NHS Trust Tells Parents To Stop Calling Children’s Body Parts ‘Willy’ And ‘Front Bottom’ And To ‘Tell It Like It Is’

First topic message reminder :




Parents have been advised not to call children’s body parts nicknames, such as “willy” or “front bottom”, and use the official words instead.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC) stated on its website that using a variety of words to refer to the penis or vulva can be “really confusing for children”.

The NHS trust’s sexual health service, Sandyford, is encouraging parents to “tell it like it is and use accurate terms from an early age”.

Jill Wilson, health improvement lead at Sandyford said: “Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words.

“Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’ and ‘leg’.”


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/children-body-parts-words-advice_uk_5901b563e4b081a5c0fadcc5?utm_hp_ref=uk


Makes perfect sense to me.

Original Quill wrote:
As both veya and I have pointed out to you before, you have a very stilted view of what is education.  

Your theory of education is that of information transfer...or fact transfer if you wish.  Ultimately, education is supposed to expand the mind, not constrain it.  If we were to limit the mind, where would de Vinci be?  Where would the 'flat earth' theory be?  All of our great minds, and their intellectual achievements, came about by breaking out of the envelope...and here you are trying to figure out how to enter the envelope.

But your advice turns education into the agent of fear.  It's good to have a healthy respect for the dangers of the world, but not to the point of obsession.  It's obsessive to restrict a child's creative instincts because you are possessed of a fear of sexual predators.  Your own life becomes a reaction, not action.

It's the same argument as with terrorism...if you let them steer your life out of fear, they have already won.

Because you say so?

As seen, my education is one that hits the point home and better prepares people for life.

So how is my education limiting the mind, when in fact it better prepares them to understand events they might not even see in their lives. But it may make a person more so better understand what someone is suffering, because they have been better equipped and knowledge to understand something is wrong with that person. This helps saves lives and why the tool to teach at the earliest ages, even when based around things that are difficult to deal with again ends up saving lives.

So if education is based off an agent of fear and then ends up saving more lives than it would by not teaching this method, then clearly you are very much in error. As how else do you teach a person to deal with a heart attack, without them ever seeing a person have a heart attack? Its something not all people can stomach or witness, but for most its able to teach them what to so when someone suffers with one. You see we teach children to rightly understand real dangerous situations they may face. Be it from not touching a fire, because fear is instrumental in how we learn and grow in order to not make the same mistakes.

So on every aspect your understanding of reason, is one that denies the ability to learn, it tries to mollycoddle people and deny them the ability to see what real dangers there are out there in life. We first learn to crawl before we walk, but when we first learn to walk, we first learn by falling and learn the lessons from this. So on no level what you think you teach is right, fails to understand, that you can better prepare people by getting them to overcome their worst fears.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:By the time the child is old enough to use a phone and explain something is hurting he will no doubt know the correct terminology....pet names are just baby names, like mama and moo cow, willy and daisy, choo choo and dindin....for goodness sake, they are harmless.

I just don't see the point you are making in constantly saying its wrong....and stop talking to me as if I am stupid and you are the bleedin oracle....we all bring our kids up in the best we see fit.

And when they turn out to be good, decent happy  members of society, it sort of proves that we DID actually know what we were talking about .

Is that why 3 and 4 year old have ended up saving the lives of their parents over the phone syl?

Pet names are just useless, because teaching them brings about confusion, especially, when these children learn the correct terms as they should at school. Its confusing when they know the correct terms, but some other parent mollycoddles their child and has instead called their private part a flower instead. Further confusing other children. What you need is uniform terminology.

Th point is on no other situation do you use other terms to teach a child about any other body part. None, you might say tummy, but its still correct to use. You dont see the point because you continually want to smother children and not allow them to truly be educated. I mean what happens is that you have to end up unteaching the child what wrongs they have learnt from their parents. That is called a waste of time.

You then use the victim card as if I am calling you stupid. No I am not, your reasoning is poor to say the least, so stop deflecting and making it personal. Your issue and its always been your issue, is you simply cannot take criticism

So again for the last time, how about you actually answer my questions

So you tell me why change the name for sexual parts and not other body parts, if its not due to a fear of embarrassment?

Why not call the head a noggin or a gigantic melon to a child?

So you claim its easier for the child to learn?

Really?

How is penis far more difficult to understand than sausage?

This is why your answers are at best a load of rubbish

You are claiming that a child needs to understand all other body parts but for the sexual ones, we have to lie to them. Really, you think telling them the correct name is going to harm them some how?

Please explain that to me?

Yes there has been cases (very few and far between) of children saving lives over the phone, I cant recall one involving a vagina or a penis though, is it not usually a heart attack or an asthma attack that needs urgent help?

I'm not playing a victim card because I am definitely not a victim...you have however talked to me a if I'm stupid....so stop it, I am not, and I don't say you are, even when I obviously think you are wrong.

I have now exhausted my explanation gene on this subject....over and out.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Is that why 3 and 4 year old have ended up saving the lives of their parents over the phone syl?

Pet names are just useless, because teaching them brings about confusion, especially, when these children learn the correct terms as they should at school. Its confusing when they know the correct terms, but some other parent mollycoddles their child and has instead called their private part a flower instead. Further confusing other children. What you need is uniform terminology.

Th point is on no other situation do you use other terms to teach a child about any other body part. None, you might say tummy, but its still correct to use. You dont see the point because you continually want to smother children and not allow them to truly be educated. I mean what happens is that you have to end up unteaching the child what wrongs they have learnt from their parents. That is called a waste of time.

You then use the victim card as if I am calling you stupid. No I am not, your reasoning is poor to say the least, so stop deflecting and making it personal. Your issue and its always been your issue, is you simply cannot take criticism

So again for the last time, how about you actually answer my questions

So you tell me why change the name for sexual parts and not other body parts, if its not due to a fear of embarrassment?

Why not call the head a noggin or a gigantic melon to a child?

So you claim its easier for the child to learn?

Really?

How is penis far more difficult to understand than sausage?

This is why your answers are at best a load of rubbish

You are claiming that a child needs to understand all other body parts but for the sexual ones, we have to lie to them. Really, you think telling them the correct name is going to harm them some how?

Please explain that to me?

Yes there has been cases (very few and far between) of children saving lives over the phone, I cant recall one involving a vagina or a penis though, is it not usually a heart attack or an asthma attack that needs urgent help?

I'm not playing a victim card because I am definitely not a victim...you have however talked to me a if I'm stupid....so stop it, I am not, and I don't say you are, even when I obviously think you are wrong.

I have now exhausted my explanation gene on this subject....over and out.

So again you misdirect with claiming I am calling you stupid, with failing to yet again answer my points

I explained I am not calling you stupid and yet you persist, with this piss poor misdirection

You have just rendered yourself redundant in this debate if you keep using poor misdirection to cast me being personal about you. I moved on from the other day and now you are the one being immature

If you cannot answer my questions, then say so

Stop making up poor lies, to claim I am calling you stupid, to garner sympathy

So as you cannot answer my points, i thank you for your views, but as seen, its down to one simple thing here

You simple do not like people being critical of your views

That is something you need to learn to live with

Thorin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:and how many of THOSE are down to "self treated minor wounds" as opposed to "hospital aquired" infections or UNTREATED  minor wounds???

Did you read the link?

