Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

5 Parenting Trends People Don’t Like

Published

on

5 Parenting Trends People Don't Like

Parents who run social media accounts for their kids might want to look away now, as the internet has given its verdict on some of the modern-day parenting ‘trends’ that need to quietly disappear, with some pretty strong opinions being shared.

Here are five of the most popular themes in response to SouthOwn6943′s post asking: “What is a modern parenting trend that needs to die immediately?”

1. ‘Kids’ Instagram accounts’

“Kids Instagram accounts” was the most up-voted response at the time of writing, with over 8,000 people agreeing the parenting trend, where parents manage an Instagram account on their kids’ behalf, needs to go.

Advertisement

It’s perhaps unsurprising this was top of people’s lists, with a growing backlash against sharenting due to fears around children’s safety and the potential for cyberbullying as they grow up.

Parents running social media accounts for their kids in general was also a common bugbear.

“There were a few parents I knew had Facebooks for their kids as online ‘diaries’,” said one commenter. “They were public and shared almost every detail of the kids’ lives up until they either gave up on them or deleted them. Bonkers.”

2. ‘Helicopter parenting’

Advertisement

Another Redditor noted “helicopter parenting and turning every activity into organised competition” should also go, noting it is “robbing kids of important developmental skills and independence”.

Almost 900 people had up-voted their response at the time of writing.

“To add to this, over helping children,” said another commenter. “Very few children now have any problem solving skills. They don’t have any idea how to even begin to tackle any kind of obstacles, nor the resilience to make repeated attempts. And I’m talking about even fairly simple problems like opening a banana independently.”

Advertisement

3. ‘Treating kids like a project to optimise’

Plenty of people had thoughts on Top-Park6991′s comments about parents who tend to treat their kids “like a project to optimise, instead of people who are allowed to be bored, messy, and human” – over 3,800 people up-voted the post.

People noted that parents who push their own dreams on their kids fall into this bracket. One commenter said: “It’s the ‘gardener vs. the carpenter’. We have much less control over who our children become than we think we do.

“If there’s a dandelion seed in the ground it’s not going to become a tulip no matter how hard you try. All you can do is make sure the soil is nourishing so they can be the best damn dandelion in the yard.”

Advertisement

4. ‘Refusing vitamin K for your newborn’

Vitamin K helps our blood to clot and stops bleeding – but newborn babies are born with low levels of it. As a result, some babies can suffer internal bleeding, which can, in rare cases, be fatal.

Every new parent can choose for their baby to receive a shot of vitamin K after birth, but there are some who refuse it. A study noted parents typically do so because of concerns of harm from the injection or a desire to be “natural”.

One nurse noted: “I’ve never seen an infant harmed as a result of a vitamin K shot… but I have seen one die as a result of a brain bleed that could have been prevented with a routine vitamin K injection.” Their comment was up-voted over 3,000 times.

Advertisement

The NHS notes if parents are worried about giving their baby an injection, they can ask to have it administered by mouth instead – but they’ll need further doses.

5. ‘Emotional enmeshment with your kids’

Acting like your child’s friend, rather than their parent, also got the thumbs down from the internet masses. Redditor AlwaysSomethin6722 said: “Your kids aren’t your best friends. They are your kids.”

Some parents might create an enmeshed relationship with their children, where they treat them more like a confidant than a child, which therapist Alex Howard previously labelled as “toxic”. Read more on the signs you were raised in an enmeshed family here.

Advertisement

Another user chimed in: “I’ve had a number of parenting conversations in the past decade and a line I’ve said that always gets a good chuckle out of other parents is ‘I’m not my kids friend, I’ll be that when I can walk in a bar and have a beer with them… and maybe not even that early depending on how they turn out’. It’s amusing to me that it’s amusing to them because that seems ridiculously obvious to me.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Talarico needs Crockett’s Black voters. They aren’t all convinced.

Published

on

A 'mediocre' comment has put Talarico's Texas Senate campaign in the hot seat

DALLAS — Friendship-West Baptist Church is a stronghold for Black politics, where candidates pass through cycle after cycle to win over its 13,000 congregants. It’s the church Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) calls home; her pastor, the Rev. Dr. Frederick D. Haynes III, is now running to succeed her in Congress. Even Beto O’Rourke visited last week to encourage people to register to vote.

