2, and other fat-soluble vitamins), organ meats like liver, cod liver oil, lard, pasture-raised pork, beef, and chicken, egg yolks, wild-caught salmon, organic green vegetables, and cruciferous vegetables.

Children often learn bad dietary habits from parents, so if you’re not a healthy eater, don’t expect your child to be.

You can’t give children contradictory messages – they will either see through it or become confused, possibly both.

Visit The Dentist Periodically

Your child will probably need to visit the dentist on a semi-frequent basis for checkups and cleanings, even with good diet and lifestyle choices and hygiene. These cleanings should be mostly routine, and will allow the dentist to make sure you’re not overlooking something.

Some dentists use this as an opportunity to apply fluoride treatments. While it’s not always necessary, it can help strengthen your child’s teeth. And, many dentists recommend it as a way to prevent cavities.

Most people don’t understand how fluoride works, which leads to confusion and, sometimes, backlash in the natural foods and living community (which is a valuable source of information when you’re looking to eat and life a healthy lifestyle).

Fluoride is a byproduct of the fertilizer industry. That scares some people, but as this dentist points out, it’s a useful byproduct of the industry because what the fertilizer industry needs is the phosphorus from their processing. The rest, for the industry, is “waste.”

Fluoride is naturally found everywhere, especially in otherwise healthy foods and drinks like tea, usually bound to calcium. It’s a substance that coats teeth, making them harder and protecting them from sugars and plaque.

Yes, it can be overdone, and when too much fluoride is applied to teeth, it can cause fluorosis. That’s why it’s important to work with a competent dentist who takes the time to understand your child’s current fluoride intake.

The cleanings are also a great way for the dentist to spot other potential tooth issues early before they become major problems.

Parents also need Pack and Play Playards

After earning his bachelors degree from the University of Maryland, Dr. Corcoran went on to graduate from the University of Maryland Dental School. Since 2001, he has taken ongoing continuing education courses at the UCLA Dental School, including many in cosmetic dentistry. Dr. Corcoran has been a staff member of the Vail Valley Medical Center for over 30 years ; sponsors a free day of dentistry every October providing free dental care to the local community.  This year, the Medical Center honored him with a special recognition being a leader in the community; for his steadfast commitment to his patients. It is the first time this honor was given to a dentist in the Medical Centers 50 year history.  Dr. Corcoran looks forward to your visit ; to showing you how exceptional dentistry can improve your life.

Image credit:

Tagged | Leave a comment
%d bloggers like this: