Two-drink limit at Wetherspoon’s for parents of rowdy children

The pub chain JD Wetherspoon has insisted families are welcome but on the premises despite advising staff to make them agree a limit of two alcoholic drinks per person for parents with children in town.

The two-drink limit came to light after a member of staff at a Wetherspoon’s pub in Gravesend, Kent, put up a poster detailing its policy.

“As part of our licensing it is our responsibility to ensure that we are protecting children from harm,” read the poster at The Robert Pocock pub.

“Therefore adults in charge of children will be allowed to have one alcoholic drink and a further alcoholic drink with a sit-down meal.”

It is a crime for anybody in charge of a child under the age of seven to be drunk in a public place under the 1902 Licensing Act. A person convicted of this offence can be subject to a fine or up to one month in prison.

“It’s been around eight or 10 years.... It’s a guideline, not a policy,” said Eddie Gershon.

But while the poster stressed the need to “protect children from harm”，Mr Gershon suggested the rule had been adopted to “prevent unruly behavior” among young guests. Asked whether children were welcome in Wetherspoon’s pubs, Mr Gershon replied，“Yes, we’d be a fool to say otherwise. We have a kids’ menu, coloured pencils for kids—children in pubs is a massive part of what Wetherspoon’s does.”

However, he warned that parents believed to be “using the pub as a nursery might be asked to leave. Mr Gershon added that “it is just good manners” for parents to stop their children from misbehaving and being unruly in public places.

On its website the pub operator states: “Families are welcome to dine in the majority of our pubs; however, permitted hours for customers aged under 18 years may vary from pub to pub.”

It adds: “Some of our pubs may request that all members of a party with an under-18 present order a main meal, if alcoholic is ordered.”

5 . Regardless of how famous they are, and despite the star treatment they receive, many celebrities make it a point to give back to charities. Some have even set up their own private foundations. Their widely publicised visits to troubled areas of the world help to raise awareness of issues such as famine and poverty. According to Jane Cooper of Unicef UK, celebrities have a unique ability to reach huge numbers of people, many of whom might not otherwise be engaged in charitable causes. She pointed out that famous faces had played a significant role in raising funds in recent years, and their energies had produced tangible results, such as enabling millions of children in poorer countries to attend school.

But in spite of these successes there is evidence to suggest that celebrity endorsement (代言) may be overrated. In a survey of members of the public to find out if celebrity involvement would encourage people to donate, researchers found that the impact was not as great as previously thought. When shown a list of well-known organisations and famous people who represent them, over half of respondents were unable to match the celebrity with the cause. What’s more, three quarters claimed that they didn’t respond to celebrity endorsement in any way. The survey also showed that a few names did stand out as being associated with particular charities. But the presence of a celebrity in a campaign, was not a significant factor when it came to a decision to donate time or money. Instead, the majority of people contribute because of personal connections in their lives and families which make a charity important to them.

In another study aimed at young people, most participants cited a compelling (无法抗拒的) mission as their main motivation to give. The second most important incentive was if a friend or peer recommended supporting a particular cause. Only two percent of respondents said they were motivated by celebrity endorsement. This seems to contradict the general assumption that teenagers are particularly influenced by famous people. One possible explanation is that there is a general fatigue (疲倦) with celebrity culture. There is also a suspicion that the stars are the one who benefit most when they offer to do charity work. Some critics have accused that celebrities might actually take attention away from issues by attracting more attention than the causes they represent.

So taking all these issues into account, is it time for charities to rethink their campaign strategies and look for alternative ways to reach new audiences? Whichever point of view you favour, there seems to be opportunities for more research into how charity campaigns might develop relationships with celebrities to maximise their potential. This in turn will open up more engagement, and better targeted campaigns-which can only benefit those who really matter — the people and animals that are in need of assistance.

6 . Psychological science is full of interesting topics, many of which tell a coherent picture of human nature, but some of which create seemingly contradictory stories. A case in point is the tricky, and misunderstood, overlap between strength-based science and the research on narcissism (自恋).

There is now convincing evidence to show that narcissism is on the rise, especially in our youth. Some researchers have gone so far as to say that it is occurring in epidemic proportions, with about 25% of young people showing symptoms of narcissism. The inflated ego of Generation Me is reflected in reality TV, celebrity worship, out-of-control consumerism and materialism…perhaps even a new type of president.

