Jen

https://gts.phillipsuk.org/@jetlagjen

Formerly [@JetlagJen](https://geekdom.social/@JetlagJen )

Queer disabled mum of a queer neurodivergent family.

Likes games, the planet, equalitea, general geekery.

Doesn't like TERFs, SWERFs, Nazis, and other bigots.

Profile pic: an old Space Invaders game, only it's a cake and the aliens are sweets.

Banner: winter trees, bare of leaves, silhouetted against a watery sunrise of blue-grey and pink.

Public Key

npub1kefuh62eeq2h0wtnp70wlhlu5g6dq8j8fwqum0wtmycr8wpstv5s7ptpuk

NIP-05 Address

jetlagjen_at_gts.phillipsuk.org@momostr.pink

Profile Code

nprofile1qqstv57ta9vus9thh9esl8h0ml72ydxsrer5hqwdhh9ajvpnhqc9k2gpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsnuksad

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1kefuh62eeq2h0wtnp70wlhlu5g6dq8j8fwqum0wtmycr8wpstv5s7ptpuk

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-04-21 06:17:09 UTC

- reply

yes, absolutely.
Seatbelts, smoking, drink driving... Many behaviours and attitudes have been changed for the better by regulation and public information. But we must get the right regulation in the right place and enforce it appropriately - people can only wear seatbelts if they're fitted as standard.

2026-04-21 05:59:27 UTC

- reply

that makes a lot of sense.
But none of the smoking related measures have required all adult customers to hand over copies of their ID to shady, unregulated companies who cannot be trusted not to store, leak or sell it. The proposed age gating is not analogous to flashing a card at a human staff member who promptly forgets it entirely.
Now, if there were regulations limiting the addictive elements, filtering out actually harmful content, banning invasive advertising (of or on platforms), etc, then maybe we could reduce harms to everyone.

2026-04-05 14:39:04 UTC

- reply

I've had similar thoughts in a desperate attempt to find a silver lining to the awful situation and evil acts.
Unfortunately, I always end up wondering how much general environmental damage is being done by all the planes and explosions releasing enormous amounts of pollution. How much will this war accelerate global environmental collapse? Will any acceleration of green transition balance that?
In lieu of any answers, I have simply concluded that it is one more reason to do everything we can.

2026-04-04 08:30:16 UTC

- reply

I'd ask the construction industry.
They've gone from having a reputation for street harassment to being a pretty reasonable employer of women. I don't really know what they've done, but it seems to have worked. Perhaps their path can be a model for other parts of society?

2026-04-02 07:11:10 UTC

- reply

also 6% techbro, and also because some industries need to die.
The techbros and I disagree on how that should happen and what should replace them.

2026-04-01 09:03:53 UTC

- reply

almost every job I've ever had required me to learn new specialist software. It's just a standard facet of modern work.
So expecting people to learn things like LibreOffice or Vivaldi or whatever really isn't that big a deal. Moving to a user-friendly Linux isn't a bigger jump than moving between major versions of Windows.
The biggest barrier is fear and attitude.

2026-03-22 13:05:42 UTC

- reply

I'm guess you're aware of the recent Medact briefing?
https://www.medact.org/2026/resources/briefings/briefing-palantir-fdp/
@npub10eu…78kz @npub12pw…zvxn

2026-03-22 12:19:50 UTC

- reply

I can't remember where I first heard it, but this article includes a quote from Greater Manchester that none of Palantir's products "... exceed the NHS Greater Manchester local capability."
https://democracyforsale.substack.com/p/palantirs-nhs-data-platform-rejected-hospitals

2026-03-22 10:26:24 UTC

- reply

it offers solutions that *appear* to be working and workable.
Top management buying their marketing does not mean that front line users get anything useful or usable. There have been quite a few reports of trusts being unable to make it work, or just not implementing it at all because it offers them nothing useful.

2026-03-21 10:32:10 UTC

- reply

everyone should be offered tea and biscuits.
And I mean everyone. A nice cup of tea and a sit down can do wonders to restore one's calm and see the people you share it with as *people*.

2026-03-11 09:58:21 UTC

- reply

I've had people buy me things with cheese in when I asked for "something vegan," also because they were in the same freezer.
In both of our examples the accident comes with bigger and scarier risks than accidentally eating a plant does.

2026-03-08 10:57:29 UTC

- reply

if AI were more attuned to the needs of women and girls it wouldn't exist in its current form.
Everything about how generative AI has been built, trained, and forced into everything is founded on the idea that consent isn't important. Which is also fundamental to almost all the problems women and girls face in society.