But several congregants can’t help but notice a continued absence this year: James Talarico.

The Democratic Senate nominee has a long road ahead if he wants to flip the Texas seat blue — one that requires winning over the state’s nearly 3 million Black voters, who largely broke for Crockett in the March primary and many of whom remain skeptical of his candidacy.

“Come and make the ask. Come and try to earn the vote,” said Alan Williams, a Crockett voter and Friendship-West congregant. “I think he thinks our vote is just a default and he doesn’t have to earn it.”

Advertisement

In the month-and-a-half since he won the nomination, Talarico has begun criss-crossing Texas, including visiting some Black churches, holding meetings with faith leaders and elected officials, and block-walking in majority-Black cities. But frustration from worshippers at Friendship-West — who have yet to hear from him directly — and interviews with Black power brokers across the state reveal the pressure Talarico faces to move faster to heal open wounds from a contentious primary and convince voters to turn out.

David Malcolm McGruder, the church’s executive pastor, said Talarico has to do more to sell his vision to voters — and convince them he’ll follow through: “We have people who show up in our churches during the election season, but who don’t show up for us at the level of policy beyond November.”

Talarico, in an interview, acknowledged that he would “love” to visit Friendship-West soon. “My top priority is bringing our coalition back together, and that is specifically reaching out to Black Texans,” he said. “There’s no way to win Texas without winning the trust and the support of Black voters. Period. Full stop.”

It’s clear that Talarico has his work cut out for him. He wasn’t Black voters’ preferred candidate. Some are exhausted by a messy primary that thrust questions over race and electability into the center of the contest. And while Black voters are overwhelmingly committed Democrats, he needs to keep enthusiasm high to ensure they turn out, especially as concerns over voter suppression grow. (A last-minute rule change in Dallas County, Crockett’s home base, caused thousands of people to be turned away from the polls or have their ballots invalidated on primary Election Day.)

Advertisement

Democrats have long faced accusations that they take Black voters for granted. Several Texas strategists are worried that’ll happen again in the lead up to November — and that the party will blame Black voters if Talarico loses.

“Black voters have been let down over time,” said Antjuan Seawright, a longtime Democratic strategist who has advised the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “What some may not understand is that our vote, more so than any other constituency in the history of this country, has always been a demonstration of our trust, but our trust has either been taken for granted or has always been on the chopping block by a number of people.”

Talarico is already getting on-the-ground support from Democratic groups like O’Rourke’s Powered By People and a host of Black state lawmakers.

“We don’t have time to remain in our feelings,” added Crystal Chism, president of the Dallas County chapter of Texas Coalition of Black Democrats. “We need to make the main thing the main thing, and that’s getting Talarico elected.”

Advertisement

But there’s a notable ally missing: Even though Crockett quickly conceded the race and endorsed Talarico in March, she has yet to hit the campaign trail or put much effort publicly into rallying the base behind him. Crockett, through a spokesperson, declined an interview request for this story.

Talarico said he and Crockett have “exchanged a few messages” since the primary and he “would love nothing more” than to have her on the campaign trail.

“He’s got his work cut out for him,” noted Russell Maryland, the former No. 1 NFL draft pick who won three Super Bowls with the Dallas Cowboys and voted for Crockett in the primary. “He’s gonna have to work to win over Jasmine’s supporters. … Talarico will really need to put his fingers in the ground, so to speak in football terms, and kick up some dust.”

The seminarian is still trying to overcome some of the criticism leveled against him in the lead up to the primary.

Advertisement

In February, a PAC that supported Talarico ran a TV ad with the tagline, “If she wins, we lose.” Crockett claimed the ad darkened her skin and said it was bigoted. “It’s not even undertones right now,” she said. “It’s straight-up racist.” (Talarico, in an interview, emphasized that the PAC was not affiliated with his campaign and that he disagreed with its message. He added that he believes Crockett is electable statewide in Texas, as he has said before.)

Then a social media influencer claimed Talarico told her in a private conversation that former Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas), who dropped out of the Senate race right before Crockett joined, was a “mediocre Black man.” Talarico has said that was a mischaracterization of his comments, and that he was describing Allred’s method of campaigning as mediocre.

