Happy Birthday, NHS...From a Very Grateful User Sharing Your Moment

The NHS is celebrating 60 years this year, and so am I. We were both born in 1948, one of the most amazing years in history when some significant world events took place. We merged together when I joined it as a trainee nurse between 1967 and 1969. I came to Britain to be a nurse in Kings Lynn General hospital and left partly because of racism and partly through discovering that I wanted to teach instead. I had mixed feelings of my time spent in it, but I also have friends who benefited from it and have enjoyed a good life from the qualifications they got.

I will not be one of those who will ever knock the National Health Service. I have travelled to a few countries and I have yet to see a national FREE health service that is working so well for the population. The NHS could always be better, as nothing can ever be perfect. There will always be room for improvement. But at 60 years old, this Grand Dame is doing just fine.

I have been a Type 2 diabetic for nearly 10 years now. Every single tablet I have taken has been free of charge, and there were years when I was on 10 tablets daily, 3650 each year. They all had to be paid for, but, thankfully, not by me. Then there are the regular check ups, attendance at diabetic clinics, my feet to be checked annually and my eyes to be checked regularly, and still not a penny from me.

Then 18 months ago the unthinkable happened. My body began rejecting every medication I was given, including insulin, and my world fell in. I was so ill some days, it was unbelievable. And the NHS came into its own during that time. Once a reluctant doctor realised that I was like no one he had treated, he swung into action. I was prescribed six further drugs which had little effect. They all had to be paid for too. But I had no worries about that. I could concentrate on getting well. I didn't have to fret, like my American friends, about having health insurance. Still no change in me as the months rolled by. Then I was referred to a consultant who was very sympathetic when she held my hand and said: "We have one more medication to try and, if that doesn't work, sadly we have nothing currently to help you because you are unusual."

Gulp. It sounded like a death sentence. Just for once I wanted to be like everyone else. I gritted my teeth in determination.

The new injections were designed to stimulate my pancreas to produce its own insulin. The first trial month was fraught with worry. The results were inconclusive (assessed by another consultant) so I was asked whether I wished to continue. I closed my eyes and refused to think of the horrible side-effects I had experienced, trying to block out how low they made me feel, while I concentrated on the potential for making me better. I heard my voice from a distance saying, Yes, I would like to continue.

I just got the good news, barely another month later, that I am definitely on the mend. My progress was 'very good'. I even lost 5 lbs in weight too. Clearly not out of the woods yet, but I can start to smile again, thanks to the NHS.

I came out of the hospital, sat in my car, cried a little bit with gratitude, and pondered where except Britain could I have two consultants, two doctors and one nurse working closely with me to find a solution, all trying to give me the best health care possible and absolutely free of charge. Nowhere else on earth, I decided, as I dried my tears, smiled broadly and headed home. It was good to be alive and feeling valued.

A Very Happy Birthday, NHS. May you see many, many more! :o)

From an incredibly grateful fan.

Can Pupils Learn 'Britishness'?

The short answer is: No, they can't.

You have to 'feel' something about a country to really appreciate it, and that takes time. One can learn the history of it, learn about the lifestyle, the crime, the values, but one can only appreciate what the country truly represents by being part of it for a while. We have to feel comfortable about that particular country, being in alignment with its aims, values and mores, before we can truly feel a part of it and what it represents for us. Otherwise one simply pays lip service to an ideal while feeling exactly the same. Worst still, one will also be caught in a kind of limiting limbo, while hankering after 'home'.

Another important element is the whole concept of 'Britishness'. With its obvious fluidity and continually changing mores, who defines it for whom? Politicians, civil servants, sociologists? What do we leave out of those lessons and what becomes acceptable? Reggae is now an embedded part of the British culture, despite its Jamaican heritage. Will that be part of any information, question or discussion provided, or will it be some outmoded monocultural interpretation of the essence of Britishness? And what about the elements of Britishness that will not make it to the lessons but which are regarded as equally integral to those who adhere to them and value them?

This is a cultural minefield, the effect of an evolving multicultural society, that only very courageous people would dare to tread.

Personal Experience
On a personal note, it took me 10 years after arriving in Britain 40 years ago to actually 'feel' British. Until then, I strongly resisted getting a British passport, despite my ex-husband's constant encouragement, hankering back to Jamaica at every opportunity, with strong loyalties to match. I was the epitome of Lord Tebbit's yardstick for measuring British loyalty. I certainly felt little loyalty to Britain because, during those early years, the only cricket team I ever wanted to win was that of the West Indies!