I guess not

i did...and fail to see the relevance

since.....

even IF i were to attend an injuries unit...what would THEY do that I wouldnt do in the normal course of events

lets see

theres me with a bad-ish cut...like the circular saw did to my finger end

what would THEY do...

well from experience. of a similar cut
they would clean the wound (with peroxide fgs)
spray it with povidone iodine
seal the wound with superglue/stitches
dress it with iodine gauze and bandage

then give me a "dressings pack and tell me to go see the GP nurse to get the dressing changed (a job I can do myslef anyway) after 3 days
and told me to keep an eye on it that it doesnt become infected...(q? how do THEY know I would know what constitutes "infected"??)

what would I do?

clean the wound...with peroxide
spray with povidone iodine
seal the wound if necessary
OR just dress securely with iodine gauze and bandage

redress regularly and "keep an eye on it that it doesnt become infected


ermmmm....

whassa difference?

(granted I DO have a somewhat more advanced "first aid kit" than most people including that blood clotting gauze and israeli bandages)

Lord Foul wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Did you read the link?

I guess not

i did...and fail to see the relevance

since.....

even IF i were to attend an injuries unit...what would THEY do that I wouldnt do in the normal course of events

lets see

theres me with a bad-ish cut...like the circular saw did to my finger end

what would THEY do...

well from experience. of a similar cut
they would clean the wound (with peroxide fgs)
spray it with povidone iodine
seal the wound with superglue/stitches
dress it with iodine gauze and bandage

then give me a "dressings pack and tell me to go see the GP nurse to get the dressing changed (a job I can do myslef anyway) after 3 days
and told me to keep an eye on it that it doesnt become infected...(q? how do THEY know I would know what constitutes "infected"??)

what would I do?

clean the wound...with peroxide
spray with povidone iodine
seal the wound if necessary
OR just dress securely with iodine gauze and bandage

redress regularly and "keep an eye on it that it doesnt become infected


ermmmm....

whassa difference?

(granted I DO have a somewhat more advanced "first aid kit" than most people including that blood clotting gauze and israeli bandages)

You still dont grasp this do you Victor?

How many people with simple cuts and grazes end up with sepsis?

I have no doubt that you are very clued up and admit you would not waste time being seen, but the facts are this. In only takes one incident, for where you ere not able to clean the wound because it was too deep or what you used, would then cause an infection in your blood.

If you want to take that risks, that is up to you, but there is nothing every wrong, from taking a second opinion, is there?

You might think its a waste of time, but as seen others have felt the same and to their costs and they are far less better prepared than you i admit.

All I am saying is, you place yourself at a higher risk.

Thorin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Did you read the link?

I guess not

i did...and fail to see the relevance

since.....

even IF i were to attend an injuries unit...what would THEY do that I wouldnt do in the normal course of events

lets see

theres me with a bad-ish cut...like the circular saw did to my finger end

what would THEY do...

well from experience. of a similar cut
they would clean the wound (with peroxide fgs)
spray it with povidone iodine
seal the wound with superglue/stitches
dress it with iodine gauze and bandage

then give me a "dressings pack and tell me to go see the GP nurse to get the dressing changed (a job I can do myslef anyway) after 3 days
and told me to keep an eye on it that it doesnt become infected...(q? how do THEY know I would know what constitutes "infected"??)

what would I do?

clean the wound...with peroxide
spray with povidone iodine
seal the wound if necessary
OR just dress securely with iodine gauze and bandage

redress regularly and "keep an eye on it that it doesnt become infected


ermmmm....

whassa difference?

(granted I DO have a somewhat more advanced "first aid kit" than most people including that blood clotting gauze and israeli bandages)

You still dont grasp this do you Victor?

How many people with simple cuts and grazes end up with sepsis?

now thats a good question...certainly one of those survivors seems to think it was from a mere blood blister.

I have no doubt that you are very clued up and admit you would not waste time being seen, but the facts are this. In only takes one incident, for where you ere not able to clean the wound because it was too deep or what you used, would then cause an infection in your blood.

I think you missed the point....if the wound was THAT bad that I couldnt clean it...then clearly i would seek help, since its likely to need equipment I dont have access to. perhaps local anaesthetics etc and even perhaps a prescription for antibiotics...? the knack of course...is knowing where the limits lie....

If you want to take that risks, that is up to you, but there is nothing every wrong, from taking a second opinion, is there?

You might think its a waste of time, but as seen others have felt the same and to their costs and they are far less better prepared than you i admit.

All I am saying is, you place yourself at a higher risk.

i dont think I do didge, in as much as the risk of getting sepsis in general life (as opposed of course to dieing from it if you have it) is fairly small, I would say the majority is down to hospital aquired infections and or due to other unforseeable factors (damaged immunity etc). It would be interesting to study the life style of those who were struck by it, from infancy onward...are those susceptible to it the product of the "super sterile household" that has become a feature of today?

Lord Foul wrote:

Thorin wrote:

You still dont grasp this do you Victor?

How many people with simple cuts and grazes end up with sepsis?

now thats a good question...certainly one of those survivors seems to think it was from a mere blood blister.

I have no doubt that you are very clued up and admit you would not waste time being seen, but the facts are this. In only takes one incident, for where you ere not able to clean the wound because it was too deep or what you used, would then cause an infection in your blood.

I think you missed the point....if the wound was THAT bad that I couldnt clean it...then clearly i would seek help, since its likely to need equipment I dont have access to. perhaps local anaesthetics etc and even perhaps a prescription for antibiotics...?  the knack of course...is knowing where the limits lie....

If you want to take that risks, that is up to you, but there is nothing every wrong, from taking a second opinion, is there?

You might think its a waste of time, but as seen others have felt the same and to their costs and they are far less better prepared than you i admit.

All I am saying is, you place yourself at a higher risk.

i dont think I do didge, in as much as the risk of getting sepsis in general life (as opposed of course to dieing from it if you have it) is fairly small, I would say the majority is down to hospital aquired infections and or due to other unforseeable factors (damaged immunity etc). It would be interesting to study the life style of those who were struck by it, from infancy onward...are those susceptible to it the product of the "super sterile household" that has become a feature of today?

A tad unfair on hospitals, but agree for the sake of understanding, it would be best placed to understand how people contracted sepsis. Even more so if they had not had tetanus or other vaccines. Or of this would simple be bad luck.

So you make a very good point.

Thorin wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

One would have thought that given the recent revelation that hospital blunders, such as leaving swabs or instruments inside people or giving them the wrong medication, had led to around 4,000 avoidable deaths last year, NHS Trusts might reasonably have concluded that actually keeping patients alive commanded a higher priority than telling parents not to talk about willies.

And that is your reason to misdirect from the point at hand and now make all NHS staff culpable for mistakes and deaths. As if that someone means we can dismiss the right way to name body parts?

Please explain than nonsense to me?

So you think that the prevention of fatal clinical errors including the prescription of incorrect medicines and leaving swabs, needles and even scalpels in patients should be regarded as being of a lower priority in the NHS than lecturing parents on what to call their children's sexual organs, do you?

Were 4,000 fatalities in a year insufficient to convince you otherwise?

And I would suggest that for actual "nonsense" you need only to refer to your own post, and then perhaps to re-write it in something at least approaching intelligible English.

In the kingdom of fools you truly reign supreme.

Lord Foul wrote:

Thorin wrote:

You still dont grasp this do you Victor?

How many people with simple cuts and grazes end up with sepsis?

now thats a good question...certainly one of those survivors seems to think it was from a mere blood blister.

I have no doubt that you are very clued up and admit you would not waste time being seen, but the facts are this. In only takes one incident, for where you ere not able to clean the wound because it was too deep or what you used, would then cause an infection in your blood.