Allred, who is now in a competitive run-off to represent Texas’ 33rd district, said in an interview that he backs Talarico. “Of course I support him,” he said. “I support Democrats. I’ve been supporting Democrats here for my whole life.”

But Talarico’s challenge, Allred added, isn’t convincing Black voters to support him over the Republican nominee — it’s convincing them to turn out.

Advertisement

“He needs to show comfort in Black spaces and Black communities,” Allred said. “I’m sure he can do that, but there’s just no substitute for it. Particularly given how some of the ads that ran, there may be some element of having to show contrition, even if he wasn’t responsible for all those.”

Talarico has visited Black churches almost every weekend since the primary, and he dropped by Prairie View A&M University, an HBCU, on Wednesday, where he acknowledged he has “got to earn the trust and the respect and the support of every single one of the congresswoman’s supporters.” He blocked-walk in majority-Black DeSoto, Texas and held a roundtable with Black community leaders in Austin recently. And last month, he convened African American clerics at Saint Luke Community United Methodist Church in Dallas for a discussion about policy.

“The Democratic Party has taken Black voters for granted and assumed that they’re just part of the base, assumed they’ll just show up and vote for you,” Talarico said in an interview. “And I think we’ve seen the disastrous results of that kind of disrespect toward Black voters.”

To his benefit, Talarico has an army of Texas Democrats anxious to flip the state for the first time in decades. Last Sunday, O’Rourke — whose three-point loss in 2018 to GOP Sen. Ted Cruz was Texas Democrats’ high-water mark this century — mingled with congregants at Friendship-West, while his organization’s yellow-vested volunteers encouraged them to check their voter registration.

Advertisement

“I love James Talarico,” O’Rourke said. “I’m excited for him. I’ve talked to him and said, ‘You can send me anywhere that the campaign can’t get to. I will raise money for you. I’ll go try to get your volunteers fired up. I’ll speak as a surrogate. You let me know.’”

State Sen. Royce West of Dallas, who voted for Crockett and has since endorsed Talarico, is also optimistic, if more measured: “He’s warming up. He has support within the African American community. Is it where it needs to be? No. Is he making strides? Yes.”

On the Republican side, longtime Sen. John Cornyn and Attorney General Ken Paxton are locked in a lengthy and expensive run-off that could play to Democrats’ advantage. Talarico’s internal polling shows him competitiveagainst either candidate, but some observers think he has a stronger path against Paxton given his myriad controversies. Talarico boasts a cash advantage with almost $10 million cash on hand after the first quarter of the year, compared with Cornyn’s more than $8 million and Paxton’s $2.6 million.

“There’s work to be done,” said Cliff Walker, a Texas Democratic strategist and principal at Seeker Strategies. “But I don’t stay up at night worried that we’re not going to be able to reassemble this coalition in time for November.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Dodgy Starmer now accused of breaking Ministerial Code

Published

on

Keir Starmer, Peter Mandelson, and the Palantir logo

Keir Starmer, Peter Mandelson, and the Palantir logo

Critics recently accused Keir Starmer of misleading Parliament not once but twice. Starmer’s allies, meanwhile, mostly kept quiet, suggesting they too believed he’d messed up.

This all looks terrible for Starmer. And as if things weren’t bad enough, Ministry of Defence officials have also suggested Starmer broke the Ministerial Code:

Here we go again

As you can see in the image above, the thrice-disgraced Peter Mandelson also attended the meeting:

Advertisement

As Tory councillor Rich says, we’ve known about this dodgy Palantir deal for sometime. What Rich fails to note is that this tendency to afford Palantir secret meetings began with his own party, as the Canary reported on 3 March:

In 2019 at Downing Street Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings, and Peter Thiel – Palantir’s billionaire co-founder and chairman, met for an hour. There were no notes from this meeting. Palantir being awarded Covid contracts followed.

We added:

Advertisement

Starmer has continued this pattern of secret meetings. A February 2025 Washington meeting between  Starmer, Peter Mandelson, and Palantir CEO Alex Karp has no notes and preceded the £240 million December 2025 contract between the Ministry of Defence and Palantir.