2026-03-07 09:08:14 UTC

- reply

the fundamental reason we're failing to tackle the obesity crisis is that *obesity* is not the problem.
Obesity itself is a symptom of a whole host of so-called lifestyle choices that people realistically have little control over. Stress, lack of exercise, junk food, etc all contribute to obesity and to all the things obesity is blamed for. We cannot improve health by focusing on one symptom that is easy to measure, especially when it makes the entire conversation one of "personal responsibility." That's just a fancy way of saying victim blaming. We know that shame doesn't work, that 95% of diets fail longterm, and that yoyo dieting is more damaging to health than just staying fat.
People don't have sedentary lifestyles, they're stuck in deadend jobs that leave little time or energy for anything else.
People don't choose an unhealthy diet, they eat what they can afford and access to survive.
People don't take on stress for fun, they're living through a never ending omnicrisis.
So he's right that weight loss drugs aren't the answer, but he's still asking the wrong question!

2026-02-23 13:58:53 UTC

- reply

gong farmers.
Whether it's composted, or flushed, or used in chemical processes, or whatever - someone needs to deal with the waste!

2026-02-20 18:44:34 UTC

- reply

my autistic son is hoping to go this September. He's got offers.
Do you have any tips?

2026-02-20 11:45:21 UTC

- reply

there is (or was) a third option: muddling along.
That option has effectively been neutralised by decades of pushing an agenda of conformity to being Good Service Workers.
Schools have become sausage factories, with laser-focus on exam results to the detriment of all else. They have harshly-enforced rules of conformity and control. Core subjects (science, maths, English) are valued far above arts, humanities, or vocational subjects. All assessment is all-or-nothing exams. Trade training has diminished. On-the-job training has all but vanished.
Meanwhile, factory jobs have evaporated. "And Sons" - style family businesses are few and far between. Offices are all open-plan. Everything is measured against metrics and Key Performance Indicators that have no flexibility for different skills or approaches. Funding for basically everything that supports families with whatever struggles has been cut to the bone. Job-for-life no longer exists, with many more people having to move away from their support circles for work.
It's all huge amounts of pressure on families - especially as many SEN conditions have a genetic element, so a struggling autistic kid is likely to have an (undiagnosed) struggling autistic parent. Many who may have just muddled along previously are now struggling, or even failing, to cope.

2026-02-20 10:34:58 UTC

- reply

yes, it's exactly the same silo issue and false economies.
One of the reasons SEN spending is so high is because of budget cuts in mainstream, making it less and less accommodating. More kids struggle more, so more parents fight tooth and nail for official support, which then costs more.
See also lack of social care spending costing the NHS a fortune. Or reducing support for disabled people to get accommodations at work leading to a bigger benefits bill. Or failure to invest in public transport meaning more money spent on building and repairing roads (and dealing with RTAs). And on. And on. And Ariston.
I really wish *someone* would just institute a rule where any public budget can be credited with (a percentage of?) money saved in other public budgets by sensible, holistic thinking in their spending!

2026-02-20 07:30:39 UTC

- reply

moving to secondary school is already a cliff edge for SEN kids.
Firstly, you've got to find a secondary school that can provide appropriate support. Then you've got to get your kid into it. Then the fight starts.
Whatever support you managed to persuade the primary school to put in place evaporates overnight. Even with EHCP, you have to fight for everything to be put in place anew.
Without the legal documents to support you, you have to prove all over again that your child needs support. Between a "new start", huge pressure to conform (ie, pretend everything is fine, at enormous physical and psychological cost), and large pupil numbers with low engagement time, parents are frequently told there's "no evidence" of the child's needs. Then starts the often years-long evidence gathering process that could be done in a week if staff took parent concerns seriously.
And all this against a backdrop of vastly increased complexity and pressure on the child, from overwhelming crowds, to silent corridors, to busy timetables, to having a dozen teachers to please, to getting detention for forgetting a pen.
Really, it is a testament to the determination (and desperation) of parents that any children get any support at second school.

2026-01-16 07:55:20 UTC

- reply

sounds like a good step towards mitigating a lot of current struggles, even if it doesn't address the underlying problems.
Families used to be encouraged to have savings to deal with unexpected expenses. But the squeeze of costs going up and wages stagnating makes that very difficult. The structure of UC being reduced if you're frugal enough to accumulate more than £6,000 really doesn't encourage saving. That figure hasn't increased for years, but the number of people subject to it is.

2026-01-07 07:25:32 UTC

- reply

sounds about right.
The NHS (like most organisations) suffers from "one size fits all" thinking. They have a default, standard way of doing things, and struggle to step outside that.
There are various accessibility schemes and such, but they tend to be bolt-on, rather than embedded. Which means implementation is patchy at best as it relies on additional equipment, resources, training, etc.

2026-01-02 07:40:19 UTC

- reply

"...those spikes were at six years old, eight years old and then 12 years old."
Those spikes were shortly after transition into the next stage of education - Year 1, KS2/Juniors, secondary. That can't be a coincidence, surely?
What's going on there is probably a complex mix of fresh eyes seeing what's happening, reduced tolerance of acting out, and increased pressure on the child to perform and conform. Transitions to the next level of schooling will likely both exacerbate and highlight existing problems.

