We all have a right to a means of communication

and the right to the opportunity to state our point of view. 
It is only in dictatorships that people are denied those rights - or is it?
We were told the "same-sex marriage debate" could "get nasty". Well yes it has  but not for the reasons we were told. It has become nasty because it seems that only one side of the debate is allowed to put their case. Whatever those "for" think those who are "against" have a right to put their point of view. I am not really sure what the "for" campaign is so concerned about. All the opinion polls suggest that the ayes have it - and probably by a wide margin. Trying to prevent the noes simply suggests they are worried they might not, after all, win the plebiscite. Personally I am much more concerned by the Leader of the Opposition saying that, in the most unlikely event the "No" vote wins, he will ignore it and pass legislation anyway.  No, it isn't the legislation I would oppose. I would oppose his attitude towards the electorate in passing something they had stated they did not want. 
The same sort of thing however happens elsewhere. I had to drop a book off to someone yesterday. She is, rightly, concerned about the likely events at an upcoming meeting. There has been a blatant attempt to halt any input from the general membership over a number of matters. They have been put to the group in a way which suggests there is no room for debate, that this is the way things will now be done. Most people won't even question this because they have little understanding of how things should be done. 
     "I'm a bit worried Cat," this person told me. I know she should be. When you start to take the right to make decisions away from the group then it will always lead to problems. It leads to uncertainty rather than certainty and discontent rather than content. 
And one of the things which worries her, again rightly, is the fact that not only is there an attempt to take away decision making powers but also an attempt to deny anyone the opportunity to speak up about these things. 
Were I in a position to do it I hope I would be brave enough to get up and say something. If nobody speaks up then we will lose the power to communicate and our right to put our point of view will be diminished. If we don't let others put their point of view as well then we lose as well as them. And, more importantly, we can't try to negate hate or dangerous ideas. 
I am off to a meeting too on Saturday. I hope I have the courage to speak up there because there are some things which need to be said. I'll try and be polite and reasonable but I do want to communicate.
 

"Duty of care"

is a term used to describe the responsibility one person has towards other people. It is often used in professional relationships.
It came up recently when Middle Cat was seeing our GP. Middle Cat had major back surgery two years ago but still experiences severe pain. She has very strong painkillers of the type that can only be prescribed by a doctor. Both of them are well aware of the dangers of using these long term. Our GP has a duty of care to inform Middle  Cat and to try and keep the amount to a minimum. 
Middle Cat knows these things. She trained as a physiotherapist. She has a son who is a doctor. 
I also know something about these things. Over the years I have picked up a good deal of medical knowledge simply through working with so many doctors and finding ways to inform other people about the things they need to say and do.
But there was a piece in the paper this morning about the grief a father felt for the loss of his wife and child in a murder-suicide. His feeling, possibly completely correct, was that it was brought on  by his wife's inability to cope with her then present pain and the strong possibility that in a couple of years she would be in a wheelchair. Multiple sclerosis? Perhaps. I don't know. It doesn't matter what the diagnosis was now. It's too late. She felt she  couldn't cope.
I wonder though how the last doctor she saw feels? I doubt he or she is anything but distressed at losing a patient like that. They must be wondering, "what did I miss?" and "what else could I have done?" They will almost certainly feel they have failed in their duty of care towards their patient. But how often does it happen?
I know someone, an older person, who recently changed GPs and was shocked to discover that her previous GP had not picked up several serious issues. Perhaps s/he was too familiar with the patient and simply missed the signs?
I know I try to avoid going to see any member of the medical profession but I hope I am not stupid about it. I do go to get essential doctor-prescribed medication. If I felt ill or suspected something was seriously wrong and not likely to right itself in a short space of time and without help I would go. But I won't go for the common cold or, potentially, a number of other ailments that  I know I am likely to recover from without help. I don't want antibiotics if I can possibly avoid taking them. They aren't going to help me recover from the 'flu - for which I have had a short anyway.
I am wondering whether doctors are missing things because they are overworked and whether that "duty of care" has been replaced, to some extent, by form-filling. Is that why the country GP missed the danger signs and a woman killed her child and then herself?
And it is perhaps why the Whirlwind's father left me an email this morning and said, "Care to say something on your blog Cat?"
He knows and the Whirlwind knows that there are some questions which will never be answered.