Palantir, named after the all-seeing orb from the Lord of the Rings, wants to see everything. But when it comes to its own meetings, it seems they prefer the lights off.

Oh, and let’s not forget all this:

Also central to this picture is Mandelson, whose lobbying firm Global Counsel worked for Palantir. It was Mandelson who introduced Starmer to Palantir CEO Alex Karp at that February 2025 Washington meeting, the one with no notes that preceded the £241 million MOD contract.

Mandelson’s own extensive contacts with Epstein are now the subject of a police investigation. Global Counsel no longer exists.

Total UK government contracts now exceed £670 million – spanning the NHS, the Ministry of Defence, police forces, the Cabinet Office, and even the navy’s nuclear-powered submarines. The NHS contract alone is worth £330 million over seven years, giving one US company access to the health data of 67 million Britons.

Advertisement

Green Party leader Zack Polanski, meanwhile, said the following on 18 April:

Now, it seems the mainstream media has caught up.

Finally noticing

In the piece published on Sunday 26 April, the Telegraph wrote:

Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of breaking the ministerial code by failing to declare a meeting with a client of Lord Mandelson’s lobbying firm.

The Telegraph also reported:

Advertisement

Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, said the Palantir visit was “not a formal meeting”, in response to parliamentary questions from the Conservatives about why the meeting was not declared.

However, in response to a separate parliamentary question, Luke Pollard, the defence minister, acknowledged that it was a meeting, saying: “The Office of the UK Defence Attaché holds no record of the meeting as no formal record of the meeting was produced.”

Hypocritically, the Tories are also calling out Starmer’s sleaze. Alex Burghart (shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster) said:

A presentation by a defence contractor, attended with British military personnel, took place and was not declared. Calling it ‘not a meeting’ does not make it disappear.

Gee, we wonder where Labour got the idea to meet Palantir in secret from?

Advertisement

Burghart also said:

Keir Starmer has broken the ministerial code. The public deserves to know who arranged this meeting, what was discussed, and what Global Counsel’s client stood to gain.

This is what people mean when they say Britain is a one-state party. Half of the party is in opposition, opposing the bad stuff, while the other half is in power, doing the bad stuff.

Now the public has wised up to this con-job, they’ve started looking elsewhere for political representation:

Advertisement

Starmer — Mr Transparency

This situation is especially bad for Starmer because of past comments like the following:

When it suited him, Starmer talked about transparency. When it didn’t suit him, he turned the tape recorders off and asked aids not to take minutes.

Featured image via Cory Doctorow (Flickr)

By Willem Moore

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

ADHD Diagnoses May Be Rising In Menopausal Women

Published

on

ADHD Diagnoses May Be Rising In Menopausal Women

Melanie Lawson, founder of Bare Biology, said the ADHD diagnosis she got during perimenopause was “a shock, and then it was a relief”.

Explaining that she’d “coped” with what she now understands are ADHD symptoms all her adult life, during perimenopause, “The wheels came off in a way I couldn’t explain or manage. The brain fog was crushing. I’d forget things I’d never forgotten before… I assumed it was hormones (sometimes I thought it was dementia or a brain tumour – no joke), because what else would it be at 52?

“Perimenopause had finally stripped away every last coping mechanism I’d spent a lifetime building – and underneath was a brain that had always worked differently,” Lawson added.

Speaking to HuffPost UK, Eve Lepage, reproductive health specialist at Clue, said she’s noticed a “rise in ADHD diagnoses around perimenopause and menopause”. BBC Science Focus has also written about this “increase”.

Advertisement

Here, she shared her thoughts on the link.

Why might menopause and perimenopause be linked to ADHD?

It’s not necessarily that ADHD suddenly “appears” during the life stage, Lepage said, but that changes in hormones might exacerbate existing symptoms.

“Oestrogen plays an important role in brain function, particularly in regulating dopamine, which is key for attention, motivation, and executive function. During perimenopause, oestrogen levels fluctuate and eventually decline, which can disrupt these systems and amplify ADHD-related challenges,” she said.

Advertisement

A 2025 systematic review of 11 studies found that hormone changes in women, e.g., during their menstrual cycle, may be linked to changes in ADHD symptoms. Clue has paired up with Queen Mary University of London to investigate how the menstrual cycle affects those with the condition.

