Nice People Thread Number 10 -the official residence of Nice People

silvercar

OH has a cousin who married but never had children. Instead they shower their love on 4 cats who now occupy 2 bedrooms with en-suites. They don't take holidays because they won't leave the cats in a cattery. They both have successful careers so I suppose eventually the local cats home will inherit a fortune.

lostinrates

Actually, I'm not keen on Catteries either, but there are excellent pet sitters. I have no problem with that as a solution.

PasturesNew

I used to feed people's kitties and pets. Even dogs, back in the days when you didn't have to poop scoop. It was the countryside though, so pooping in rough ground, not pavements or parks.

Generali

The cost of kids isn't just in childcare and lost wages. There's the requirement for a larger house for example. Food and clothing aren't free, even though we get a huge amount of hand me downs.

Then there are the 'unnecessary costs'. For example, I'm happy to drive an old car but I'm not so happy to drive the kids around in something that doesn't at least have some of the more modern safety features.

It costs a bloody fortune and I don't regret a single penny of it.

LydiaJ

Generali wrote: »

For example, I'm happy to drive an old car but I'm not so happy to drive the kids around in something that doesn't at least have some of the more modern safety features.

Absolutely. I also won't drive myself around in something without decent safety features, even if the kids aren't with me, because I don't want to put my kids through losing a parent again.

Generali

People have different attitudes these days to what constitutes an acceptable risk. I remember it being ok to travel in the boot of a Cortina Estate as long as we didn't have our heads above the level of the rear seat. We'd get 4 kids in the back seat and another 4 in the boot! I reckon you'd make the Daily Mail for driving kids around like that these days.

My theory is that as child mortality rates have fallen, we have tried to find ever more ingeneous ways to cut it yet further. Kids basically don't die now. I mean obviously the odd one does but if you make it to 5 you'll most likely make it to 16. If you get through the mad teen bit then you'll very likely get to 60-70.

We've solved a lot of the stuff that used to kill both kids and adults. That's why we are looking to cut out more and more risk.

Just a theory.

LydiaJ

Generali wrote: »

People have different attitudes these days to what constitutes an acceptable risk. I remember it being ok to travel in the boot of a Cortina Estate as long as we didn't have our heads above the level of the rear seat. We'd get 4 kids in the back seat and another 4 in the boot! I reckon you'd make the Daily Mail for driving kids around like that these days.

My theory is that as child mortality rates have fallen, we have tried to find ever more ingeneous ways to cut it yet further. Kids basically don't die now. I mean obviously the odd one does but if you make it to 5 you'll most likely make it to 16. If you get through the mad teen bit then you'll very likely get to 60-70.

We've solved a lot of the stuff that used to kill both kids and adults. That's why we are looking to cut out more and more risk.

Just a theory.

I travelled in the boot of a cortina estate too. Parents in the front, three teenage boys in the back, little girl and dog in the boot.

You're right that attitude to risk has changed as death rates have gone down. It's not just that risk is less accepted; it's also an increased desire to have somebody to blame when something goes wrong. So if a kid (or indeed an adult) dies in some kind of accident, it's assumed that someone or something was at fault for not having prevented it, and that leads to everyone trying harder and harder to eliminate all risks of any kind.

zagubov

LydiaJ wrote: »

I travelled in the boot of a cortina estate too. Parents in the front, three teenage boys in the back, little girl and dog in the boot.

You're right that attitude to risk has changed as death rates have gone down. It's not just that risk is less accepted; it's also an increased desire to have somebody to blame when something goes wrong. So if a kid (or indeed an adult) dies in some kind of accident, it's assumed that someone or something was at fault for not having prevented it, and that leads to everyone trying harder and harder to eliminate all risks of any kind.

There was a radio programme (the Infinite Monkey Cage) that covered this in a show about risk. They showed how the death rate from traffic accidents had dropped over the last few decades and also that kids in the UK now have the highest survival chances humans have ever had in recorded history.

I'd recommend it for any NPs to download to make car journeys/commutes more bearable
http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/timc

zagubov

Generali wrote: »

The cost of kids isn't just in childcare and lost wages. There's the requirement for a larger house for example. Food and clothing aren't free, even though we get a huge amount of hand me downs.

Then there are the 'unnecessary costs'. For example, I'm happy to drive an old car but I'm not so happy to drive the kids around in something that doesn't at least have some of the more modern safety features.

It costs a bloody fortune and I don't regret a single penny of it.

After trying to remember where I'd seen the figure about the cost of bringing up a kid, I stumbled on it when visiting someone's house tonight( ££218,024.). There's a fascinating article of QI facts here. Well worth a read!

LydiaJ

zagubov wrote: »

There was a radio programme (the Infinite Monkey Cage) that covered this in a show about risk. They showed how the death rate from traffic accidents had dropped over the last few decades and also that kids in the UK now have the highest survival chances humans have ever had in recorded history.

I'd recommend it for any NPs to download to make car journeys/commutes more bearable
http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/timc

Does that mean that today's UK kids have better survival chances than today's kids from all other countries? Or just that the UK is one of a number of countries currently sharing the best ever survival rate? Either way, it's good news.

With retrospect, the way I travelled as a kid is quite scary. As an adult, I came to think of seatbelts as "what you do because it's the sensible thing" but they became something I'm passionate about when a policeman explained to me that my kids would be dead if they hadn't been wearing theirs that day 4 years ago. Apologies if I'm repeating myself, but any NP with influence over any kids, do make sure that some adult in their life has taught them they must always always keep them done up.