How much pocket money

do teenagers actually get?
It is a question the Senior Cat has asked me more than once after observing the teenagers in the local shopping centre. I will therefore be interested to hear what he has to say about the article in this morning's paper. 
Apparently some teenagers have been ordering lunch to be delivered to school via something called "Uber-eats". The student interviewed on the front page  has admitted to ordering from "Maccas down the road".
Hold it right there. I  have never eaten one of those. I don't want to. As for ordering one for lunch....that's probably my "lunch out" budget for several days. I don't know how much it costs but I am sure it is more than a sandwich from homemade bread taken from home.
I had to earn my pocket money. We all did. Mum had sheets printed off and, each week, she would fill one in with the various things that needed to be done. My brother and I, as the two oldest, had the most to do. Middle Cat came next and the Black Cat came last. We had to do things like set the table, wash up and dry, take out the rubbish, sweep, dust, put the clothes out on the line, bring them in, help with the ironing (Mum did the Senior Cat's shirts), vacuum, clean the bathroom, and more. Things might get added if something else was happening. 
And woe betide us if something didn't get done - and done to her satisfaction. 
We didn't get to cook. Mum didn't like us in the kitchen when she was busy doing that. We did get to do the other things. Mum worked as a teacher and then as the head of a school. There was no time for teaching us to cook but the other tasks were considered fairly simple and able to be handled by us. 
And yes, we got pocket money for doing those things. Our Sunday School "collection" came from that. We were expected to save to buy birthday presents and Christmas presents. (Ours were often home made but we would buy items to make them.) 
I know other children got more pocket money than we did. Our grandparents would occasionally slip us an extra sixpence or shilling. We knew better than to let Mum know about that. If she had known then she would have insisted on us "saving" it. 
I am sure she thought she was doing the right thing. She was brought up in a household where there was no pocket money at all. Even when she went to teacher training college she had to hand over all her allowance to her mother - who returned just enough for the fares.  
I wonder what the teens ordering food from the fast food places in the local shopping centre would think of that? Have they considered ordering from this "Uber-eats"? Do they have the money to do that?
A couple of weeks back I actually had coffee with a friend in the shopping centre. The last time I did that was back at the beginning of the year. On that occasion I was invited and the friend I went with paid. He earns a lot more than I ever will so I didn't feel too bad about that. I know other people do things like that on a much more regular basis. 
Part of me not doing it is my limited income but the other part is that I grew up not doing that sort of thing. I can't remember going out with a group and having a milkshake - which is what teens might have done back then. And yes, I suppose I did miss out - but I suspect there were some other teens who did too. There will be some who miss out now.
But, there are others who seem to have an extraordinary amount. I can't quite get my head around a teenager, still at school, having the sort of pocket money which allows them to contemplate getting fast food for lunch - and having it delivered. 
 

The bullies are back

with renewed force and vigor. 
Columnist Andrew Bolt has an interesting article on them in this morning's paper. He has pointed out the problems surrounding attempts by certain sides of debates to find evidence for their own claims of bullying and more. Bolt is a very divisive columnist so I will be interested to see how much support that particular column gets.  
Yes, I have noticed a definite - and sometimes not too subtle - demand that we all vote "yes" in the same-sex marriage plebiscite. I have also noted that we are all supposed to support the demand to change the date of Australia Day. We are all supposed to be  pro-renewable energy, anti-nuclear, anti-coal. We are supposed to accept that all those claiming to be refugees are actually refugees. We are supposed to accept that some women not only can but should wear certain articles of clothing and that certain other cultural practices should be retained "because we are a multi-cultural society" - and we are told to accept that too. We even have some doctors who are, apparently, anti-vaccination. Really?
Now I am not saying I am for or against any of these things. What bothers me is something rather different. What bothers me is that there is a distinct lack of genuine debate  around these issues. People are being told things but they are not being informed. They are being given "facts" but they are not actually facts at all. There is often no research to back up these facts. There are "opinion polls".
I know someone who conducts opinion polls for a living. He and his company set about it in what they believe to be the closest they can actually get to a fair and unbiased view from those they survey. (It might be the General Public or it might be a Special Interest group or something else.) He also knows that there is always the possibility that they won't get it right. People give the answers they believe they are expected to give. Some deliberately lie in an attempt to skew the results so as to boost their own side. Others simply don't know or don't have an opinion. The way the question is put can affect the results...and much more. It isn't an exact science.
And it is all wonderful material for the bullies. They can carefully conduct a "survey" or an "opinion poll" and do it in such a way that it supports  "their" side. 
These attempts at political engineering are dangerous - and so much easier than they once were. You can get something "out there" on social and then mainstream media in a matter of minutes. I was looking for some information yesterday. When I did an internet search I came across hundreds of "articles" on the topic when I put in the base terms. It was not until I added more terms that I came to articles that I felt might be of some real value. I think it is fair to say most people will only put in the base terms. They wouldn't know to do more than that. So, even they get their "information" from unreliable sources that look as if they might be trustworthy but aren't.They will be informed by a media with an agenda and by bullies who are providing the media with that agenda. 
I think it may be too late to do anything about it as well.
That frightens me.
 