“Perimenopause can bring underlying ADHD traits to the surface. Many people have spent years compensating through coping strategies or symptom masking, but hormonal changes can intensify symptoms and make those strategies less effective,” Lepage added.

“As a result, challenges that have been present for a long time may become more noticeable and harder to manage. This can prompt people to seek answers, and in some cases, a diagnosis for the first time.”

There’s even evidence that perimenopause may begin earlier in people with ADHD, she continued.

Advertisement

“Perimenopause can cause brain fog, forgetfulness, low motivation, and mood changes, all of which can also present in ADHD. For some people, this leads to a new diagnosis, and for others, it highlights how hormonal changes can exacerbate underlying neurodivergent traits.

“The link is likely multifactorial: hormonal fluctuations can intensify ADHD symptoms, while underlying ADHD can shape how someone experiences and copes with perimenopause. At the same time, a cultural shift towards greater openness around menopause and neurodiversity is making it easier for people to connect with experiences and talk about them.”

How can I handle ADHD during menopause?

The NHS says that you should see your GP if you notice signs of menopause or perimenopause, and the same goes for signs of ADHD that are disrupting your day-to-day life.

Advertisement

“If possible, speak to a healthcare provider who can look at the full picture. For some people, adjusting ADHD treatment is helpful; for others, it may be more about addressing menopausal symptoms. Often, it’s about finding the right balance between the two,” Lepage said.

“In everyday life, small practical adjustments can help. Externalising tasks by writing things down, setting reminders, and breaking tasks into smaller steps can help reduce the pressure on working memory and make things feel more manageable.”

She recommends trying your best to fall asleep and wake up at roughly the same time every day, following a wind-down sleep routine, eating balanced meals with enough protein and fibre, and avoiding skipping meals.

“Chronic stress can worsen both ADHD and perimenopause symptoms. Moving your body, spending time outside, or even a few minutes of structured downtime can help regulate stress without adding extra pressure,” she said.

Advertisement

“Other techniques, like practising mindfulness or breathing exercises, can help regulate your nervous system.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

MP Warns Labour May Lose Young Vote To Greens And Reform

Published

on

A demonstrator gets up and shows a banner reading "Youth Deserve Better" during the launching speech of Britain's main opposition Labour Party election manifesto booklet, in Manchester, on June 13, 2024

Labour risks losing “a generation of young voters” to the Greens and Reform, according to one of its own MPs.

Luke Charters told HuffPost UK that Labour has always been the “party young people backed when it mattered”.

But he warned: “If we don’t show we’re serious about delivering, we risk losing a generation to populists peddling false hope.”

His remarks come less than two weeks before voters head to the polls for local elections in England, and elections in the Welsh Senedd and Holyrood.

Advertisement

Polls suggest Labour are on course to potentially lose up to 2,000 English councillors, be defeated in Wales for the first time and see the SNP triumph in Scotland once again.

YouGov’s latest polls show the Greens are the most popular party among 18-24 year-olds on 36%, while Labour behind on 24% and Reform UK sit at 7%.

All three parties are much closer when it comes to 25-49-year-olds, though Greens still have a lead on 25%, Reform on 23% and Labour at 20%.

It’s a real reversal of the trends seen in 2024, when Labour was the most popular party for voters under-30s – 41% of 18-24-year-olds and 45% of 25-29-year-olds voted for the party.

Advertisement

Charters said: “Young people got a raw deal under the Tories, and some of the alternatives are no better.

“The Greens are offering gimmicks like DJ sets while Reform wants to cut young workers’ wages. You couldn’t make it up.”

He added: “Labour is delivering real change. Wage boosts, the Renters’ Rights Act, a better deal with Europe. But there is more to do on key issues like student loans and getting young people onto the housing ladder.”

The Renters’ Rights Act will ban no-fault evictions and ends fixed-term tenancy contracts from May 1, legislation is likely to appeal to the largest share of private renters – 25-34-year-olds.

Advertisement

Labour has also increased the National Living Wage for those aged 21 and over, and the National Minimum Wage for 18 to 20-year-olds.

Labour legalised voting for 16 and 17-year-olds, too.