The main effect of this split loyalty was that every time my British Sikh husband and I travelled anywhere with our family, he and the children would be whisked off to the fast queue while I was held back for a good old search for any ganga I was perceived to have, the dreaded 'weed' I might have carried back with me! Didn't matter that his suitcase could have been full of it too as he passed without scrutiny. I was Jamaican so I would be guilty. I soon learnt to give him all the extra bottles of rum we had that would have attracted attention! Being searched with little respect was so regular as to be ad nauseam. Having a Jamaican passport condemned me to the ritual of immigration racism and handy stereotype which I felt powerless to change. I certainly didn't feel 'British' when I was clearly excluded and being treated differently.

Then one morning 10 years later, I just didn't wish to be Jamaican anymore. I wanted a British passport. I had gradually realised, on subsequent visits back to the homeland, that I had little in common with the folks back 'home'. My perspectives had changed dramatically, yet with a slow realisation. I thought like a Brit and did things like a Brit. Fellow Jamaicans used to point at us in some mirth noting how we 'acted funny'. My children and immediate family also lived in Britain and I felt I truly 'belonged'. Until that Eureka moment of acceptance, that feeling of being at one with one's homeland, any talk of teaching 'Britishness' is sheer pie in the sky.

Today I adore Britain, I enjoy living here, and certainly wouldn't live anywhere else. Yet it took 10 years to have such a contented feeling of confidence and belonging in order to leave Jamaica behind. Sadly, many people never make that transition, depending on their experience. If it is negative, and they feel excluded, they tend to hanker forever after the perfect 'home' they left behind, one that would have been moving on with time, in reality, but had fossilised in their heads in an idealistic way - a situation that tends to have a tragic effect on their children's sense of self, identity and belonging too.

Pupils can learn what a narrow perspective of being 'British' is all about, from a dubious monocultural perspective, but they can never learn what it is to be truly British in the essential emotional terms of appreciation and love in that superficial process. Only time can teach them that. Nothing else.

Do we really need a Black History Month?

As one who has spent the last 14 years promoting multiculturalism from the rooftops in the UK, through the only book on the subject and two annual national diversity awards, I have been pretty saddened this year to hear government ministers and others trumpeting that 'multiculturalism isn't working' or we 'cannot celebrate diversity because it encourages difference' and keeps us separate. But both statements are based upon ignorance and fear which does not really help a diverse community to move forward together.

There is nothing wrong with celebrating diversity or encouraging multiculturalism. What has been terribly wrong is a marked absence of respect on both sides of the cultural divide which makes appreciation difficult. The word 'respect' is glibly shouted by everyone in times of crisis, but it seems to be only in connection with our own needs and viewpoint and very little to do with others. We all seek respect, we feel we are denied it, we accuse each other of not giving it. But in reality, we are simply in love with the idea of the word itself, not its implementation. This could be because we really do not understand the meaning of this important word. Let's take some glaring examples of disrespect.

Origins of Disrespect

1. Exclusive labels: October has a special significance for minorities. As usual, it is Black History Month to celebrate Black heritage and culture. This is not just a showcase but an educational opportunity for the White majority to learn about their minority neighbours. It also empowers Black people to take pride in their identity and thus a wholesome cause for celebration. There are also many pointedly 'Black', 'Asian' or 'Muslim' organisations which were created to encourage a positive identity and to guard against isolation, primarily because of their exclusion from the mainstream. Nothing wrong with that at all. However, how would members of minority groups feel if they suddenly saw signs and promotion for a 'White History Month', 'White Women Forum', the 'White Professional Association' or the 'White Entrepreneurs Club', labels which are clearly racist and exclusive? They would rightfully be up in arms. Where is the sensitivity (respect again) for the pointedly White exclusion in those labels? Yet, in a diverse society, such cultural sensitivities are very important if we are to learn about, value, and appreciate one another.

2. Negative media coverage. Black History Month emerged because of a lack of positive attention to minorities (respect again!) by the media. Minorities in Britain are virtually invisible in every aspect of life except crime. We hear about them ad nauseam in relation to terrorism, guns, gangs and street crime but hardly in any other dimension. The only time you hear about minorities is when something negative is being reported. Black History Month was introduced to counteract that media exclusion, to give much needed positivity and visibility. Yet, there should be no need for a Black History month at all because there is just a flurry of activities in October (and February in the USA), a month saturated with events where everyone tries to be heard, to be significant and valued, and then nothing else for the other 11 months. Like tragic cuckoos, they coo loudly once, then go back inside their clocks for another year. What minorities need is to be treated ordinarily, like the majority community, with balance and value.