2025-12-29 09:17:23 UTC

- reply

as a parent to teens (who also fall into other minority groups) I am getting increasingly tired of this government trying to control how I raise them.
I'm doing my best, with what I have, for the specific individuals in my care. The government haven't a clue what that actually looks like or why, but they keep trying to interfere and constrain. And they keep telling me it's for my children's welfare when I can see the blatant direct damage.

2025-12-10 07:07:18 UTC

- reply

the other day I was reading a bit about Great British Railways.
It looks like they're transitioning from a disjointed, privatised mess, to a nationalised (but arms-length) integrated system within the space of a parliament. No doubt there will be delays and issues and accusations, but the overall direction of travel seems positive and a good pace.
So what makes railways so different from water, electricity, broadband, NHS, and a host of other beleaguered national infrastructures? I know that the structure of the rail privatisation (contracts on which extentions can be refused) helps, but that can't be the whole picture. Do the railways just lack the lobbyists?

2025-12-06 10:15:50 UTC

- reply

I find this comment interesting:
"As a society we seem to have forgotten that life can be tough - a broken heart or grief is painful and normal, and we have to learn to cope."
It's not wrong, as such. But how do people get through those difficult experiences when community is so very fractured? Far too many adults do not have good support networks - few friends, family far away, and too little time, money or headspace to process anything... If they don't have the support in their daily lives, they're going to seek it elsewhere.

2025-12-02 21:55:31 UTC

- reply

it isn't. People are wrong.
Nuclear energy doesn't meet the basic criteria inherent in the word "renewable", because when it uses its input, that input gets used up, turning it into waste.
It is, however, low carbon, and low emission (at time of energy production). Some people think that makes it "green" and they don't understand that green and renewable are not synonyms.

2025-11-27 07:49:53 UTC

- reply

from the perspective of a SEND parent, it feels very much like the government wants to force all kids into the conformity of mainstream education, regardless of whether that's good for the children.
They're messing about with SEND support with, as you point out, no hint as to their actual vision for where they're going. At the same time, they're introducing new rules to make home education more difficult (and more rigid in its requirements), while home ed rates are going up because SEND kids are being failed by the rigidity of school. Against a background of PIP reforms that are basically attempts at backdoor cuts, this does not give me confidence in anything good coming from reforms around support of people with disabilities.
We've had a decade of the Tories pushing for more authoritarian schooling, with fines for absence, shifting all assessment to exams, and encouraging policies like phone bans and quiet corridors. This is another field in which the Labour promise of "change" is ringing hollow.

2025-11-22 08:19:13 UTC

- reply

one of the things that bugs me about "legitimate concerns" is the implication that any concerns on the other side of the argument are somehow not legitimate.

2025-11-15 09:13:40 UTC

- reply

thus pushing more people into the ridiculous scenario of simultaneously paying income tax and claiming UC, at an effective marginal rate of 64%
You earn an extra tenner, £2 is taken as tax. Then 55% of what's left is removed from the UC, which is another £4.40. So your actual cash that month is only £3.60 more than if you hadn't earned that tenner.
If I've done my sums right, an extra hour at minimum wage nets you a pathetic £4.40, which might not pay the bus fare home.
And then they wonder why people aren't interested in doing more work.

2025-10-28 07:44:20 UTC

- reply

I've said for a while that more data doesn't mean better results, it just means more work for overstretched and underfunded people and systems. That always leads to more mistakes.

2025-10-27 22:26:30 UTC

- reply

when I was 14, I looked at my GCSEs and figured out that if I coasted for two years, I'd probably get a similar set of results to what I could manage if I worked damned hard. So I coasted.
If I could figure out this input/output relationship and adjust my input accordingly at 14, I'm damned sure fully grown adults up and down the country can do the same re "work ethic" and pay.
It doesn't help that for some time, the only route to better salary is moving jobs - promotion just isn't a thing for most people, so there's no point working extra hard to get one.

2025-10-19 13:32:21 UTC

- reply

there are so many people I could mention. But, you know, that's why I follow them. So if anyone wants to look through that list, they're all awesome people.
One thing I love about the fediverse is the amount of tonic masculinity just everywhere. I'd like to mention several very different examples:
@npub12pw…zvxn, for being clued-up, clever and kind.
[@ifixcoinops](https://retro.social/@ifixcoinops ), for evolving train-of-thought threads that are always a wild ride.
[@bright_helpings](https://mspsocial.net/@bright_helpings ), for humility, humanity, and general dad vibes.