We are correct to be concerned about this phenomenon but our fear that all kids are potential narcissists has caused an unhelpful counter-reaction to approaches that seek to make our children and teens feel good about themselves.

In my own research on strength-based parenting it is common for people to wrongly label this approach as a recipe for narcissism. Their argument seems to be that a child who knows their strengths will automatically view themselves as better than everyone else. It is argued that the self-assurance that comes with identifying and using their positive qualities will make a child arrogant, selfish and uncaring. Genuine confidence about one's strengths is categorized as over-confidence; desirable self-knowledge is branded as excessive self-admiration.

Why does this occur? It's partly because more is known about narcissism than strengths. While strengths psychology has largely stayed within the limit of academic journals or has been applied only within certain contexts such as the workplace, research on narcissism has made its way into the mass media and into our collective consciousness. The New York Times noted that narcissism is a favored "go-to" topic and that people everywhere are diagnosing others with it.

The fear that a strength-based approach will cause narcissism also occurs because we unknowingly fall prey to binary (非此即彼) thinking. We mistakenly believe that one cannot be both confident and humble. We focus on Donald Trump and Kim Kardashian rather than Mahatma Gandhi and Mother Teresa. There's no way that Gandhi and Mother Teresa could have achieved what they did without confidence in their strengths, and yet they are both pillars of modesty and selflessness.

When we assume that strength-focus is the same as a self-focus, We fail to entertain the idea that people who know their strengths are, actually, more likely to be pro-social and focus on helping others.

It's tempting to conclude that every young person is at risk of becoming a narcissist but I'd like to stand up for the thousands of young kids I have worked with who are caring, thoughtful and humble — even when they use their strengths.

7 . Imagine someone had a knife and told you, “This is a great knife. The only problem is that it can’t cut anything.” You’d think it’s not a great knife.

“Telos is the Greek word that Aristotle and others use to define the end or purpose of something,” Jonathan Haidt, professor at New York University Stern School of Business, says in a recorded lecture at the University of Colorado Springs. The telos of a knife is to cut. What, Haidt asks, is the telos of a university?

Truth — that’s the purpose of higher education, Haidt says. The academy aims to be a stage where truth is sought, discovered, and explored. When the university is functioning at its best, students learn to present arguments and receive debate in following truth.

Are today’s universities achieving their purpose?

In his lecture, Haidt suggests that changes in campus culture over the past decade have rerouted university resources away from the pursuit of truth and towards creating an emotionally and intellectually comfortable environment for students.

“From out of nowhere, students in 2014 began asking for trigger warnings,” Haidt says. A growing group among student bodies and administrators seemed to believe students were fragile and needed to be aggressively protected from “bad” ideas, offensive imagery, and annoying arguments. Students began protesting speakers, and publicly shaming peers whose words made them uncomfortable.

There are many places and institutions whose purpose, or telos, is comfort. But a university is not one of those places. To make that point, Haidt quotes CNN contributor Van Jones: I don’t want you to be safe ideologically. I don’t want you to be safe emotionally. I want you to be strong — that’s different. I’m not going to settle the jungle for you. Put on some boots and learn how to deal with adversity. I’m not going to take all the weights out of the gym. That’s the whole point of the gym. This is the gym.

Putting comfort over the pursuit of truth, universities are ignoring their purpose. Higher education should be a stage of open exploration and free expression, where ideas are exchanged, tested, and inspected. A common education should be “an invitation to be concerned not with the employment of what is familiar but with understanding what is not yet understood,” according to philosopher Michael Oakeshott.

What is the social influence if universities fail to achieve their purpose? New generations could lose more than academic power; they could lose the ability and interest to pursue and prioritize truth first. They could become so dependent on emotional comfort that they refuse to observe deep in thought “what is not yet understood”. Anyhow, this is happening in reality. It’s time for universities to realize their telos, or they’ll risk losing their essential role in society.

8 . An 8-year-old boy I know is small for his age, shorter and slighter than his friends, even smaller than his 5-year-old sister. Concerned about the increasing use and possible risks of growth hormone(生长激素), I asked his mother if she’d considered treating him with it. She replied, “Not really. He’s built like his father, who was short and slight as a boy and didn’t shoot up until college.”

His father, at 41, is now 6 feet tall, though still very slender. He recalls being a reasonably athletic child but without the physical power of his friends, making up for what he lacked in mass with speed and agility. “I enjoyed competitive sports and worked on skills others didn’t have,” he told me, and said he encourages his son to recognize and capitalize on the skills he has.