For example, the focus on celebrities is pervasive in our society. But where are the minority celebrities and achievers? The ones well known in their communities but are ignored by the mainstream press? Where are the minority guests on chat shows? On discussion panels? On entertainment programmes? Where are the minority writers to give alternative viewpoints? Such an exclusive and racist approach keeps minorities in the public eye as extraordinary and non-contributing beings who are simply taking from society. It uses them in situations that bolster national fear (immigration and crime) while ignoring the vast majority of law abiding, legal citizens quietly playing their part in their communities. Minorities are also used in a cynical way to show national pride abroad, as with the Olympics when multculturalism was suddenly cool and essential, but are largely excluded from the preparations, the promotion and the service contracts.



Lack of Recognition
3. Today I visited the website of a top national newspaper and, of its 24 writers paraded for the public, only one was Black. I won't even mention television and radio because commercial radio, in particular, is dismal when it comes to representation of their diverse audience among radio staff. Is it any wonder that the views in the media are so skewed against minorities when there is a basic lack of recognition for them, with hardly anyone speaking with any cultural knowledge? That is why there is very little sensitivity (respect again) to minority views and feelings. Being on the negative end of any reporting, they are fair game for people seeking sensational headlines without any responsibility for the divisive consquences of their actions. The BBC has been recently accused of racism by a prominent writer in 21st century Britain. That is very sad today. The real worry is that if the BBC is still lagging behind in its own objectives, a service which is supposed to be serving, and representing, the whole community, what can one expect of lesser organisations?

Diversity and multiculturalism can work harmoniously when all parties are prepared to compromise, and accord each other respect. We cannot simply demand respect for ourselves while giving none because no country can thrive with a divided nation. If we really love our country, we strive together to make it a great place to live. However, we cannot respect what we don't understand or appreciate.

Starting from that base, Black History Month should be scrapped and minority heritage and culture celebrated all year round, just like that of the White majority, but under a diversity label. For example, what about Our Diverse Music in January, Our Diverse Literature in February, Arts and Crafts in April, Dance in May, Diverse Foods in June?...You get the drift. It means that, instead of just focusing on minority crime and negative issues around minorities, the White media can actually begin to pay some proportional attention, throughout the year, to the positivity of being a minority, and the rich diversity of our nation, through the cultural exchange of knowledge, particularly encouraging involvement and patronage by White sponsors and patrons. That is the only way to make all people feel included, to engender loyalty and pride, and the main way to change White perception of their Black neighbours.

It is also the only way for all British citizens, whatever their origins, to feel significant, appreciated, valued and included. In effect, to feel respected.

Why Ken Livingstone was Wrong to Apologise for the Slave Trade

The 200th commemorative anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade was marked by Ken Livingstone with a suitably emotional and tearful apology on behalf of London and its part in it. The capital's Mayor wept openly as he told the audience about the atrocities millions had to endure during their transportation from Africa and the legacy of that singular act of inhumanity.

Having thought deeply about it for a few days, I believe he was wrong to apologise.

It is easy to seek current retribution for past wrongs. It has become increasingly fashionable to demand an empty apology, one that applies guilt by proxy, hoping that it will somehow make things better 200 years down the line. But apologies are just words which make the people who utter them feel good and those hearing them feel vindicated, but offer no guarantees of the sincerity to match or the political will to bind those words to future actions. For an astute politician as Mr Livingstone, that was a master stroke of sensitive PR which is bound to garner him a few words of admiration, on top of the expected votes of appreciation.

However, regardless of his feeling of sincerity, apologies are mainly palliatives for those wishing to blame others for their problems in a selective way without really doing anything to change the miserable status quo many of them might still endure today. Apologies do nothing for the endemic racism, the continuing invisibility of minorities in Britain, the embedded inequality between communities, the lack of confidence, pride and self-esteem among Black people, or the alienation felt by their youngsters to the extent that they would wish to continually destroy themselves - the real legacy of slavery through displacement, lack of identity and a lack of self-worth.

There are also other important reasons why there should be no apology for the slave trade, or any other historical atrocity.
First, regardless of how inhuman the act, we cannot take it upon ourselves to apologise for the values and beliefs of people of a bygone age. That is to imply our superiority over their judgement based upon limited knowledge of the reasons for their actions or the mood at the time. They were the best judges of their time because they LIVED in it and based their decisions on the nature of THEIR society, whether it is agreeable to us or not. Just as we are now living in the 21st century and are making decisions based upon what is appropriate to us and the knowledge we have, so every age bases its actions on the beliefs, resources, information and aspirations they have. They behaved in the only way they knew how, until new information, new values, developing reason and being challenged taught them otherwise.