2025-10-19 09:43:53 UTC

- reply

I think a lot of people have been watching and waiting: who would be leading GPEW and how? What is this new Corbyn/Sultana thing going to be? What stance will either take on issues like trans rights and inequality?
We have very clear answers to all of those, now. And people are choosing strong, trans-positive, anticapitalist, people-first, Polanski-led Greens over the weak, unclear, utterly depressing shambles Your Party has been so far.

2025-10-09 05:50:42 UTC

- reply

a natural consequence of spin and soundbites, making parties seem more like a product than a principle?

2025-10-09 05:41:31 UTC

- reply

I get the impression that party membership is more volatile than it used to be. I can't work out whether that's a good thing or not.
On the one hand, people making active decisions about their support for parties suggests a more engaged populous. On the other, perhaps reduced loyalty is because people feel generally let down. Maybe it's just a factor of online management making it easier to join or leave. My gut is telling me it's a mix of three.

2025-10-01 07:10:54 UTC

- reply

weird how it has never worked yet also historically consistently comes out near the top of any ranking against similar countries (less so over the last 5 - 10 years - a significantly smaller and more recent drop-off than you suggest). The attached chart is based on several data sources from 2011 - 2013 and shows the UK as overall 1st among 11 comparable countries.
Also strange how long waiting lists are given as evidence for how it can't work, when 15 years ago there were stringent targets that were routinely met in 95% of cases, including:
- max 4 hour wait in A&E
- max 2 weeks referal-to-treatment time for cancer
- max 2 days to get a GP appointment
Building databases to track these was my day job then, so RTT figures were very familiar. I also personally remember getting a same day GP appointment regularly when my teenage sons were little - a far cry from current experiences of maybe getting one in a couple of weeks.
It seems to me that perhaps it is not the NHS in concept that cannot work, but its current iteration. I'm not saying that's easy to fix, or that money alone would do it. But it's patently untrue that it cannot work, because it definitely has and was just 15 years ago.
https://gts.phillipsuk.org/fileserver/01NPF4P5NKS0D1MQWW0P2XKD8E/attachment/original/01K6F8E9MCVJCBXND5MSG8RHN2.png

2025-09-28 22:02:22 UTC

- reply

my kids' primary school (in Stoke-on-Trent) had a library when the oldest started, then for reasons I've forgotten got rid of it. It might have been to do with needing to use the space as classroom. Several years later, they set up a new library, which is just a corner of the hall with a few bookshelves. Not very impressive, but better than nothing, and they did also start to run a whole bunch of schemes to encourage reading.

2025-09-20 18:14:29 UTC

- reply

I'm glad you're doing a combined fundraiser. I can't spare enough to give a sensible amount to everyone on your list. Picking who does and doesn't get my few pounds was difficult. Donating to a shared pot was easy.

2025-09-19 06:06:06 UTC

- reply

I wonder how much of the leniency is because, "oh, but he's such a good doctor! We can't afford to lose him."
No, no he isn't. But a system close to collapse sure encourages that line of thought.

2025-09-07 14:16:09 UTC

- reply

if your ultimate goal is actually to run the country for the benefit of the majority of people, yes.
The government have stated they aim to reduce the benefits bill. There are quick, easy ways to do that without penalising or stigmatising people. The fact that they're choosing not to do those things suggests to me that reducing the bill is not the point, regardless of whether it's a good or necessary thing to do.

2025-09-07 13:22:01 UTC

- reply

I've said for a while that the quickest route to cutting the benefits bill is increasing minimum wage.
Every extra pound paid in wages to low-income families is 60p less in UC.

2025-09-05 13:43:43 UTC

- reply

she is (was) on the left compared to the rest of the cabinet. Granted, that's a taller than Ronnie Corbett competition.

2025-09-03 06:55:28 UTC

- reply

there are a lot of good points made in this article, but I take issue with its framing.
It states that children suffer "a sharp and *lasting* decline in wellbeing," and then talks only about the transition, not the ongoing 5-7 years spent in secondary schools. This is not an issue of them needing help across the jump up from Y6 to Y7. This is an issue of secondary schools being a fundamentally damaging place to be.
Suggesting that people just need help to survive a toxic environment is focusing entirely in the wrong place. But what should we expect from a culture which believes genuine work grievances can be resolved by occasionally buying the staff pizza?

2025-08-27 06:11:21 UTC

- reply

and the supposedly pro-work government want more AI in Britain.
If it's good at what people claim, then jobs will be lost. Labour tell us work is good, so this must be bad.
If it's bad at what people claim, it will be wasted investment and won't stimulate the sacred growth Labour currently worship. This will likely lead to businesses closing down and jobs being lost.
Either way, it looks like a bad thing to get too deep into. But FOMO and the near future of mates' bank balances matter far more than any stated aims.

2025-08-26 23:11:17 UTC

- reply

reducing the standard work week has a knock-on effect for part time workers, though.
16/40 is different to 16/32. So anyone working two day weeks should either have their hours cut by 1/5 on the same pay, or have their salary etc recalculated from 40% to 50%.
(I once had to fight HR on this very point when they changed full time from 40 to 35. We all got the recalculation in the end.)