Drinking games

or drinking contests have been banned at one of the universities in this state. The students are unhappy.
The ban does not surprise me, neither does the reaction.
I am old enough to have been through the first part of my tertiary education when the drinking age was 21. Then parliament was stupid enough to lower the age of majority to 18 and the drinking age with it. 
Alcohol became available on campus rather than off campus. Yes of course people under 21 were drinking alcohol when I was there. It is a rite of passage for most young  people in this country - at some point you get extremely drunk. You regret it and, all too often, some people do it again  - and again. 
Lowering the age of majority meant that it was even easier to obtain and over indulge in alcohol. There are individuals, legally classified as children, who have over indulged in alcohol.
I don't drink alcohol and I don't eat anything with vinegar in it. Both things will make me feel as if I am itching all over. It is a thoroughly unpleasant feeling and, on medical advice, I avoid those things. Even if that was not the case I would hope that I would indulge only rarely and just a little at a time. 
If other people want to indulge that's fine. It doesn't bother me as long as they don't drink to excess and behave in obnoxious or dangerous ways as a result.
And that's the problem. When I went back to university 18yr old students could and did drink alcohol. Parties became wild alcohol fuelled affairs. They often ended unpleasantly. 
That was bad enough but there was also pressure on students to drink alcohol - and drink it to excess. Even as a mature age student I would be asked, "Aren't you going to have a drink?" I'd explain and get, "Well, a little one wouldn't hurt would it?" Sorry, yes it would."  I avoided the parties anyway. The young ones didn't want anyone over the age of 26 there and their music wasn't to my taste anyway. 
And all that has a deleterious effect on academic performance. It isn't possible to stop people from imbibing alcohol and over indulging in it but bars on campus (and often cheaper alcohol) make it all too easy.
The students might be angry but I am wondering whether banning drinking games - at least officially - is such a bad thing.

"Did you read the instructions?"

We were standing there looking at the wooden "clotheshorse" someone had gone and bought to add height to our display cabinets.
Yes, there is rather a lot in those cabinets at the showgrounds. This is a "good thing" but it puts pressure on the available display space so P... went off and bought the clotheshorse". After all, we are displaying clothes and household items aren't we? 
It arrived in pieces of course. These things are never assembled. The instructions were written in that curious dialect of English known as "Instructionese". They had been read and we had interpreted them into standard English.
We still could not get the thing to go together.
   "Leave it," A....told us, "H....will be in soon. He can put it together."
So we went back to putting other things in display cabinets in other places. 
     "H... is here. A....'s asking him to put the clotheshorse together now," J...told me.
      "Oh good. We can finish that cabinet," I said.
We waited.
We waited some more.
Then I heard a muffled curse. It wasn't actually a rude word, more a sound of exasperation. 
And then I heard A... ask, "Have you read the instructions?"
There was absolute silence and then everyone, including H... burst out laughing.
About ten minutes later we had a very nicely assembled clotheshorse. We could not have done it nearly as well. H... had needed his electric drill and a proper  hammer (rather than the lump of timber supplied) to do the job.
We have asked if we can have two more clotheshorses for next year. H.... won't need to read the instructions again. 

More creativity!

There is a class in the crochet section which says "creative crochet". It is there to encourage people to "do things". The judge is not looking for the "ordinary", more the "extraordinary".
And there was the "rainbow serpent" rug. The maker had designed it himself or herself. It was done in very heavy yarn and must have been very difficult indeed to make. 
And there was the "princess" dress - with the crochet top and the butterfly at the back, something which ingeniously concealed the opening. It had crochet flowers all over the skirt too. Not my thing in the least but a little girl who likes pink, pretty, flowery, dress up things would undoubtedly love it.
And there were the amigurumi - both knit and crochet. There was a  tiny green chameleon knitted in very fine yarn. He - it has to be a he - was chatting away to a pair of cats when the judge reached him.   Over the other side in the crochet there were a pair of  inscrutable Japanese dolls about 5cms high. They won "best in show" and truly deserved it. 
But they were apparently nearly beaten to the best in show prize by a lovely scarf of broomstick crochet. 
And there were fun things too - a teapot cosy in the shape of a fish that was obviously intended to be Nemo had everyone smiling. He had a cousin in the recycled section - made out of discarded plastic. That must have been extraordinarily difficult to knit.
Yes, the knitting and crochet sections are getting more creative and interesting every year. I
It's a very interesting exercise to be involved in. Thank you people who put things in. I just wish more people would.