For example, the fact that Bush and Blair were wrong to go into Iraq will not be decided in 200 years time by a different world. We will make that judgement now, based upon our values of what is ethically right and wrong for us as a people in this time and space. If we do not admit any wrongdoing over the tens of thousands of lives lost in that country and the parlous state it is in, should we expect a future American president and a future British prime minister, who might not have any experience of 'terrorists', to publicly apologise to the future Iraqi people for what is happening now? To use their limited judgement in a different era, a different mood and different objectives to judge our actions now? That would be very silly because they would be taking upon themselves authority which they do not possess over our age, dictating to us what they believe to be right by THEIR ethical standards and interpretation of our actions, while ignoring the world we are inhabiting now and its dangers. Not only would they not understand the fears that drove the decision to invade, but they would also deprive us of the right to decide our own destiny. Any apology for Iraq should be made by current leaders, in our time and age, because they carried out the deed and were sure of the reasons why it was necessary, not by some self-righteous people in 200 years using their inappropriate ethics to judge us.

Livingstone broke down in tears as he apologised for his London's role in the transatlantic slave trade. ©Daily Mail

The Value of Each Age
Each period of time has led us, in turn, to this one through exploration, education and innovation. Every era is thus a natural phase in our evolutionary development, teaching us something new every step of the way as mankind advances. No age is better than the other because every age is essential to our unique emotional and professional journey, continuing stages which have brought us to where we are. We cannot judge a past age by our standards because that age did not have our knowledge, beliefs, social mores or resources. We are learning all the time, improving on past actions, with the hope of not repeating the mistakes we make along the way. To use our current knowledge to denigrate the actions of a bygone age and apologise on its behalf is rather arrogant and foolhardy because without the curiosity, experiments and mistakes of that age we would not be where we are now.

Improved information and education ensure our growth, one which should give us a greater understanding of, and appreciation for, the limitations of the past. Seeking apologies for past acts might sound honourable but this is simply applying guilt by proxy, being made purely for appeasement or a superficial notion of 'justice' without any real value. For example, why on earth would I apologise to my best friend now because my great grandfather might have killed her great grandfather? The fact has to be acknowledged by us, but the most important thing is the friendship we now share and the journey we are prepared to make together in the spirit of forgiveness and mutual appreciation. We cannot build anything or improve our lives if we are both in resentment and recrimination mode. Furthermore, apologies do not denote remorse or real regret because the pain, magnitude and true consequences of any act can never be understood by anyone outside that age. They can only be guessed at with compassion.

Apologies are also highly selective. We only apologise for those atrocities which carry the most condemnation or voice. What about all the other violent acts and unjustified killings in history? Who is going to apologise for those? And why are only European peoples being asked for an apology regarding the slave trade? What of the African chiefs and leaders who sold their people in slavery? Who is asking current African leaders for an apology? Or doesn't their part in it matter too?

So Ken has publicly apologised. What now? What is the point of an empty apology without anything else to change the status quo of inequality and disrespect, of resentment and recrimination, of continuing prejudice and discrimination? Apologies are inappropriate in these instances because it is not the apology that is important, but actually moving on in the future being kinder and more understanding people because of what happened. Apologies merely accord history more precedence over the present and future while preventing any real practical changes in perception or respect. The words soon replace the necessity for healing actions.

What matters most now is a clear acknowledgement of past atrocities by everyone, especially the part such acts play in hampering the progress of a community, and a genuine desire to learn from them to prevent repetition and to appreciate the enormous cumulative consequences down the years for those involved. The most important time should be the present, that's all we are guaranteed, no other. Instead of apologies, there should be the sincere desire to make the present and future a much more richer experience for all concerned in a spirit of reconciliation, real equality and genuine justice.

That can only be achieved through greater visibility, affirmation and reinforcement for people of African origin, utilising their talents, appreciating their contribution to British society and encouraging personal education and emotional development. However, along with such external actions, many displaced Africans (like African Caribbeans) need to relinquish the slavery mentality they still have, the lack of self-belief that plague them, the sense of impotence and victimhood which embraces them and the huge barriers to achievement that exist mainly inside their heads which no amount of apologies can ever eradicate.

Why I love Paul Potts and Lewis Hamilton

Two unlikely heroes have emerged from the UK to leave a trail of feel-good feeling strewn across the country in the most unusual way. The first winner of Britain's Got Talent, Paul Potts, moved reality shows to a new level when he was crowned the undisputed king of talent in the programme. Yet he couldn't have been a more unlikely winner at the beginning.