2025-08-21 06:39:00 UTC

- reply

there is only one way to solve the issue of mass housing of asylum seekers: process their claims and clear the backlog.
But somehow that never seems to come into the conversation.

2025-08-20 13:21:20 UTC

- reply

holiday lets are a whole big complication. Would they also be considered house-hoarding?
On the one hand, they're more environmentally friendly than flying abroad, more practical than hotels if you have kids, dogs, or a large group, etc. But they push house prices up, block locals from living in them, and stand empty for weeks on end.
I think it's a different problem from home rental, but both need considered and rules written to encompass both.

2025-08-18 07:55:51 UTC

- reply

there's always an assumption of "wasted" costs, like people are twiddling their thumbs or doing work that doesn't need done. It's like red tape was dreamt up for no reason, and bureaucracy has no purpose. We've just forgotten what went wrong before.
I've seen many systems and organisations that do have waste, but it's never been as simple as too many people. It's almost always things like maintaining two systems because neither does everything necessary, or being too busy doing a thing to pass it on, or taking the long way round because the short way is blocked. There's also a lot of working around systems that were built to be sold to high-ups, rather than used by underlings, and a lot of avoiding processes that seem unnecessary just because they aren't understood.
You can't fix problems like that by cutting jobs.

2025-08-05 08:55:47 UTC

- reply

that all tallies with my experience of living in a low-income area.
It is well known and very evident from the way people talk that the only people in the area with disposable income are pensioners. The combination of triple-locked reliable income, no dependents, and relatively low housing costs (often one-bedroom council housing - the only kind not bought out) make a clear difference. They plan holidays, have lunch out, talk about hobby supplies they've bought, etc.
Everyone else is always on the lookout for ways to afford the demanded gadgets, cheap food, and cheap or free things to keep the kids busy - especially if the kids get fed. There is a constant tension in the air and they often just don't talk directly about money, like they can make the problems not exist. If they do, it's always either pride in a bargain or self-deprecating comments about being rubbish with money.

2025-07-30 07:23:02 UTC

- reply

there are laws, rights, systems and processes all set up to provide him dignity in life. They have failed.
Why should we have any faith that laws, rights, systems and processes set up to provide dignity in death won't also fail? Or will that appointment also take a year to come through and be bounced between different waiting lists?
Which brings us right back to needing to properly support health and social care so they can properly support us.

2025-07-30 07:03:14 UTC

- reply

this is exactly the kind of case that has me worried about assisted dying.
I really feel for this poor guy and completely understand why he would rather slip away than continue living like that. But if he got actual, useful, caring support, maybe he would feel differently about ending it.
Nothing in this story suggests coercion, or encouragement to die, or anything like that. But he's still being pushed to it by the (in)actions of other people.
We need a right to *live*.

2025-07-14 07:35:43 UTC

- reply

part of the problem is the pattern of rainfall.
We do get more rain, but it tends to come in fewer, more intense storms, instead of frequent drizzle. This doesn't top up reservoirs well, and it increases the chance of flash floods. This is also related to the overwhelm of drains and release of raw sewage. It's all made worse by the loss of peat bogs and forest, which slow the flow of rain so everything is dumped on low ground very quickly.
This by no means lets the water companies off the hook - these changing patterns have been evident for years and the water companies have avoided infrastructure investment instead of attempting to meet the challenge.

2025-07-09 08:08:02 UTC

- reply

personally, I think the real problem is too many cases being pushed into the justice system that should never be there.
Waving a placard or getting an abortion don't need prosecutions. Stealing food should never be necessary. PIP "fraud" doesn't need made an example of. Drug use needs treatment and support, not criminalisation.
You cut out all those cases that really aren't in the public interest, the workload across the whole system drops.

2025-07-07 07:38:37 UTC

- reply

I know many families who have been through the battle for special provision, and more who have pulled out of formal education entirely because of failure to provide suitable support.
Families have to put so much time and energy fighting for every tiny scrap of support. Every process takes literal years and frequently involves reviews, appeals, and tribunals. The support often just doesn't exist. By the time something suitable is found, the child is often so damaged by ongoing failures that it isn't suitable anymore.
Families are stretched to breaking point and don't have any fight left in them. In other words, they're excellent targets for government "savings".

2025-07-03 09:43:05 UTC

- reply

I look forward to supporting Action for Palestine, Palestine People's Front, People's Front of Palestine, Popular Front of Palestine any other organisation that opposes genocide.