I think you missed the point....if the wound was THAT bad that I couldnt clean it...then clearly i would seek help, since its likely to need equipment I dont have access to. perhaps local anaesthetics etc and even perhaps a prescription for antibiotics...?  the knack of course...is knowing where the limits lie....

If you want to take that risks, that is up to you, but there is nothing every wrong, from taking a second opinion, is there?

You might think its a waste of time, but as seen others have felt the same and to their costs and they are far less better prepared than you i admit.

All I am saying is, you place yourself at a higher risk.

i dont think I do didge, in as much as the risk of getting sepsis in general life (as opposed of course to dieing from it if you have it) is fairly small, I would say the majority is down to hospital aquired infections and or due to other unforseeable factors (damaged immunity etc). It would be interesting to study the life style of those who were struck by it, from infancy onward...are those susceptible to it the product of the "super sterile household" that has become a feature of today?

What about someone like me? I was hospitalised with sepsis in November

Miffs2 wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:



i dont think I do didge, in as much as the risk of getting sepsis in general life (as opposed of course to dieing from it if you have it) is fairly small, I would say the majority is down to hospital aquired infections and or due to other unforseeable factors (damaged immunity etc). It would be interesting to study the life style of those who were struck by it, from infancy onward...are those susceptible to it the product of the "super sterile household" that has become a feature of today?

What about someone like me? I was hospitalised with sepsis in November

One of the GPs at our local health centre died of it less than a month ago, so even professionals do not always spot the symptoms. It's an extremely dangerous disease.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
What about someone like me? I was hospitalised with sepsis in November

One of the GPs at our local health centre died of it less than a month ago, so even professionals do not always spot the symptoms. It's an extremely dangerous disease.

Scary time I tell you Lord M.
Came out of nowhere, so fast

That is my point....

is this something new?
or has it been around for ever and is now only noticeable because of better recording and/or the fact that so many other causes of death have been nullified?
Is it possible that living in ultra clean, disinfected scrubbed and pristine environments (as beloved of the "bug spray seller) is a cause , becasue killing all those bugs in the living environment means that folks are less exposed and their immunity thus compromised through lack of practice as it were.
are some house holds TOO clean?

\it strikes me that sepsis tends to strike seemingly randomly, but I wonder if that really is the case.

with our pack of dogs and pride of cats, birds tortoises etc, and the fact that I'm also in regular contact with meerkats, skunks etc, you can immagine that whilst out house is safe enogh biologically to live in its hardly pristine...nor would I want it to be
also give that I work with timber which is far from sterile and often pick up splinters, that we have our woodland and I get numerous cuts/scratches etc and contact therfore with the soil, bark etc

generally, if i get "mucky hands" they get a quick squirt of alcohol gel before I eat..unless I'm close to our camp in which case yes i'll wash them properly...and I havnt had bellyache yet?

I get bitten and stung by almost every creature capable....

and was just recently bitten by a miserable old ewe that I assisted giving birth on the farmland that surrounds us...

it seems my immune system is fairly capable and well excercised....

whether thats the key that protects ne I dont know

but any wound I get heals quickly and cleanly without fuss or bother...

moreover, as you know I have psoriasis, and the inevitable truth of that means that my skin is rarely unbroken somewhere on any area with plaques (though it heals within hours)

of course...having said all that I will likely turn all mouldy overnight

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:


And that is your reason to misdirect from the point at hand and now make all NHS staff culpable for mistakes and deaths. As if that someone means we can dismiss the right way to name body parts?

Please explain than nonsense to me?

So you think that the prevention of fatal clinical errors including the prescription of incorrect medicines and leaving swabs, needles and even scalpels in patients should be regarded as being of a lower priority in the NHS than lecturing parents on what to call their children's sexual organs, do you?

Were 4,000 fatalities in a year insufficient to convince you otherwise?

And I would suggest that for actual "nonsense" you need only to refer to your own post, and then perhaps to re-write it in something at least approaching intelligible English.

In the kingdom of fools you truly reign supreme.

So the people in the NHS who believe parents should correctly place the names of sexual parts are to blame for the 4000 deaths that have occurred throughout the NHS are they? That they should have done more to prevent this in hindsight? What next heart surgeons being responsible for the organisation of hospital porters? That individual errors makes all guilty within the NHS? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast cuts. Which has led to vast staff shortages in the NHS is placing great strain on medical staff working ridiculously longer hours. Leading to more and more mistakes becoming a reality? How about rightly blaming the Government for the failures in not funding the NHS properly. Which is leaving the NHS straining to breaking point.

Hence the nonsense of your misdirection based in hindsight

You do realise within the NHS there are many different departments and for you to even make the most dumbest comparison here is not only appalling, it shows the typical point scoring someone does when they try to blame one and all for failures.

So only a right upper class knob would brand the Education department, for the failures of the medical department.

That is effectively what you are saying.

The fact there is multiple NHS divisions and you place the blame here on one that helps educate children. But I guess you want to make further cuts to the NHS and that they also cut their education division, especially around educating children. When what you posted up is in regards to individual error. Says everything that is wrong with an upper class wally such as yourself. Its like blaming you for all the civilian deaths in WW2, because you served in the RAF. That the RAF failed to prevent all civilian loses. That is effectively the dumb reasoning that you are using.

Oh and change the record on what you subscribe to being the correct English you pompous wally. Its really boring now. It just further proves what a snob you really are. Some of us were not born with a silver spoon up our arse like you. Which then gave you a free ride of entry into everything including the RAF.

I suggest you read and understand, with most of all that you stop being a wally

Willy, wee man, tinkle, front bottom, privates….. what words do you use for private parts of the body when talking with your children?

There is a wide variety of words used by families to refer to the penis or vulva. In fact, no other part of the body has been given so many different names!  This is really confusing for children and can get in the way of them asking questions or giving you accurate information.

A new website and video from NHSGGC’s sexual health service, Sandyford, are encouraging parents to tell it like it is and use the accurate terms, from an early age.

Jill Wilson, Health Improvement Lead, Sandyford said: Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words. Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’, ‘leg’ etc

“We have consulted parents across NHSGGC, on their role in educating children about growing up, puberty, sexual health and relationships.

“Parents have told us they are keen to back up the learning that children get in school, but many feel unsure about what to talk about, when, and what language to use. So we built a website to provide this information and support parents in this area.”

Jill added: “We’ve also made a very short film, on the theme of language, which we hope will make parents laugh and then share on various social media platforms and by word of mouth. The film is now available on the homepage of the website.”

Mum Lyndsey McGowan from Alexandria said: “I struggle to talk to my nine year old about this subject.  The website is a great help, it’s easy to use and gives you tips on things you can’t normally find online.  It covers everything I am going through at the moment with my child.”

Jill added: “Most parents want their kids to direct their curious questions to them but sometimes we need a hand with how to answer them. For many parents, this is particularly so for questions about growing up, changing bodies, relationships and sexual health. Fear not, we’re here to help!”

http://www.sandyford.org/parents-sandyford/

http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/about-us/media-centre/news/2017/04/parents-urged-to-use-proper-words-for-parts-of-their-body/

Thorin wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

So you think that the prevention of fatal clinical errors including the prescription of incorrect medicines and leaving swabs, needles and even scalpels in patients should be regarded as being of a lower priority in the NHS than lecturing parents on what to call their children's sexual organs, do you?

Were 4,000 fatalities in a year insufficient to convince you otherwise?

And I would suggest that for actual "nonsense" you need only to refer to your own post, and then perhaps to re-write it in something at least approaching intelligible English.