Charters is not the only MP who thinks the government needs to focus on the younger demographic.

One Labour backbencher suggested the government should move its focus away from policies like the pension triple lock, having already put off the elderly generation by scrapping universal winter fuel payments.

Advertisement

Instead, they said the government should look towards what it can offer young people once again.

“That’s where the focus should be. No more of this leadership debate,” the MP said.

A government insider also told HuffPost UK admitted they intend on engaging young people “a lot” in the coming months – though not at the expense of other groups.

A demonstrator gets up and shows a banner reading "Youth Deserve Better" during the launching speech of Britain's main opposition Labour Party election manifesto booklet, in Manchester, on June 13, 2024
A demonstrator gets up and shows a banner reading “Youth Deserve Better” during the launching speech of Britain’s main opposition Labour Party election manifesto booklet, in Manchester, on June 13, 2024

OLI SCARFF via AFP via Getty Images

An EU official also told HuffPost UK that helping young people will likely be one of the core means for the bloc will try to re-establish ties after Brexit.

Advertisement

The UK joined the Erasmus + scheme last week, allowing people from the EU and the UK to work or study in one another’s countries for a limited time period.

Minister for EU relations Nick Thomas-Symonds told HuffPost UK that “we think 100,000 most likely young people” will be joining that programme overall.

Considering 83% of 16 to 24-year-olds would vote to rejoin the EU, according to a February ITV News poll, it means closer ties with the bloc could be a vote-winner for Labour among young people.

But, as a Labour source warned, winning back the young vote would a “tough sell” in the coming months, considering the Green Party – which wants to rejoin the EU – has capitalised on the disillusioned demographic.

Advertisement

Last week, the progressives declared a Green “Youthquake” as more than 50,000 Brits under 29 became party members.

As Savanta’s political research director Chris Hopkins told HuffPost UK, how young people vote “does have the potential to be important for political parties going forward, but none more so than for Labour.”

Hopkins added that the younger voter has been a “relatively fertile electoral ground for Labour” in the past, and now the government risks losing them altogether.

The polling expert warned: “Their general malaise, and the perception that they are responsible for the country’s issues, may mean that even young people desert them.”

Advertisement

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Are You A ‘Doomer’? This Mindset Is All Too Common Today

Published

on

Experts believe this age of hyperinformation has led to a rise in doomerism.

There’s a certain kind of person many of us have in our lives – the one who constantly sends you alarming articles, along with a comment to the effect of “we’re f**ked”.

They always know the latest awful happenings in the world and seem ready to tell everybody that nothing anyone does matters.

The name for these kinds of people? “Doomers.”

″‘Doomerism’ is a mindset that’s rooted in chronic pessimism and worst-case scenario thinking,” Chloë Bean, a licensed marriage and family therapist, told HuffPost. “It’s the belief that the future is bleak, things are only going to get worse and individual actions won’t matter. It tends to carry a sense of hopelessness, helplessness and emotional exhaustion.”

Advertisement

For “doomers,” there’s a pervasive sense that everything is bad. Alexandra Cromer, a licensed therapist with Thriveworks, compared doomerism to “existential dread,” highlighting the sense of fear around imminent destruction against which you have no power.

“It posits that the future of global welfare is inherently ‘doomed,’ meaning that there is almost a guarantee that the global population will soon face climate, economic and other grave disasters that ultimately contribute to widespread societal collapse,” she explained.

While there have always been “doomers” in the world to some extent, this mindset seems to have become more prevalent in the age of the internet and social media.

“A lot of people are consuming a steady stream of alarming news headlines, conflict, economic stress, climate anxiety and comparison culture without enough time to process what they’re absorbing,” Bean said. “Our nervous systems were not designed for 24/7 exposure to global distress.”

Advertisement

She noted that social media can amplify doomerism as fear-driven content often gets more engagement.

“The more someone interacts with pessimistic or catastrophic content, the more the algorithm will serve it back to them,” Bean explained. “This creates the false feeling that despair is the only reality.”

Experts believe this age of hyperinformation has led to a rise in doomerism.

Illustration: HuffPost; Photo: Getty Images

Experts believe this age of hyperinformation has led to a rise in doomerism.