2025-06-25 07:23:31 UTC

- reply

agreed on all points.
This also intersects with an increase in neurodivergent people claiming PIP. Work has become more stressful, less flexible (for the worker), and more constrained by conformity to narrow expectations. It has become especially difficult for neurodivergent people to sustain. While PIP is not an out-of-work benefit, losing earned income is a driver to review other options and can be the nudge needed to make it worth engaging with the assessment process.
Of course, more neurodivergent folk getting PIP is variously interpreted as over-diagnosis, bandwagoning, and a problem to put a stop to.

2025-06-25 06:15:39 UTC

- reply

I caught a snippet of something on the radio yesterday. Apparently 1000 people a day are being awarded PIP, which is unsustainable.
That's probably true, as far as it goes. But nobody seems interested in why so many people need it, or what can be done to prevent so many people becoming disabled.
People are frequently disabled by car crashes. Good public transport would make our roads safer.
Covid continues to be a mass disabling event. Masks and air filters being common would significantly reduce this, as well as relieving pressure on the NHS.
Many people are left severely disabled by strokes. I understand acute treatment is getting better so more people are surviving, but there isn't enough rehabilitation work to help them recover well.
The difficulties in getting a GP appointment and the lengths of NHS waiting lists have been talked about a lot. How many people are on PIP just because they have to wait years for their life-changing treatment? How many are being left permanently disabled by delays in care? Not an easy problem to solve, but definitely another part of the picture.
There must be a whole bunch of ways acquired disability can be prevented, most of them with extra benefits to individuals and society. But that doesn't even seem to form part of the conversation.

2025-06-24 10:57:22 UTC

- reply

the average caseload of social workers dealing with vulnerable children in Stoke-on-Trent has dropped from 22 to 17.3 in the past two years. That's roughly the same time span as reopening family hubs - not a coincidence, according to folks I know working in them. Early support without gatekeeping works.
https://www.stoke.gov.uk/news/article/1688/more_positive_news_on_vulnerable_children_as_social_worker_caseloads_lighten

2025-06-24 04:56:45 UTC

- reply

please add alt text. This is directly relevant to people who will be affected.
#alt4u
Text on a red background:
100 Labour MPs are opposing cuts for disabled people. What's wrong with the rest?

2025-06-23 14:08:13 UTC

- reply

there is no transgender movement. Nobody is asking you to support an abstract cause. There's just people who want to be allowed to be who they are.
Whether they've always known, or whether they've had a long period of self-discovery, they are who they are and we can accept it at face value. We don't need to know the trials they've been through to acknowledge where they are now. This is as true for gender as it is for any other aspect of who someone is.
Secondly, I've never seen, experienced, or even heard about a single significant problem caused by the fact trans folk exist. Every single time someone has pointed to something that might be, it has turned out to be because of transphobia, or because of something unrelated.
Finally, if there is broad expert consensus on something, I think you need to have a really good reason to disagree. There is broad expert consensus across psychologists, psychiatrists, endocrinologists, researchers, surgeons, and anybody who has spent time around trans people that trans women are women, trans men are men, and non-binary identities are real and valid. "I don't get it" is not a good argument against the weight of evidence they have gathered in papers, statistics and experience.
It's been shown over and over that trans people do far better in life when people just accept them for who they are. That alone should be enough for anyone. If it isn't, why not?

2025-06-20 06:04:24 UTC

- reply

so this time round there will be a different set of problems, that also conveniently funnel money to big business and fat cats at public expense with little regard for stated objectives?

2025-06-19 09:39:00 UTC

- reply

I'm so confused.
I'm trying to read up on what I'm voting on, but the numbers don't add up.
The boss gets a salary of £1.1mn, old rules say she could get a bonus of up to 100%, proposed new rules would allow a bonus up to 150%. That's a bonus of £1.7mn, total possible remuneration £2.8mn.
Where does the £7mn figure come from?

2025-06-17 08:08:56 UTC

- reply

I haven't had that email yet, but I'll watch out for it.

2025-06-17 06:30:27 UTC

- reply

Nationwide is currently in the process of giving all its members £100 profit share.
And that's on top of the £50 from earlier in the year and the £100 from last year.
It always scores highly in green banking lists, customer service ratings, etc.
It's taking over other financial institutions (most recently Virgin Money) and appears to be improving them.
While £7mn is definitely an obscene and eyewatering size of bonus, they can at least back up their claim of being different, and do actually have something to say about performance to be rewarded. That, at least, is refreshing.

2025-06-17 05:57:01 UTC

- reply

another example of how free market ideals don't apply when big business doesn't want them to.

2025-06-14 09:59:05 UTC

- reply

I'm a little sad it was accidental.
I thought "prevention of spending" was both insightful and witty.

2025-06-13 08:03:01 UTC

- reply

absolutely. I fully expect headroom will be close to zero, if not actually negative.
I was just wondering if anyone had put it together in black and white, in a digestible form.