Paul Potts appeared on stage at the audition looking pained, dishevelled and grim-faced to hide his uneven teeth and clearly uncomfortable. Not too attractive, one might say. A former victim of bullying, and clearly lacking in confidence and esteem, he would not have looked out of place as an lost orphan. In a world focusing on beautiful celebrities and spurious interpretations of beauty, Paul would have been firmly placed on the near side of ugly. When he told the judges, including the dreaded Simon Cowell, that he was going to sing opera, they cast unbelievable sideways glances at each other, unable to hide their disbelief. This would be over quickly, they must have thought, red buzzers at the ready. He was way down the audition list towards the end, so they were not in the best of moods. They questioned him briefly and he began.

What followed next was sheer poetry and fantasy, being so unexpected as to be unreal. He began to sing Nessun Dorma and in a few moments the audience had tears rolling down their eyes. I felt goose pimples all over my body and was suddenly very tearful too. He had the most incredible voice I had ever heard. I have never liked opera but I knew from that moment onwards I would follow Paul Potts to any concert he did. His voice was mesmerising. Apparently he spent £12,000 on lessons and thought they were wasted as they didn't lead him to much. But little did he know that he was being prepared for such an amazing moment in his life, that the money was the best investment he did. He brought the house down and went on to win the final. The judges were naturally speechless. At the time of writing, more than 3 million people had seen his video below.



Paul Potts might have won £100,000 and the chance to perform before Her Majesty the Queen, but his win has far greater implications for two important reasons. First, the final show on TV had 12 million viewers, the highest for a long time on such a show. The audience simply lapped up his talent. People obviously want to hear of positive things, not just depressing news of killings and maimings. Second, people love the underdog because they too can live vicariously through those winners, to dream of their big day. British society is also in transition and if people like him can help to remind us of what is beautiful, wholesome and really important, that is no bad thing. Paul Potts, a humble mobile phone salesman with a big dream realised that dream, and, in the process, will be helping an awful lot of people not only to see a new perspective on entertainment, but, most important, a new perspective on their world. Many people will be the richer for it.

It is interesting that in the same week another unlikely champion emerged from Formula One racing. Cheeky, bright, articulate, very talented and the Black champion ever, Lewis Hamilton, raced home to take the sport by storm, both in Europe and in America, seemingly with the greatest of ease. These two amazing young men in their own way offer tremendous inspiration for an awful lot of people in the UK. Most important, Lewis Hamilton and Paul Potts have shown the value of having a dream and being passionate about it, no matter the costs. If you believe badly enough, and dedicate time and effort to it, things will happen in time. Paul got into debt paying for his lessons. His wife must have wondered what on earth it was all about. All that money they could ill afford must have seemed a waste. This week she found out just what was possible. Lewis had started in the sport almost from the toddler stage, with a doting father who held three jobs at one time just to help him move closer to that dream. The stuff of books and legends.

Young men, and women, all over the country now have permission to dream, not just about being famous for being famous, but to realise that dormant talent they night possess and dare not admit before now. For the first time in a very long while it feels truly good to be British. Cheers to Paul Potts and Lewis Hamilton. Good Luck!

Is the British Royal Family Irrelevant?

A member of the Royal Family finally said something about the disappearance of little Madeleine McCann, a full 14 days after she disappeared. Members of this august family are not known for their pronouncements on the public stage, but it has been accepted that when there is a real tragedy, especially on a personal basis, we expect our Royal Family to give a lead, especially in compassion, care and appreciation of the situation. Despite that appalling tragedy for the family, and the incredible amount of attention it has drawn, it took Prince Andrew two weeks to say something, and it wasn't planned either. He departed from his set text in Scotland to be human. One could be cynical and say that, whatever else he was going to pronounce on at that event would not have had so much media coverage, so he made a wise decision!

The Royal Family is rapidly becoming an anachronism in today's classless world of high tech reactions, individual expressiveness and instant soundbites. The Queen still gives out medals and public honours based on the 'British Empire', yet where that empire exists these days is entirely beyond me. Paradoxically, she is head of a commonwealth which is highly multi-racial, yet there is not a single Black person in her entourage, no Black advisers and certainly no Black staff in her palace. Furthermore, this commonwealth is is weighed down under the oppressive symbolism of an unjust 'empire' that obstinately continues to take pride of place in our language, no matter how offensive it is to certain sections of the British community. There is no move to get rid of the archaic, divisive and racist symbolisms which divide her subjects, despite her important role in the commonwealth.