In the kingdom of fools you truly reign supreme.

So the people in the NHS who believe parents should correctly place the names of sexual parts are to blame for the 4000 deaths that have occurred throughout the NHS are they? That they should have done more to prevent this in hindsight? What next heart surgeons being responsible for the organisation of hospital porters? That individual errors makes all guilty within the NHS? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast cuts. Which has led to vast staff shortages in the NHS is placing great strain on medical staff working ridiculously longer hours. Leading to more and more mistakes becoming a reality? How about rightly blaming the Government for the failures in not funding the NHS properly. Which is leaving the NHS straining to breaking point.

Hence the nonsense of your misdirection based in hindsight

You do realise within the NHS there are many different departments and for you to even make the most dumbest comparison here is not only appalling, it shows the typical point scoring someone does when they try to blame one and all for failures.

So only a right upper class knob would brand the Education department, for the failures of the medical department.

That is effectively what you are saying.

The fact there is multiple NHS divisions and you place the blame here on one that helps educate children. But I guess you want to make further cuts to the NHS and that they also cut their education division, especially around educating children. When what you posted up is in regards to individual error. Says everything that is wrong with an upper class wally such as yourself. Its like blaming you for all the civilian deaths in WW2, because you served in the RAF. That the RAF failed to prevent all civilian loses. That is effectively the dumb reasoning that you are using.

Oh and change the record on what you subscribe to being the correct English you pompous wally. Its really boring now. It just further proves what a snob you really are. Some of us were not born with a silver spoon up our arse like you. Which then gave you a free ride of entry into everything including the RAF.

I suggest you read and understand, with most of all that you stop being a wally

Willy, wee man, tinkle, front bottom, privates….. what words do you use for private parts of the body when talking with your children?

There is a wide variety of words used by families to refer to the penis or vulva. In fact, no other part of the body has been given so many different names!  This is really confusing for children and can get in the way of them asking questions or giving you accurate information.

A new website and video from NHSGGC’s sexual health service, Sandyford, are encouraging parents to tell it like it is and use the accurate terms, from an early age.

Jill Wilson, Health Improvement Lead, Sandyford said: Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words. Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’, ‘leg’ etc

“We have consulted parents across NHSGGC, on their role in educating children about growing up, puberty, sexual health and relationships.

“Parents have told us they are keen to back up the learning that children get in school, but many feel unsure about what to talk about, when, and what language to use. So we built a website to provide this information and support parents in this area.”

Jill added: “We’ve also made a very short film, on the theme of language, which we hope will make parents laugh and then share on various social media platforms and by word of mouth. The film is now available on the homepage of the website.”

Mum Lyndsey McGowan from Alexandria said: “I struggle to talk to my nine year old about this subject.  The website is a great help, it’s easy to use and gives you tips on things you can’t normally find online.  It covers everything I am going through at the moment with my child.”

Jill added: “Most parents want their kids to direct their curious questions to them but sometimes we need a hand with how to answer them. For many parents, this is particularly so for questions about growing up, changing bodies, relationships and sexual health. Fear not, we’re here to help!”

http://www.sandyford.org/parents-sandyford/

http://www.nhsggc.org.uk/about-us/media-centre/news/2017/04/parents-urged-to-use-proper-words-for-parts-of-their-body/

You do waste an inordinate amount of time and effort on feebly attempting to defend and justify your pathetically flawed opinions and childish craving for obsequious approbation, don't you?

It might be worth it if any of it made sense, though at least your acres of cut and pasted material are mostly written in readable English.

Are you going to cite yesterday's news of the sentencing of a criminally irresponsible surgeon - in addition to 4,000 deaths through clinical negligence - as yet another example of why the NHS should be affording the highest priority to lecturing parents about the evils of mentioning willies?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:

So the people in the NHS who believe parents should correctly place the names of sexual parts are to blame for the 4000 deaths that have occurred throughout the NHS are they? That they should have done more to prevent this in hindsight? What next heart surgeons being responsible for the organisation of hospital porters? That individual errors makes all guilty within the NHS? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast cuts. Which has led to vast staff shortages in the NHS is placing great strain on medical staff working ridiculously longer hours. Leading to more and more mistakes becoming a reality? How about rightly blaming the Government for the failures in not funding the NHS properly. Which is leaving the NHS straining to breaking point.

Hence the nonsense of your misdirection based in hindsight

You do realise within the NHS there are many different departments and for you to even make the most dumbest comparison here is not only appalling, it shows the typical point scoring someone does when they try to blame one and all for failures.

So only a right upper class knob would brand the Education department, for the failures of the medical department.

That is effectively what you are saying.

The fact there is multiple NHS divisions and you place the blame here on one that helps educate children. But I guess you want to make further cuts to the NHS and that they also cut their education division, especially around educating children. When what you posted up is in regards to individual error. Says everything that is wrong with an upper class wally such as yourself. Its like blaming you for all the civilian deaths in WW2, because you served in the RAF. That the RAF failed to prevent all civilian loses. That is effectively the dumb reasoning that you are using.

Oh and change the record on what you subscribe to being the correct English you pompous wally. Its really boring now. It just further proves what a snob you really are. Some of us were not born with a silver spoon up our arse like you. Which then gave you a free ride of entry into everything including the RAF.

I suggest you read and understand, with most of all that you stop being a wally

You do waste an inordinate amount of time and effort on feebly attempting to defend and justify your pathetically flawed opinions and childish craving for obsequious approbation, don't you?

It might be worth it if any of it made sense, though at least your acres of cut and pasted material are mostly written in readable English.

Are you going to cite yesterday's news of the sentencing of a criminally irresponsible surgeon - in addition to 4,000 deaths through clinical negligence - as yet another example of why the NHS should be affording the highest priority to lecturing parents about the evils of mentioning willies?

1) Immature misdirection again with no point on the debate.

2) Even more immature misdirection again with no point on the debate.

3) So now according to the resident snob, one surgeon is a reason to make all departments of the NHS culpable for his criminal acts?

Of course its no surprise that a know it all thinks he is above all education and calls education now lecturing parents. When all they are rightly doing is bringing uniformity to the names of the human body

The horror

So again for all the points you avoided

So the people in the NHS who believe parents should correctly place the names of sexual parts are to blame for the 4000 deaths that have occurred throughout the NHS are they? That they should have done more to prevent this in hindsight? What next heart surgeons being responsible for the organisation of hospital porters? That individual errors makes all guilty within the NHS? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast cuts. Which has led to vast staff shortages in the NHS is placing great strain on medical staff working ridiculously longer hours. Leading to more and more mistakes becoming a reality? How about rightly blaming the Government for the failures in not funding the NHS properly. Which is leaving the NHS straining to breaking point.

Hence the nonsense of your misdirection based in hindsight

You do realise within the NHS there are many different departments and for you to even make the most dumbest comparison here is not only appalling, it shows the typical point scoring someone does when they try to blame one and all for failures.

So only a right upper class knob would brand the Education department, for the failures of the medical department.

That is effectively what you are saying.

The fact there is multiple NHS divisions and you place the blame here on one that helps educate children. But I guess you want to make further cuts to the NHS and that they also cut their education division, especially around educating children. When what you posted up is in regards to individual error. Says everything that is wrong with an upper class wally such as yourself. Its like blaming you for all the civilian deaths in WW2, because you served in the RAF. That the RAF failed to prevent all civilian loses. That is effectively the dumb reasoning that you are using.