2025-06-13 06:56:21 UTC

- reply

I wonder if anyone has sat down and worked out how the funding adds up, directly compared to the most basic legal requirements on councils? I know councils have to produce budgets, but I'm talking about a much simpler headline-only version that us mere mortals can understand.
This basic budgeting is usually the starting point for individuals who are struggling. It very clearly shows what headroom you have (or don't have).

2025-06-01 08:04:11 UTC

- reply

as I understand it, he failed to meet his stated aims, such as cutting costs.
But just because an aim is stated, doesn't mean it's real. Among people like him, it's likely to be an excuse to make it palatable enough to get away with what he really wants to do.

2025-05-29 09:41:35 UTC

- reply

formula should only be necessary for a very tiny percentage of families. Our screwed-up society makes breastfeeding or chestfeeding incredibly difficult, and then leaves the parents with the guilt and blame for "failing".
Around 95% of birthing parents can successfully feed their babies without artificial milks, if given appropriate support. That would require significant social changes, all of which would be beneficial in many ways, as they're mostly about valuing and supporting people.
Against that backdrop, a decent milk donation system would provide for most of the rest, leaving only those infants with very specific medical issues.
While we're building that society (which I admit is a big ask, but we should still try), formula should be on prescription. It makes it free for those who need it (through medical need or through being failed by poor support or wider social pressures), avoids the entire "follow-on" milk con, and negates the expensive marketing which artificially inflates the costs.
(As someone who has done more baby feeding support training than most midwives and health visitors, I've looked at and thought about it a lot. The entire artificial milk market was created and is sustained artificially.)

2025-05-26 12:00:08 UTC

- reply

perhaps. I haven't run the numbers or anything.
I'm just thinking out loud potential steps that might be politically palatable while still making a teensy but of progress. I would *love* to see them actually see it for the essential infrastructure it is and make it nationalised and free at point of use, but we both know the current government doesn't like to do investment in the public good.

2025-05-26 08:56:36 UTC

- reply

thinking more about this, I wonder how the sums would fall out if they froze the headline prices and increased only the cheapest possible advance prices and only by inflation?
It would automatically streamline the pricing as the cheapest fares catch up with the nearly-cheapest (taking the same train an hour later shouldn't randomly cost £8.76 more), while nobody is hit with a real-terms increase.

2025-05-26 08:30:31 UTC

- reply

what they could do is freeze prices.
No price rises for several years, while they improve the service in various ways. More & better service should in itself increase passenger numbers and therefore revenue, hopefully balancing any inflation-related costs increases. Keep them frozen long enough and they become cheap.

2025-05-26 08:22:34 UTC

- reply

we're going on the train tomorrow.
On-the-day price would be £220.
We booked a couple of weeks ago for £90-odd, including the cost of a 3 year disabled person's rail card.
It took three goes (and two websites), each with lots of tweaking, to work through the options to find that price.

2025-05-25 12:44:55 UTC

- reply

we start by making more people aware.
We vote, we talk, we call out lies, we sign petitions, we support any and all progress, we protest in every way we can, we pour sand in the gears, we cheerlead and champion everyone trying to do the same.
Everyone has a different way to fight, a different tolerance for risk. I have neither the stomach nor the ability for most direct action, but I support those who do.
@npub1r7q…gz68 @npub12pw…zvxn

2025-05-25 10:30:47 UTC

- reply

most people have never installed an operating system.
I dare say most don't even know what an OS is.
The first stage is always "here, choose a distro from this enormous list!" And then people wonder why so many don't get past that point.

2025-05-25 08:49:46 UTC

- reply

the purpose of a system is what it does.
That is, if a system has an effect other than the stated one, and whoever has the power to fix it doesn't, then the actual effect must be desired.
For example, the stated purpose of the PIP application process is to enable those who have disabilities to access financial support. But the reality is that the form puts people off, the assessment diminishes and disregards everything it can, and the mandatory reconsideration process delays things. The whole system blocks support for many, many people. This has been the case since its creation and successive governments have not changed it. Therefore, the purpose is to act as a block to prevent people from accessing support.
So, yes, the violence is the point.
I don't believe our nice little debates will change anything. I do believe they can help us arm each other with understanding and solidarity so that we can call out the lies more easily, and take our action and activism further in whatever ways we can.

2025-05-25 08:38:16 UTC

- reply

a few possible scenarios that I, personally, have encountered:
1. It's a group chat including people who aren't there, possibly also offering directions so they can join.
2. They're looking at the menu, because of course that has to be online now.
3. They're neurodivergent and need to decompress between bouts of socialising.
4. They're playing a game together.
5. They've fallen out and are taking a break from each other so they can sort it out.
6. They've had a very active few hours and need to switch off for a bit now they're sitting down.
7. They're looking up things to do when their meal is finished.
8. They're checking in on a friend who is going through a major life event.
9. They're looking up something that one of them mentioned so they can discuss it among the group.
In all cases, try mentally replacing the phones with books, newspapers, or other printed media. Does it still look like a problem?
All too often, people assume that whatever is going on on the screen has little value purely because it's on a screen. The assumption is that it *must* be time-wasting, attention-draining tripe. That isn't always the case.

