YP Letters: Rights and responsibilities of parents

SOME years ago I talked to a group of people about the 1952 Convention on the Rights of the Child and how on too many occasions those rights were overlooked. We all signed a letter to the Government but, as they say, “some fell on stony ground”.

I still feel there is much to be said for a body whose task is to examine all legislation and to look at the structures within society as they are today in order to see whether improvements could be made to prevent the all-too-frequent suffering to which children are subjected because of the selfishness of adults.

For example we have agencies whose task is to rescue children from abuse but none that I know of whose task it is to ensure that those contemplating procreation have thought through what their responsibilities are.

Just three examples of an agenda for prospective parents to consider are:

1) How firm is our intention to remain together as parents and how realistic is it?

2) Our child will be entitled to be provided by us with safe and secure place in which to grow up. Are we in a position to provide this for the foreseeable future?

3) Do we ourselves have the educational background to provide our child with a good start in life?

These questions are of course just starting points for the sort of discussion that prospective parents ought to be having.

From: John Springer, Ingbirchworth, Sheffield.

I PRESUME one must accept that the Thatcher government’s decision to force state schools to sell off land used as playing fields may have affected opportunities for pupils to exercise (The Yorkshire Post, May 12). The new regime may then have had some effect on teachers’ efforts at keeping school teams going.

I think it was also this government which decided a child could be timetabled for gym for one or two hours a week. As the time included getting to the gym, changing, showering and returning to the classroom, the actual time exercising was often minimal.

Finally, when I started teaching, most teachers expected to take a turn at being on a playing field with pupils in school teams or out of school activities as part of the job.

BBC not value for our money

From: Karl Sheridan, Selby Road, Holme on Spalding Moor.

THE BBC have again managed to achieve a done deal as regards everyone having to pay the extortionate licence fee – however it would have been nice if the Government consultation asked if £175 a year was good value or not. A vast number of people – including myself – do not feel it is good value, especially when one has to pay Sky and others for additional entertainment.

The BBC do provide some decent programmes. However, during the viewing week, I doubt that there are more than eight or nine worth watching – the rest consist of cheap-to-make food programmes, brain-destroying soaps and repeat after repeat of drivel we have all seen time and time again... and which I object to having to pay to watch when I can see the same rubbish on all the other channels for free.

From: David Quarrie, Lynden Way, Holgate, York.

I HAVE just watched part two of the BBC TV programme about the Invictus Games choir. This has been one of the best ever TV productions in the way it showed the immense skill of choir master Gareth Malone who put together in only seven weeks a choir of severely disabled men and women from the British armed forces.

From: Harry Santiuste, Edenthorpe, Doncaster.

TAKING liberties with Shakespeare on TV can work well if the intention is to amuse the viewers, but the insertion of gay and lesbian scenes in the new BBC production of A Midsummer’s Night Dream seems like pathetic, politically-correct propaganda.

The need for bank facilities

From: Miss JE Ella, Wetwang.

AT nearly 75 years of age, I do not have a computer. Mainly because I do not have the finances either to buy or run one.

Even if I had, I would not dream of banking online as I wouldn’t trust it with a barge pole.

Fine I can use the Post Office, but there again we only have an outreach service one morning a week from 9am-1pm. In my case, it’s keeping a roof over my head and the car on the road to enable me to get to Driffield six and a half miles away.

Fracking risk to miners

From: Andrew Bullivant, Gristhorpe, Filey.

WITH regard to fracking, there is one major point that has not to my knowledge been made. It has been proved that fracking does cause geological disturbance, and in many cases low level tremors. It is stated that these tremors are so weak that they are unlikely to cause damage to properties.

But has anybody thought of the implications for the new potash mine? What seems only a minor disturbance on the surface is likely to be a lot worse underground. Indeed, would you want to be down there while a mini earthquake threatens to shake vital jacks out or crack the roof of the mine workings?