Oh and change the record on what you subscribe to being the correct English you pompous wally. Its really boring now. It just further proves what a snob you really are. Some of us were not born with a silver spoon up our arse like you. Which then gave you a free ride of entry into everything including the RAF.

Thorin wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

You do waste an inordinate amount of time and effort on feebly attempting to defend and justify your pathetically flawed opinions and childish craving for obsequious approbation, don't you?

It might be worth it if any of it made sense, though at least your acres of cut and pasted material are mostly written in readable English.

Are you going to cite yesterday's news of the sentencing of a criminally irresponsible surgeon - in addition to 4,000 deaths through clinical negligence - as yet another example of why the NHS should be affording the highest priority to lecturing parents about the evils of mentioning willies?

1) Immature misdirection again with no point on the debate.

2) Even more immature misdirection again with no point on the debate.

3) So now according to the resident snob, one surgeon is a reason to make all departments of the NHS culpable for his criminal acts?

Of course its no surprise that a know it all thinks he is above all education and calls education now lecturing parents. When all they are rightly doing is bringing uniformity to the names of the human body

The horror

So again for all the points you avoided

So the people in the NHS who believe parents should correctly place the names of sexual parts are to blame for the 4000 deaths that have occurred throughout the NHS are they? That they should have done more to prevent this in hindsight? What next heart surgeons being responsible for the organisation of hospital porters? That individual errors makes all guilty within the NHS? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast cuts. Which has led to vast staff shortages in the NHS is placing great strain on medical staff working ridiculously longer hours. Leading to more and more mistakes becoming a reality? How about rightly blaming the Government for the failures in not funding the NHS properly. Which is leaving the NHS straining to breaking point.

Hence the nonsense of your misdirection based in hindsight

You do realise within the NHS there are many different departments and for you to even make the most dumbest comparison here is not only appalling, it shows the typical point scoring someone does when they try to blame one and all for failures.

So only a right upper class knob would brand the Education department, for the failures of the medical department.

That is effectively what you are saying.

The fact there is multiple NHS divisions and you place the blame here on one that helps educate children. But I guess you want to make further cuts to the NHS and that they also cut their education division, especially around educating children. When what you posted up is in regards to individual error. Says everything that is wrong with an upper class wally such as yourself. Its like blaming you for all the civilian deaths in WW2, because you served in the RAF. That the RAF failed to prevent all civilian loses. That is effectively the dumb reasoning that you are using.

Oh and change the record on what you subscribe to being the correct English you pompous wally. Its really boring now. It just further proves what a snob you really are. Some of us were not born with a silver spoon up our arse like you. Which then gave you a free ride of entry into everything including the RAF.

No doubt the grieving families of the 4,000 victims of clinical negligence and the women maimed and scarred mentally and physically by the now imprisoned surgeon will be somewhat slow in rushing to acknowlege your logic.

I wonder whether anyone else here has noticed your inevitable wails of "misdirection" whenever you manage to make a complete tit of yourself?

Mugwump.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:


1) Immature misdirection again with no point on the debate.

2) Even more immature misdirection again with no point on the debate.

3) So now according to the resident snob, one surgeon is a reason to make all departments of the NHS culpable for his criminal acts?

Of course its no surprise that a know it all thinks he is above all education and calls education now lecturing parents. When all they are rightly doing is bringing uniformity to the names of the human body

The horror

So again for all the points you avoided

So the people in the NHS who believe parents should correctly place the names of sexual parts are to blame for the 4000 deaths that have occurred throughout the NHS are they? That they should have done more to prevent this in hindsight? What next heart surgeons being responsible for the organisation of hospital porters? That individual errors makes all guilty within the NHS? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast cuts. Which has led to vast staff shortages in the NHS is placing great strain on medical staff working ridiculously longer hours. Leading to more and more mistakes becoming a reality? How about rightly blaming the Government for the failures in not funding the NHS properly. Which is leaving the NHS straining to breaking point.

Hence the nonsense of your misdirection based in hindsight

You do realise within the NHS there are many different departments and for you to even make the most dumbest comparison here is not only appalling, it shows the typical point scoring someone does when they try to blame one and all for failures.

So only a right upper class knob would brand the Education department, for the failures of the medical department.

That is effectively what you are saying.

The fact there is multiple NHS divisions and you place the blame here on one that helps educate children. But I guess you want to make further cuts to the NHS and that they also cut their education division, especially around educating children. When what you posted up is in regards to individual error. Says everything that is wrong with an upper class wally such as yourself. Its like blaming you for all the civilian deaths in WW2, because you served in the RAF. That the RAF failed to prevent all civilian loses. That is effectively the dumb reasoning that you are using.

Oh and change the record on what you subscribe to being the correct English you pompous wally. Its really boring now. It just further proves what a snob you really are. Some of us were not born with a silver spoon up our arse like you. Which then gave you a free ride of entry into everything including the RAF.

No doubt the grieving families of the 4,000 victims of clinical negligence and the women maimed and scarred mentally and physically by the now imprisoned surgeon will be somewhat slow in rushing to acknowlege your logic.

I wonder whether anyone else here has noticed your inevitable wails of "misdirection" whenever you manage to make a complete tit of yourself?

Mugwump.

Will they?

I doubt they are as pathetic as you to blame all people within the NHS and place rightly the blame on the Government for constant cuts to the NHS. Which is causing vast shortages, longer hours worked and leading to more and more errors happening, but its no surprise you fail to see this or how you blame now everyone in the NHS.

The reality is you are nothing more than another fossil, extinct in your views and who again like many here fail to offer a reason against bringing uniformity to teaching the body parts to children. Instead we see the most outlandish bullshit born from a right snob.

An unprecedented increase in “excess deaths” in England and Wales could be linked to underfunding in the NHS and social care system, new research suggests.


“Relentless cuts” to the health service could be behind 30,000 deaths in 2015, argued researchers in two articles published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.


The Government has angrily refuted the claims, calling the reports a “triumph of personal bias over research”.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/nhs-cuts-excess-deaths-30000-study-research-royal-society-medicine-london-school-hygiene-martin-a7585001.html

Thorin wrote:An unprecedented increase in “excess deaths” in England and Wales could be linked to underfunding in the NHS and social care system, new research suggests.


“Relentless cuts” to the health service could be behind 30,000 deaths in 2015, argued researchers in two articles published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.


The Government has angrily refuted the claims, calling the reports a “triumph of personal bias over research”.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/nhs-cuts-excess-deaths-30000-study-research-royal-society-medicine-london-school-hygiene-martin-a7585001.html

All the more reason for making a solution to the clinical negligence problem the highest priority, over and above spending limited financial and staff resources on things such as focus groups and publications. I would have thought that obvious even to the most limited intelligence.

In the meantime I will do my best to seek an amendment to the Hippocratic Oath that would replace "primum no noclere", or "First do no harm", to read "First use the correct word for prick."

My own suggestion would be "a thorin."

In both Latin and Greek, of course....

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:An unprecedented increase in “excess deaths” in England and Wales could be linked to underfunding in the NHS and social care system, new research suggests.


“Relentless cuts” to the health service could be behind 30,000 deaths in 2015, argued researchers in two articles published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.


The Government has angrily refuted the claims, calling the reports a “triumph of personal bias over research”.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/nhs-cuts-excess-deaths-30000-study-research-royal-society-medicine-london-school-hygiene-martin-a7585001.html

All the more reason for making a solution to the clinical negligence problem the highest priority, over and above spending limited financial and staff resources on things such as focus groups and publications. I would have thought that obvious even to the most limited intelligence.