If only every parent with a short but healthy child approached the matter as sensibly. Experts estimate that 60% to 80% of children who are short for their age do not have a growth hormone deficiency(缺乏) or other medical condition that limits growth. But knowing there’s a therapy available to increase height, some parents seek a medical solution for a perceived problem, even when there is no medical abnormality. They should also know, however, that new research has linked growth hormone treatment to serious unfavorable health effects years later.

Dr. Adda Grimberg, a doctor at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, recalled that “Twenty years ago, families were focused on health. They came in with a child who was not growing right and wanted to know if there was an underlying disease. Now, more and more, they’re focused on height. They want growth hormone, looking for a specific height. But this is not like online shopping; you can’t just place an order and make a child the height you want.”

In 2003, the Food and Drug Administration approved use of recombinant human growth hormone for the condition known as “idiopathic short stature”, or short build of unknown cause, which is not a disease. But it has caused a growing number of parents to consider using the hormone to boost the height of their children.

The resulting rush to therapy reflects concerns about a widespread societal bias(偏见) against shortness, rather than a true medical need. Experts have noted that the practice backs up the belief that short stature is unacceptable, leading to an increasing demand for therapy. It is far better, Dr. Grimberg suggested, to help a short child develop coping skills than to buy inches through medicine.

9 . About IVHQ

At International Volunteer HQ, we bring people from all walks of life together to make a difference on the adventure of a lifetime. Established in 2007, we have grown to become the world’s leading volunteer travel company, working in over 50 destinations around the world and placing thousands of volunteers abroad every year.

We’re focused on providing affordable volunteer travel experiences that are responsible, safe and high quality. Our programs heighten global awareness and cultural understanding through the skills and expertise taken by volunteers to their host communities, and through the experiences and lessons that volunteers take back to their own countries and cultures.

How IVHQ Works

IVHQ provides affordable volunteer programs by partnering with organizations based in each of our program countries. We believe this is the best approach to international volunteering.

First, local organizations are in the best position to see where volunteers are genuinely needed. The staff in these organizations are locals, they have been raised in the area and know it inside and out.

Second, partnering with local organizations reduces the costs associated with hosting volunteers, making programs more affordable. This means more people are enabled to volunteer and that enables greater social outcomes to be achieved.

Why Volunteer Abroad with IVHQ

Having supported thousands of people to volunteer abroad since 2007, IVHQ is proud to be the most popular volunteer travel organization for international volunteers. One of the major strengths of IVHQ is our careful selection process in choosing our partner organizations and the high quality volunteer programs that we offer through these partners. Every program that IVHQ offers has been personally inspected by IVHQ. We have experienced the programs first-hand, we have assessed the local teams and we have provided comprehensive IVHQ training to all of our local teams.

How to Get Started

Want to make a difference? Click this simple step-by-step guide to choose the perfect volunteer program and secure your place with IVHQ. We’re here for you from start to finish.

Digital Inclusion for Older Adults

As a researcher in the behavior of older adults, I regularly hear complaints from them like, “I’m just not part of this world anymore. In certain parts of society, I just can’t join… Some things just are not possible if you are not in the flow of the Internet.” or “We feel like we’re standing outside a building that we have no access to.”

Today, mastering digital technology has become a key component of what it means to fully participate in society. But one area in particular threatens to prevent some older adults from making connections: the digital divide.

As a recent study shows, one-third of adults aged 65 and older say they’ve never used the Internet, and half don’t have Internet access at home. Of those who do use the Internet, nearly half say they need someone else’s help to set up or use a new digital device.

In contrast to concerns about technology use increasing isolation(孤立；隔离) among younger populations, the communication and connection possible online can be especially valuable for older adults who are homebound, live far away from family, or have lost the loved ones. Older adults can use online tools to connect with friends and family via messaging platforms, video chat, and social media even if they can no longer physically visit them. And they can engage with the outside world through news, blogs, streaming platforms, and email, even if they are no longer able to move about as easily as they once could.

For older adults in particular, the risks associated with social isolation are profound. Loneliness among older adults has been associated with depression, functional decline, and death. Technology can serve as an important tool to help reduce these risks, but only if we provide older adults with the skills they need, to make inclusion in the digital world accessible to them.

The importance of digital inclusion is not going to disappear with the generational changes of the coming decades. Technology is continuously developing, and with each new digital innovation come challenges for even younger adults to adapt.