This phenomenon is true for those who don’t engage directly with these kinds of headlines and posts as well.

“Information that’s posted online and via social media can find you even if you’re not seeking it – e.g. your Facebook friend comments on a post or shares the concept of doomerism as a post – thus enhancing the chance that you’re exposed to that concept,” Cromer said.

Advertisement

Very real cultural factors can shape this mindset as well – from recent global affairs and instability to political figures espousing extremist ideologies.

“Many people are navigating systemic issues, inequity, discrimination, financial pressure, loneliness and uncertainty about the future,” Bean said. “For some, pessimism is not irrational – it’s actually a response to repeated stress and feeling unsupported.”

Dr Sue Varma, a psychiatrist and author of Practical Optimism, believes doomerism has become especially widespread among younger people, who feel they must choose between being happy and being informed.

“Younger people have declining trust in institutions, rising economic anxiety and the collapse of shared optimistic narratives – like steady progress or upward mobility – which all feed the mindset,” she said.

Advertisement

“Constant exposure to global crises creates a sense that disasters are everywhere all at once. Historically our 20s were typically the period of time we were happiest and most optimistic in our lives, and I just don’t see that to be the case anymore.”

How doomerism affects everyday life

There are serious downsides to leaning too far into doomerism in your everyday life, however.

“Being concerned about real issues is understandable, while doomerism crosses into the belief like ‘nothing will get better,’ which can create a sense of paralysis and apathy,” Bean said.

Advertisement

She believes the biggest risk to this mindset is that it becomes self-reinforcing.

“When someone believes nothing matters, they stop taking actions that support their wellbeing, like connecting with others, pursuing meaningful goals, learning new things, caring for their body, creating change in their community, or asking for help,” Bean explained.

Doomerism can increase depression, burnout, anxiety and isolation as well.

“It also narrows attention so people stop noticing what is still working or possible in their lives,” Bean said. “Chronic doom-focused thinking can disconnect people from hope, and hope is a top protective factor for mental health.”

Advertisement

It’s a mindset that tends to produce very absolute and passive conclusions: “Nothing will ever get better.” “Everyone is terrible.” “There’s no point.”

“It usually comes with compulsive scrolling, feeling emotionally flooded, irritability, numbness, withdrawal, constriction or losing motivation to participate in life,” Bean noted.

Cromer similarly sees many downsides to the doomerist outlook on life.

“Primarily, it causes you to have an unhealthy and unrealistic viewpoint on global health and humanity’s ability to problem-solve,” she explained. “While, yes, there are certain factors that humanity should be aware of that contribute to poor global health and outlooks, it’s also important to take a more holistic – and realistic – viewpoint of our global forecast.”

Advertisement

In addition to isolation and anxiety, she pointed to negative effects like restlessness, low motivation, low energy, chronic stress, hopelessness and an overall lack of enjoyment and engagement with life.

“Becoming engrossed in this mindset leads to rigid thinking, hyperfixation and can have real impacts on people’s lives,” Cromer said.

What to do if you fall into doomerism

“If someone notices they feel worse after consuming news, feel stuck in catastrophic thoughts, or can’t access moments of joy or their sense of agency anymore, it may be time to get some support in making a change,” Bean said.

Advertisement

She recommended setting boundaries around the media you take in every day.

“You don’t need unlimited access to distressing information to stay informed,” Bean said. “Choose a few reliable sources, check them intentionally once per day max and avoid doom-scrolling.”

Restricting your information intake can help foster a healthier mindset. Consider balancing your media diet by seeking out stories of progress alongside articles about problems.

“Limit your interactions with news to maybe 30 minutes a day,” Cromer echoed. “Or, disengage from following news outlets on social media and rely on a once-daily email newsletter that can provide you with a quick, succinct update.”

Advertisement

Another helpful approach is to reconnect with your body and what’s going well in the present.

“When people are trapped in catastrophic thinking, regulation helps them gain a new perspective,” Bean said. “Go outside, move your body, listen to music, talk with someone safe, cook dinner, notice what is steady and real in the present moment.”

Give yourself permission to “step away” from the gloom and doom. Spend time in nature, even if it’s just sitting on a city park bench.