In the dark ages
The problem with the royal Family is that it has not changed with the times. Members are still trying to apply traditional, unequal ways of behaving to a situation which has long dispensed with tradition. Diana offered a golden chance of bringing the monarchy up to date with current expectations, but her demise meant that her sons offer the best hope of change. In a world where blog is king, there is no place for silence from our Royal Family anymore otherwise they rule themselves out of our rapidly advancing world simply by omission. That could explain why, except for the Queen, William and Harry, their popularity has dramatically declined and only a few people turn up to see them at events. We need a caring, expressive Royal family who is not just there for the tourists, but one who, through its own lead, will begin to justify the £10 million per year the public purse has to supply to keep them in the dark ages.

In its present form, the Royal Family is definitely irrelevant, having the trappings without the substance. As a strong Royalist who has no desire to see Britain become a republic, to me it would be nice to see a leading Family which is more in tune with our modern age, more approachable, more inclusive and far more appreciative of the benefits of technology to getting their own message across; one that is no longer guided by a colonial empire but reflecting a modern society based on respect for the individual, regardless of class, race, creed or birth.

A Light of Hope for Madeleine

A LIGHT FOR MADELEINE!



On Thursday 3 May 2007, little Madeleine McCann from the UK was taken from her bedroom, from her parents and her family while on holiday in the Algarve. As a mother myself, I am not sure what I would have done if my child suddenly vanished. It must be the most awful feeling of desolation and impotence, with not knowing being the hardest part. My heart goes out to Kate and Gerry McCann. I hope they find the courage to keep hoping for her return. This candle is my personal tribute and prayer for Madeleine to be found safely.
Love and Faith conquer all.

This candle will burn in hope until Madeliene is returned to her family. May she be protected from all harm by the ocean of love and prayers that surrounds her. Please feel free to leave comments of support. Thank You.

Is it Time to Ditch the Old Ageist Mindset?

In an interview regarding getting older in the New York Times Magazine, Nora Ephron says, with obvious feeling, "Old age can be pitiful. That's why Americans tend to ignore it. First it was ignored. Then it was boosterized by all those people who wrote these stupid books about it. This insistence on the joy of aging, the joy of menopause, the joy of late-life sex — this is all garbage."

That was a real pity because there was no obvious counter interview for ageing put by the NYTM, so this one negative view appeared to speak for all women. Bearing in mind that many women fear ageing too, they would have been left even more depressed and downhearted by those comments. The real tragedy here is that many people look to Nora, a well established writer, for guidance and enlightenment. If there is no 'joy' of being older, what would she advise those who fear the process to do? End their life in midstream to avoid ageing?

I am not sure if the way we age is a cultural/race thing, but most of the Black people I know look fabulous at any age. I remember watching a programme on the BBC not long ago about the history of soul music. They were interviewing some of the soul stars of the 60s and I had to keep reminding myself that these amazing looking people, without a single wrinkle, would have been in their late 60s or 70s. They looked no older than mid-40s. Many of them would have disagreed with Nora that ageing had no joy attached to it, perhaps because ageing comes naturally to them. They don't fret about it!

I also spoke at a conference recently and most of the people there were over 50 and it was difficult to tell their ages. But there was one noticeable thing about all the delegates in the room. They had come to learn career, business and confidence tips for self-improvement and not one person cared about their age in a negative way. Most were boastful about how they looked for their age. These people could show Nora a thing or two about the real joys of ageing. It got me thinking about how we need to change our perception to really appreciate getting older.




Low Mortality Rate
Two hundred years ago, one was likely to die in mid-40s or early 50s. It meant that, from about 35 years old, you were considered as 'old' and expected to do 'old' things with your life, like being seen and not heard, especially if you were a woman. During the 20th century it was quietly assumed that one is young until 40, middle aged until 60 and 'old' after that. Since then we have had a revolution in technology, changing the direction and quality of our lives dramatically, but we are still stuck with the same old ageist mindset on getting older. The result is that employers, programme makers and media producers still fear ageing and treat it in outmoded terms, so much that 18 million people over 50 in the UK, the flower-power baby boomers who liberated their age in the 60s, are still waiting to be treated like their younger counterparts. We have shiny new technological tools working with old decrepit mindsets that should have been educated, along with technology, to expect the unexpected and to think outside the box. People are changing rapidly in their behaviour while many of the power brokers are still stuck back there judging others through their own fears.