In the meantime I will do my best to seek an amendment to the Hippocratic Oath that would replace "primum no noclere", or "First do no harm", to read "First use the correct word for prick."

My own suggestion would be "a thorin."

In both Latin and Greek, of course....

So like I said you wish to cut educational departments that help children.

That says it all to me and someone of your lack of understanding fails to understand how this is benefiical to children the NHS educational teams

The fact is the NHS is breaking at the seams because of people like yourself so ignorant of the facts its medical staff working all hours, as there is such a shortage of staff. That we train many doctors here who then bugger off for better money elsewhere. This of course does not concern you and instead you wish to deride the education of children as to a view of it being pointless.

So instead of rightly giving more money and medical staff to the NHS you wish to make more cuts.

Wow

What next, do away with schools?

Like I say, being as your are a fossil, you would be better placed in the archives of a museum

Thorin wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

All the more reason for making a solution to the clinical negligence problem the highest priority, over and above spending limited financial and staff resources on things such as focus groups and publications. I would have thought that obvious even to the most limited intelligence.

In the meantime I will do my best to seek an amendment to the Hippocratic Oath that would replace "primum no noclere", or "First do no harm", to read "First use the correct word for prick."

My own suggestion would be "a thorin."

In both Latin and Greek, of course....

So like I said you wish to cut educational departments that help children.

That says it all to me and someone of your lack of understanding fails to understand how this is benefiical to children the NHS educational teams

The fact is the NHS is breaking at the seams because of people like yourself so ignorant of the facts its medical staff working all hours, as there is such a shortage of staff. That we train many doctors here who then bugger off for better money elsewhere. This of course does not concern you and instead you wish to deride the education of children as to a view of it being pointless.

So instead of rightly giving more money and medical staff to the NHS you wish to make more cuts.

Wow

What next, do away with schools?

Like I say, being as your are a fossil, you would be better placed in the archives of a museum

Which of my posts on this subject even suggests that?

Reproduce it.

Or is it that you find the word "priority" too difficult to comprehend?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So like I said you wish to cut educational departments that help children.

That says it all to me and someone of your lack of understanding fails to understand how this is benefiical to children the NHS educational teams

The fact is the NHS is breaking at the seams because of people like yourself so ignorant of the facts its medical staff working all hours, as there is such a shortage of staff. That we train many doctors here who then bugger off for better money elsewhere. This of course does not concern you and instead you wish to deride the education of children as to a view of it being pointless.

So instead of rightly giving more money and medical staff to the NHS you wish to make more cuts.

Wow

What next, do away with schools?

Like I say, being as your are a fossil, you would be better placed in the archives of a museum

Which of my posts on this subject even suggests that?

Reproduce it.

Or is it that you find the word "priority" too difficult to comprehend?

All of them by claiming education for children is wrong from the NHS

That you now try to deny this says it all

I have nothing against priority

So what are the parents to do when they go to the NHS for help with teaching uniformity with physiology taught to children.

The Snobs answer, "errr you have to sod off, because of 4,000 deaths in the NHS, which I admit is down to government cuts, but have decided to cut education to children also, even though we should have more money and staff anyway"

I mean maybe you can tell me how an educational department for children can give priority elsewhere, when its purpose is education?

Thorin wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Which of my posts on this subject even suggests that?

Reproduce it.

Or is it that you find the word "priority" too difficult to comprehend?

All of them by claiming education for children is wrong from the NHS

That you now try to deny this says it all

I have nothing against priority

So what are the parents to do when they go to the NHS for help with teaching uniformity with physiology taught to children.

The Snobs answer, "errr you have to sod off, because of 4,000 deaths in the NHS, which I admit is down to government cuts, but have decided to cut education to children also, even though we should have more money and staff anyway"

I mean maybe you can tell me how an educational department for children can give priority elsewhere, when its purpose is education?

You appear to be having some difficulty in understanding plain English so I will try again:

In which of my posts on this subject do I even suggest that "... instead of rightly giving more money and medical staff to the NHS I wish to make more cuts."?

In which of my posts do I say "..."errr you have to sod off, because of 4,000 deaths in the NHS, which I admit is down to government cuts, but have decided to cut education to children also, even though we should have more money and staff anyway"?

Reproduce them.

The fact is that being, as usual, in a hole of your own digging, your default, attempted face-saving position is deliberately to misrepresent posts in order to suit your own agenda and now, even, to invent utterly false "quotes" - in other words pure lies.

Your problem is that you are too terminally stupid and have your head so far up your own arse that you are incapable of realising that you have been rumbled.

By the way, since when has the The Glasgow NHS trust’s sexual health service been the NHS education department?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:


All of them by claiming education for children is wrong from the NHS

That you now try to deny this says it all

I have nothing against priority

So what are the parents to do when they go to the NHS for help with teaching uniformity with physiology taught to children.

The Snobs answer, "errr you have to sod off, because of 4,000 deaths in the NHS, which I admit is down to government cuts, but have decided to cut education to children also, even though we should have more money and staff anyway"

I mean maybe you can tell me how an educational department for children can give priority elsewhere, when its purpose is education?

You appear to be having some difficulty in understanding plain English so I will try again:

In which of my posts on this subject do I even suggest that "... instead of rightly giving more money and medical staff to the NHS I wish to make more cuts."?

In which of my posts do I say "..."errr you have to sod off, because of 4,000 deaths in the NHS, which I admit is down to government cuts, but have decided to cut education to children also, even though we should have more money and staff anyway"?

Reproduce them.

The fact is that being, as usual, in a hole of your own digging, your default, attempted face-saving position is deliberately to misrepresent posts in order to suit your own agenda and now, even, to invent utterly false "quotes" - in other words pure lies.

Your problem is that you are too terminally stupid and have your head so far up your own arse that you are incapable of realising that you have been rumbled.

1) Misdirection again and yet more immaturity

2) All of them by discounting the value of educating for children from the NHS

3) As why else are you arguing over the deaths of patients if not to discount the value of teaching children?

4) You jumped in with this idiocy, as if money spent on education is wrong

5) Then we have now nursery level immaturity claiming I have dug a hole. As seen its your argument off deaths, claiming little value to education

6) Then more woeful insults from the snob.

7) So again I mean maybe you can tell me how an educational department for children can give priority elsewhere, when its purpose is education?

Then explain why you went off the deaths of NHS patients as if those within the NHS teaching children on the request of parents are culpable to these deaths?

9) By priorities is simply another translation to cut other departments, when the NHS is already stretched at the seems. Hence the idiocy of your point, when you should be calling for more staff and money for the NHS

Thorin wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

You appear to be having some difficulty in understanding plain English so I will try again:

In which of my posts on this subject do I even suggest that "... instead of rightly giving more money and medical staff to the NHS I wish to make more cuts."?

In which of my posts do I say "..."errr you have to sod off, because of 4,000 deaths in the NHS, which I admit is down to government cuts, but have decided to cut education to children also, even though we should have more money and staff anyway"?

Reproduce them.

The fact is that being, as usual, in a hole of your own digging, your default, attempted face-saving position is deliberately to misrepresent posts in order to suit your own agenda and now, even, to invent utterly false "quotes" - in other words pure lies.

Your problem is that you are too terminally stupid and have your head so far up your own arse that you are incapable of realising that you have been rumbled.

1) Misdirection again and yet more immaturity

2) All of them by discounting the value of educating for children from the NHS

3) As why else are you arguing over the deaths of patients if not to discount the value of teaching children?