2025-05-24 11:29:39 UTC

- reply

yes, that's a fascinating insight.
Here in the UK, we have lost the church-as-social-hub phenomenon. There are lots of things attempting to fill the gap, but they're fragmented.

2025-05-24 09:43:12 UTC

- reply

I agree that it's not the same, but I'll take online over not at all every time.
My closest friends live in different cities. Online contact allows me to maintain the friendship enough to arrange getting together physically.
Case Study 1: this summer, we're going away with my old uni friend and his family. The ongoing connection and practical arrangements all happen online.
Case Study 2: we do a video call with another couple of friends at least once a month. Through this, we also arrange visits usually twice a year. Without the internet, we probably would have drifted apart.
I'm not saying it's all rosey, but we must acknowledge the benefits, and also the other difficulties of the modern world. Falling into "all fields round 'ere" thinking is blinkered and helps nobody.

2025-05-24 09:31:37 UTC

- reply

yep, but even dog walking is blocked from anyone stuck in rented accomodation with a landlord that won't allow pets.

2025-05-24 09:05:01 UTC

- reply

a lot of things have changed.
We no longer live in the same street for generations, so we no longer have that existing social network to grow into. Many of us have to build it from scratch, multiple times over.
The social culture has changed significantly. Locally, there used to be hatches on every pub. Mum and dad could socialise inside, while all the kids hung about together outside and bought pop and sweets from the hatch. This, and other family-centred social devices, no longer exist. It is no longer socially acceptable to let your kids roam the streets until the streetlights come on, meaning parents have to be On Duty a lot more, even supervising their kids at the park where previous generations would have just waved them off.
Work is now less stable, meaning people end up moving jobs more frequently. This means it's much more difficult for colleagues to become friends. It also often ends up with longer commutes, sapping time and energy.
If they move house for work, it disrupts existing friendships and support networks. Without them, it's far more difficult to share childcare duties, so also more difficult to do other things.
It's far more common now for families to either be single-parent or have both parents in work. This leads to evenings and weekends used up with housework, and less time for socialising.
Housing is also unstable. Fewer people can buy, more are stuck in private rent, and that means having to move often. You can't get to know people in your street if it isn't your street for more than six months.
The gig economy makes predicting work patterns impossible, and therefore planning free time activities is impossible. It also means nobody ever knows when you're available, so dropping round doesn't happen.
Not all of these affect all people. But some selection of them affects enough of us. The old trope of chatting over the garden fence just doesn't work against that backdrop.

2025-05-24 08:21:19 UTC

- reply

on the flip side, how many retreat to phones because real-world socialising is so difficult?
I'd love to catch up with friends more often, but between disabilities, work, kids, moving to different parts of the country, traffic and public transport being awful, the ongoing pandemic, and generally surviving in this world, it's incredibly difficult to actually make that happen. For so, so many people, it's online or not at all.

2025-05-21 07:17:00 UTC

- reply

reducing funding for vulnerable people always increases costs elsewhere.
Pensioners can't afford heating? That's more hospital trips.
Disabled folk can't afford various life-enabling adjustments? That's more jobs lost, so more unemployment benefits.
People can't afford to eat? That's more illness to treat, and more shoplifting to prosecute.
People are so desperate they self-medicate? That's more drug use to manage.
People can't get dedicated services to help them off drugs? That's more police intervention.
Somehow, politicians just can never see the false in the economies they claim. It's that lack of joined-up thinking again.

2025-05-13 06:13:58 UTC

- reply

good! Working extra hours for no extra pay has become far too normalised.
I've also known too many people say "oh, but I don't mind." Not entirely the point when it's making it hard for anyone who does mind to say no to unpaid overtime.

2025-05-12 10:21:35 UTC

- reply

they don't need to be "better than Reform," though.
There's flow of voters in all directions, there always is. But a good number of Tories are now voting Reform, while a good number of Labour voters are *not voting*. "Less bad than the other lot" is not getting people to the polling station for anyone.

2025-05-12 07:59:40 UTC

- reply

the Green messaging here is basically nonexistent, which is thoroughly frustrating.
I keep hearing from the regional party that they need people to go leafleting, which I physically cannot do. I don't here from the local party at all.
I *want* to get involved. I *want* to go to the odd meeting, do a bit of background admin, maybe. But there doesn't seem to be anything happening that I can actually get involved with. If there is, they're not sharing it anywhere I can hear about it.
We would very much benefit, up and down the country, from the Greens being more visible. We would benefit *here* from them being visible at all. The main reason my council didn't go Reform is because we didn't happen to have elections this time. Something needs to change before the next one.