I am 59 and I don't have even one wrinkle. I have a beautiful face, beautiful smooth skin and great legs – and I won't even mention my fantastic boobs, which many younger women would die for. I have never used anti-ageing anything. Everything about me is natural, no help from anywhere apart from plain moisturisers. I have never been to a hairdresser in my life as I don't like anyone else's hands doing my hair. I feel and look no less sexy than when I was in my 40s or 30s, with a trail of men, from all ages, trying to attract my attention . Yet I have no wish to be young again. I love the age I am and shout it from the rooftops. I believe that there is nothing more wonderful than having wisdom, experience and intellect along with all those other physical assets. An awesome combination. I boast daily that when I reach 60, 70 and beyond, I will still be as fabulous. There's a 77 year old woman on my MySpace page who does not look a day over 45! You can see the self confidence, sense of pride and wellbeing in her face - the key to getting older. She is clearly enjoying who she is. Nora Ephron, she certainly is not!

Ageing has been a joy for me throughout my life because I have NEVER thought of ageing in negative terms. I have always looked forward to my birthdays and enjoyed every one. I never look for wrinkles, I never worry about how 'old' I am getting. Instead, every day I remind myself that dead people don't age. So, if I am ageing, I am alive.....and hallelujah for that fantastic fact! What is the point of being alive only to tell yourself every day how horrible you look. Might as well end the torture by flagging down the next bus and getting under it!

The Power of Thoughts
For the uninformed, we age first in our heads and our bodies gladly oblige. So if we sit and stare at ourselves every day, bemoaning how OLD we look, that's precisely what we will have more of, because we cannot have positive things while thinking negatively. If we see age as 'garbage' and a joyless existence, that's precisely what we will enjoy. However, when we begin to appreciate our life, ourselves, and the people accompanying us on our journey, the world becomes a magical place and life is a true joy. In line with the effects of new technology on our lives, it is time we lose the old senile, fearful views on ageing.

Currently we have people living until 120+, with many thousands reaching 100 without too much fuss. It needs a new perception of the whole process. It means accepting that, with each new decade of good health and good living, people are going to live longer. As long as we keep using our brains and bodies they will serve us magnificently too. Time to acknowledge that a YOUNG person now is at least up to 45 years, a middle-ager is up to 70 and an older person anything after that, with the markers shifting constantly. Ten years from now, a really old person might be perceived as one who is 85 years and above because many people would be living to 115! Time to do away with limiting age numbers and let people prove themselves, at whatever age they are.

I have a theory I would love to prove because I believe that, from birth, we are brainwashed by society, the media and loved ones into negative expectations around ageing, which then become self-fulfilling prophecies. I would love to experiment with some people on an island where every newborn was told, daily, that they will live forever, and then see what happens. My guess is that, because they would have been told nothing else, they would have nothing to fear and their perception of ageing would be entirely different from ours. Positive ageing would become part of their belief system and they would live like ageless people, regardless of their actual mortality. They won't live forever, but they are likely to live a darn sight longer than the average person does now.

We never completely fulfil our potential till the day we die. It is time to stop using age as the sum of the individual; to stop writing a person off at any point in their life; to let them show us, through the quality of their existence, exactly what age they are. Then we will have freed ourselves from the tyranny of oppressive ageist numbers and really 'live' that precious life we're granted in every sense of the word.

Why it is Difficult to Earn RESPECT

From today, an 18 year old at the start of his adult life will be spending the next 25 years of it in prison in the UK for killing another man who he said paid him no 'respect'. Yet another Black youngster is behind bars, his freedom and potential dramatically cut short like the life of his victim. Bradley Tucker shot unarmed Peter Woodhams after Peter had already been knifed by someone in Tucker's hoodie gang. He lost his life trying to stand up to the bullies.

According to the judge, Bradley "perceived disrespect". He feared loss of face in a challenge that he perceived from the man he killed - a challenge to the standing he felt he had in the eyes of the people whose respect he sought. Gang members tend to talk about getting 'respect' from each other and others. They believe that the negative acts of wounding and killing should encourage even more 'respect' and save face. But they will always fail in getting the desired result because of a misunderstanding of the word respect and a lack of awareness of how it is acquired. Respect is a positive word. It has nothing to do with negativity or negative acts. So one cannot get respect through negative behaviour. One can probably get a temporary feeling of satisfaction and power, but no real respect. There are also six dimensions of the word respect.

At the heart of respect is sensitivity to others and their feelings. By demanding respect, or bullying others into showing it, that goes against the grain of earning that respect because there is no sensitivity. We are all automatically entitled to respect by virtue of being living, thinking human beings. Respect is thus automatic in the first instance for who we are and proclaim to be. However, maintaining that respect is the difficult bit because unless the six dimensions of respect are in place (curiosity, attention, dialogue, sensitivity, empowerment, healing), we are likely to withhold respect from that person and treat them with either contempt or disdain, especially through ignoring them or resisting their attempts to draw our attention or engage in dialogue.