4) You jumped in with this idiocy, as if money spent on education is wrong

5) Then we have now nursery level immaturity claiming I have dug a hole. As seen its your argument off deaths, claiming little value to education

6) Then more woeful insults from the snob.

7) So again I mean maybe you can tell me how an educational department for children can give priority elsewhere, when its purpose is education?

Then explain why you went off the deaths of NHS patients as if those within the NHS teaching children on the request of parents are culpable to these deaths?

9) By priorities is simply another translation to cut other departments, when the NHS is already stretched at the seems. Hence the idiocy of your point, when you should be calling for more staff and money for the NHS

And the posts that you have attributed to me? Where are they?

Stop wriggling like a pathetic worm on a hook and produce them.

Face up to it, you're nothing but a snivelling little liar, fraud and coward.

Get out of my sight.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Thorin wrote:

1) Misdirection again and yet more immaturity

2) All of them by discounting the value of educating for children from the NHS

3) As why else are you arguing over the deaths of patients if not to discount the value of teaching children?

4) You jumped in with this idiocy, as if money spent on education is wrong

5) Then we have now nursery level immaturity claiming I have dug a hole. As seen its your argument off deaths, claiming little value to education

6) Then more woeful insults from the snob.

7) So again I mean maybe you can tell me how an educational department for children can give priority elsewhere, when its purpose is education?

Then explain why you went off the deaths of NHS patients as if those within the NHS teaching children on the request of parents are culpable to these deaths?

9) By priorities is simply another translation to cut other departments, when the NHS is already stretched at the seems. Hence the idiocy of your point, when you should be calling for more staff and money for the NHS

And the posts that you have attributed to me? Where are they?

Stop wriggling like a pathetic worm on a hook and produce them.

Face up to it, you're nothing but a snivelling little liar, fraud and coward.

Get out of my sight.

Are you blind?

I said every post you have made

So all you can do is act like the immature 2 year old you are.

Why can you not answer the questions I raised?

Because you know I am right

By saying priority, means diverting or making cuts to other areas, as that is what you are basically saying. When what you should be saying is that there should never be a set cost to the saving of human lives.

That is where your immature and quite frankly ignorant post fails to grasp.

The NHS is meant to be free to all and it should never face any form of cuts and I would rather and happily pay more in taxes to maintain that brilliant free health service that we have.

You tried poorly to demean the NHS helping to uniform our language for children, after parents had asked for this help. You did this by claiming that negligence and errors which has led sadly to deaths, should then be a reason to deny the NHS helping educate children and help parents. It was the worst and most piss poor argument you could come up with. When you should have been arguing off the Government funding far more into the NHS to ensure the needs of all its services are met.

That is why you constantly misdirected and even worse for someone of your intelligence and the fact I do respect you, shows even more how poor your arguments were here.

I haven't had time to read any of the posts in this topic, but I don't see why small children should use such formal words to describe their private areas. Besides,  the words penis and vagina are both latin, so why should parents insist that small kids use latin words for private areas when they don't use formal latin words for their other body parts? Let them use any childish word they like. Why should they use grownup terminology?


IMO if they just say "private areas" or "privates",  that is adequate.  As an added benefit, that choice of words reinforces the fact that no one on earth should invade such areas.

Jules wrote:I haven't had time to read any of the posts in this topic, but I don't see why small children should use such formal words to describe their private areas. Besides,  the words penis and vagina are both latin, so why should parents insist that small kids use latin words for private areas when they don't use formal latin words for their other body parts? Let them use any childish word they like. Why should they use grownup terminology?


IMO if they just say "private areas" or privates, that is adequate. As an added benefit, the choice of words reinforces the fact that no one on earth shoud invade such areas.

So your reasoning is because you claim they are originally latin, even though they are now English words

Eh?

This is about being uniform in what we teach children, where they are clearly confused over the multitude of words being used. We already use the correct terms for all other body parts. Like I say the only reason people make up other words, is they think and treat such words as if they are swear words and are thus embarrassed by them. When they never should be.

Jules wrote:I haven't had time to read any of the posts in this topic, but I don't see why small children should use such formal words to describe their private areas. Besides,  the words penis and vagina are both latin, so why should parents insist that small kids use latin words for private areas when they don't use formal latin words for their other body parts? Let them use any childish word they like. Why should they use grownup terminology?


IMO if they just say "private areas" or "privates",  that is adequate.  As an added benefit, that choice of words reinforces the fact that no one on earth should invade such areas.

Actually that's a very sensible alternative to teaching the adult medically accepted words and the pet names that so many people prefer...me for one.

However, private is a good word, it covers various areas and like you say you can also explain to the child that that area of their body IS private, thus making them aware of boundaries without scaring them.

Thank you Syl..... I think you are sort of agreeing with me there. Not too sure.

Syl wrote:

Jules wrote:I haven't had time to read any of the posts in this topic, but I don't see why small children should use such formal words to describe their private areas. Besides,  the words penis and vagina are both latin, so why should parents insist that small kids use latin words for private areas when they don't use formal latin words for their other body parts? Let them use any childish word they like. Why should they use grownup terminology?


IMO if they just say "private areas" or "privates",  that is adequate.  As an added benefit, that choice of words reinforces the fact that no one on earth should invade such areas.

Actually that's a very sensible alternative to teaching the adult medically accepted words and the pet names that so many people prefer...me for one.

However, private is a good word, it covers various areas and like you say you can also explain to the child that that area of their body IS private, thus making them aware of boundaries without scaring them.

How is it scaring to a child to refer to the correct name?

Again like I say, people treat the correct names as if they are swear words when they never should be, as they have grown up viewing them with such a taboo.

If you are going to make up names, why then not do so for all body parts?

Thorin wrote:

Jules wrote:I haven't had time to read any of the posts in this topic, but I don't see why small children should use such formal words to describe their private areas. Besides,  the words penis and vagina are both latin, so why should parents insist that small kids use latin words for private areas when they don't use formal latin words for their other body parts? Let them use any childish word they like. Why should they use grownup terminology?


IMO if they just say "private areas" or privates, that is adequate. As an added benefit, the choice of words reinforces the fact that no one on earth shoud invade such areas.

So your reasoning is because you claim they are originally latin, even though they are now English words

Eh?

This is about being uniform in what we teach children, where they are clearly confused over the multitude of words being used. We already use the correct terms for all other body parts. Like I say the only reason people make up other words, is they think and treat such words as if they are swear words and are thus embarrassed by them. When they never should be.

Different people have different ways of bringing up their kids and that won't change, Thorin. Each parent will raise their kids according to how they feel it's best. It's easy to be a dreamer and idealist before you have kids. Once you have them you switch into pragmatic / practical mode.

If whatever is best for the kid(s) is your priority you'll not go far wrong. Bye Thorin, got to go now. xxxx

Jules wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So your reasoning is because you claim they are originally latin, even though they are now English words

Eh?

This is about being uniform in what we teach children, where they are clearly confused over the multitude of words being used. We already use the correct terms for all other body parts. Like I say the only reason people make up other words, is they think and treat such words as if they are swear words and are thus embarrassed by them. When they never should be.

Different people have different ways of bringing up their kids and that won't change, Thorin.    Each parent will raise their kids according to how they feel it's best.  It's easy to be a dreamer and idealist before you have kids. Once you have them you switch into pragmatic / practical mode.

If whatever is best for the kid(s) is your priority you'll not go far wrong. Bye Thorin, got to go now. xxxx

Well they certainly have over the years. take for example how less and less people smack their children anymore and how they use better discipline for their children. How about better diets? So to say it won't change when it is changing, is simple trying to deny the inevitable Jules. I mean it was parents that approached the NHS on this issue.

x

Jules wrote:Thank you Syl..... I think you are sort of agreeing with me there. Not too sure.

I said it was a sensible alternative....which implies agreement.

Throughout this thread (I saw you say you haven't read it) there has been a very lively discussion re the best way to teach 'Young' children names for private areas...penis and vagina being the two most obvious. I (and to be honest most others) see nothing wrong in using pet names that both parents and young kids feel comfortable with.
If there are any more youngsters coming along into my family I will stick to the tried and tested pet names, but your suggestion is a 'middle ground' alternative that may please both sides of the debate.

Syl wrote:

Jules wrote:Thank you Syl..... I think you are sort of agreeing with me there. Not too sure.

I said it was a sensible alternative....which implies agreement.

Throughout this thread (I saw you say you haven't read it) there has been a very lively discussion re the best way to teach 'Young' children  names for private areas...penis and vagina being the two most obvious. I (and to be honest most others) see nothing wrong in using pet names that both parents and young kids feel comfortable with.
If there are any more youngsters coming along into my family I will stick to the tried and tested pet names, but your suggestion is a 'middle ground' alternative that may please both sides of the debate.

People used to think the best way to discipline children was by hitting them
That was once the tried and tested way.
Look how that has changed.
Again this is more about the embarrassment over the use of names and what it really shows it that parents have to get over their embarrassment on this.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Actually that's a very sensible alternative to teaching the adult medically accepted words and the pet names that so many people prefer...me for one.

However, private is a good word, it covers various areas and like you say you can also explain to the child that that area of their body IS private, thus making them aware of boundaries without scaring them.

How is it scaring to a child to refer to the correct name?

Again like I say, people treat the correct names as if they are swear words when they never should be, as they have grown up viewing them with such a taboo.

If you are going to make up names, why then not do so for all body parts?

I didn't say the words are scary...... I said teaching a child that certain areas of their body are for them alone could bring in scary connotations for a young child.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:


How is it scaring to a child to refer to the correct name?

Again like I say, people treat the correct names as if they are swear words when they never should be, as they have grown up viewing them with such a taboo.

If you are going to make up names, why then not do so for all body parts?

I didn't say the words are scary...... I said teaching a child that certain areas of their body are for them alone could bring in scary connotations for a young child.

Okay I get that, but why refer to the area as private, when the whole body is private and not to be touched?

I doubt anyone would like someone stroking the leg of a child. I am sure most would rightly go ballistic and hit the disgusting abuser.

Thorin wrote:

Syl wrote:

I didn't say the words are scary...... I said teaching a child that certain areas of their body are for them alone could bring in scary connotations for a young child.

Okay I get that, but why refer to the area as private, when the whole body is private and not to be touched?

I doubt anyone would like someone stroking the leg of a child. I am sure most would rightly go ballistic and hit the disgusting abuser.

Obviously the whole body isn't private, many times a stranger will take hold of a childs hand if they are lost, or touch their heads as they pass....lay a hand on the shoulder when speaking to them.

We wont agree because we haven't thoughout the thread...but privates is certainly a good alternative if parents are not sure how to refer to sexual organs or feel their child would prefer a friendlier sounding pet word.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Okay I get that, but why refer to the area as private, when the whole body is private and not to be touched?

I doubt anyone would like someone stroking the leg of a child. I am sure most would rightly go ballistic and hit the disgusting abuser.

Obviously the whole body isn't private, many times a stranger will take hold of a childs hand if they are lost, or touch their heads as they pass....lay a hand on the shoulder when speaking to them.

We wont agree because we haven't thoughout the thread...but privates is certainly a good alternative if parents are not sure how to refer to sexual organs or feel their child would prefer a friendlier sounding pet word.

No, we are never going to agree on this Syl

Thorin wrote:

Jules wrote:

Different people have different ways of bringing up their kids and that won't change, Thorin.    Each parent will raise their kids according to how they feel it's best.  It's easy to be a dreamer and idealist before you have kids. Once you have them you switch into pragmatic / practical mode.

If whatever is best for the kid(s) is your priority you'll not go far wrong. Bye Thorin, got to go now. xxxx

Well they certainly have over the years. take for example how less and less people smack their children anymore and how they use better discipline for their children. How about better diets? So to say it won't change when it is changing, is simple trying to deny the inevitable Jules.


I mean it was parents that approached the NHS on this issue.
x

That doesn't mean much. Parents are very militant these days and always firing off letters to various organisations.   They could be an extreme fringe group who decided to get together and form a lobby group.  People who send off letters to the NHS about kids' private parts do not sound like regular/average/mainstream parents, they sound like a small fringe group whose kids or close relatives have been affected by child abuse in some way.

I am very strongwilled so I am not the type to be swayed by any opinions written on forums - unless the argument is sold to me convincingly. But fair enough, it's an interesting and thought provoking thread.

Jules wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Well they certainly have over the years. take for example how less and less people smack their children anymore and how they use better discipline for their children. How about better diets? So to say it won't change when it is changing, is simple trying to deny the inevitable Jules.


I mean it was parents that approached the NHS on this issue.
x

That doesn't mean much. Parents are very militant these days and always firing off letters to various organisations.   They could be an extreme fringe group who decided to get together and form a lobby group.  People who send off letters to the NHS about kids' private parts do not sound like regular/average/mainstream parents, they sound like a small fringe group whose kids or close relatives have been affected by child abuse in some way.

I am very strongwilled so I am not the type to be swayed by any opinions written on forums - unless the argument is sold to me convincingly. But fair enough, it's an interesting and thought provoking thread.

Sorry but how does that makes parents an extreme group for not being embarrassed to use the correct terms?

They came to the NHS as schools teach the correct terms and its parents confusing children with countless numerous names, because they wrongly as seen class the terms as taboo and comparable to swear words

So maybe you can explain how you think this makes them extreme, for placing the best interest of their children first?

Thorin wrote:


Parents have been advised not to call children’s body parts nicknames, such as “willy” or “front bottom”, and use the official words instead.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC) stated on its website that using a variety of words to refer to the penis or vulva can be “really confusing for children”.

The NHS trust’s sexual health service, Sandyford, is encouraging parents to “tell it like it is and use accurate terms from an early age”.

Jill Wilson, health improvement lead at Sandyford said: “Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words.

“Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’ and ‘leg’.”


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/children-body-parts-words-advice_uk_5901b563e4b081a5c0fadcc5?utm_hp_ref=uk


Makes perfect sense to me.

well I know a geranium when I see one.

It's not a geranium it'sACunt

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Parents have been advised not to call children’s body parts nicknames, such as “willy” or “front bottom”, and use the official words instead.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGGC) stated on its website that using a variety of words to refer to the penis or vulva can be “really confusing for children”.

The NHS trust’s sexual health service, Sandyford, is encouraging parents to “tell it like it is and use accurate terms from an early age”.

Jill Wilson, health improvement lead at Sandyford said: “Many adults were not taught these words growing up and can feel uncomfortable using them as they can be thought of as ‘sexual’ words.

“Young children do not have these associations and usually consider these words to be as normal as ‘hand’ and ‘leg’.”


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/children-body-parts-words-advice_uk_5901b563e4b081a5c0fadcc5?utm_hp_ref=uk


Makes perfect sense to me.

well I know a geranium when I see one.

It's not a geranium it'sACunt

Well that sums up why you are so uncouth.