Reasons for Joining Gangs
Most important, real respect begins from the self. If we have no respect for ourselves, we cannot expect it from others either. That would be a difficult thing to do. For example, someone being a murderer, yet expect to be treated as though he hasn't committed a crime, is contradictory. He is a criminal. Until there has been a successful rehabilitation for his action, he will always be perceived in a negative light and denied the respect he seeks.

People join gangs for a variety of reasons but the key one is to foster a sense of belonging, an essential part of the confidence triangle. Most gang members will be low in self-esteem and the stronger ones will have a craving for power. Not being able to use that power in positive ways in the wider world, they will use it negatively to feel better about themselves. In such groups, where the only glue holding members together is the desire to belong and feel wanted, the achievement they crave is likely to come in deviant acts to maintain that feeling of power and desire for 'respect'. Yet that is not the basis to earn respect because there is no self-respect already in place. Instead, members are likely to expect others to like what they reject - themselves. They will also be expecting others to condone negative acts which are likely to be part of their rituals and affirmation process. Yet those very acts merely serve to alienate the wider public and form a dubious base for their efforts to impress other members. In such a negative situation, how could Bradley expect to get the respect that he himself denied others?

Bradley Tucker is another tragic youngster who thinks he can earn respect by force through the maiming and killing of another person. But he lost respect for himself when he became a member of a deviant gang and began his reign of terror against his neighbourhood. He said he only meant to scare his victim. I am inclined to believe him. But what obviously got in the way when he pointed the gun at defenceless Peter Woodhams was that feeling of power again, the sudden realisation of the heady power to snuff out a man's life to prove a point, while momentarily forgetting that he was robbing himself of a life too.

Why Paris Hilton's Sentence is the Right One

Paris Hilton has been sentenced to 45 days in prison for violating her probation terms. She won't be able to choose her prison, there will be no work releases, electronic monitoring or any other concessions. Just a plain old jail with an hour outside her cell each day. Her mother thought the sentence was 'pathetic and disgusting' and her lawyer was 'shocked and surprised' by it. Why is that? What exactly did they expect when Paris kept breaking the law? Is she special in that regard?

If one disobeys the law one can expect retribution. What is the point of having laws which some people ignore or which only work with some types but not others? If the law is not applicable to all, can we expect it to work to society's benefit when we want it to do so? If we give no respect to the law we are actually condoning a lawless society and one dreads to think of the consequences of that. The law can only be effective if it is taken seriously, treated with respect and applied to everyone, whether rich or poor, high or low, famous or unknown. If those three elements are not in place, judges and lawyers might as well pack up and go home.

There are four reasons why this is a just sentence. First, Hilton was caught for alcohol-related reckless driving in 2006, and reckless driving costs lives. Simple and unequivocal. She could have killed someone in her state. She was given 36 months probation, $1500 in fines and mandatory alcohol education. All of which she accepted, especially reporting for enrolment in the education programme. Yet she never did enrol and, worse still, she took to driving again and was stopped twice by police when she was not even supposed to be in her car! She said she didn't know she was banned! Wow!


The Responsibilities of Being Celebrity
Second, Hilton is a celebrity role model, whether she acknowledges that or not. Millions of teens and other women across the world who look up to her would be watching, and even emulating, what she does. Flouting the law is not behaviour to inspire, or even reassure, such fans and followers, neither can she be allowed to disregard her probation by placing herself above it.

Third, for the law to work effectively, its application has to be consistent and perceived to be fair, no matter what the actual reality says. By ignoring whatever Hilton does in her case, a strong message of bias would be sent out to the general public regarding favoured people and their ability to ignore the law. The effect of that kind of action on others who are similarly sentenced would be disastrous, for upholding the law, for respect of it or instilling a sense of fairness in its jurisdiction. Worse of all, it would weaken the legitimacy of that law.

Finally, no one is above the law. Ignoring her actions would have encouraged others to do the same, especially when there are many people caught daily drinking and driving. How would such similar resistance by the public have been contained if it got out of hand? If a celebrity is going to behave as if a legal ruling doesn't apply to her then she must be prepared to take the consequences. One cannot flout the law then expect any mercy because the very act of doing as one pleases is to put one's self outside of its orbit. And if the law ceases to apply to our lives, what kind of state are we heading for?

At least one thing will come out of this. All those on similar probation who might be tempted to do the same will probably think again if they don't want to go to prison. Well done, Judge Sauer! Common sense is beginning to rule at last! There really should be no appeal to waste taxpayer's money any further.