“Engaging with a doomerism mindset places a disproportionate amount of responsibility and perceived control on a person’s shoulders,” Cromer said. “Allow yourself to visualise placing that worry down, like removing a backpack from your back.”

Advertisement

Ultimately, the goal is not to disengage from all negative news but to find balance and personal agency.

“Realistic concern usually leads to taking a grounded action – voting, setting boundaries, volunteering, reducing harm, having conversations, or making values-based choices,” Bean said. “It says, ‘Things are hard, and I can still choose to respond.’”

You might not be able to fix the macro problems of the world, but you can make a difference in your immediate surroundings.

“Take concrete action on something you care about, even small, because agency is the antidote to helplessness,” Varma said. “It could be planting a community garden. It could be mentoring or tutoring somebody. It could literally be cleaning your apartment, rearranging things, donating old clothes. Invest in in-person relationships and local community, which tend to be more hopeful than online life.”

Advertisement

You can have realistic concern about the world without going down an unhealthy doom spiral by ensuring you can look at world issues “from all sides,” Cromer noted.

“Do you have the ability to identify risk factors as well as protective factors regarding global health?” she asked. “Are you easily able to disengage from these thought patterns and ‘take a break’? If your answer is ‘no,’ you are likely engaging in harmful ways of thinking that are not reflective of current reality.”

She also warned against becoming intolerant of differing or conflicting viewpoints ― a potential sign that you’re stuck in rigid, unhelpful patterns.

What to do if doomerism starts to cross into darker territory

Advertisement

Doomerism can also go beyond just media diet and into darker mental health territory – particularly with “there’s no point” attitudes.

“Doom thinking feels absolute and drains energy rather than directing it,” Varma said. “Warning signs include consuming bad news compulsively, feeling numb or hopeless most days, believing nothing you do matters, withdrawing from plans or relationships, dismissing any positive information as naive and talking about the future only in terms of collapse.”

Be mindful if you or someone you know starts to cross a line between doomerism and suicidal ideation.

“If you find that the doomerism is impacting daily functioning and enjoyment, seek professional supportive counselling services,” Cromer said.

Advertisement

Mental health professionals say it’s important to pay attention to how pervasive and intense these doom-focused thoughts become. It can be hard to tell when everyday pessimism crosses into something more extreme and serious.

But you might need additional support if “what’s the point?” starts to feel like your default setting and not just a passing thought or if you notice yourself pulling away from things that used to bring you joy.

In addition to seeking therapy support, Bean recommended practicing “both/and” thinking in your everyday life.

“The world has real problems, and there is still goodness, beauty, connection, and action available right now,” Bean said. “If hopelessness feels persistent, therapy can also help unpack whether the doomer mindset is being fuelled by anxiety, trauma, depression, loneliness, or burnout. Sometimes what looks like cynicism is actually an overwhelmed and stressed-out nervous system ready for care.”

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Brian Cox Says Trump Is Not Popular After Shooting

Published

on

Brian Cox Says Trump Is Not Popular After Shooting

Succession star Brian Cox has said Donald Trump is “not popular” after a gunman was apprehended at an event attended by the president on Saturday night.

The White House Correspondents’ Association dinner was thrown into chaos by the attack, which saw Trump, who has been the previous target of an assassination attempt, swiftly evacuated by secret service agents.

The president later described the man was “a lone wolf whack job” at a hastily-arranged press conference.

The suspect, said to have been carrying a shotgun and handgun, has been identified as Cole Tomas Allen, 31, of Torrance, California.

Advertisement

He is understood to have been a guest in the Washington Hilton hotel where the event.

Asked about the incident on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg show, Brian Cox said: “There are a lot of unhappy people in America about what’s happening. The poor in particular are being really treated rather badly.

“Medicaid is under threat, everything is under threat. He’s doing the most extraordinary things to people’s wellbeing.

“People are not happy. People who voted for him are not happy. He is not popular, he really isn’t popular. He would like to pretend he is popular. He would give that impression, but he’s not. His popularity has gone way, way down.”

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Keir Starmer said he was “shocked” by the incident and has sent a message of solidarity to the White House.

In a post on X, the prime minister said: “Any attack on democratic institutions or on the freedom of the press must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.

“It is a huge relief that @POTUS, the First Lady and all those attending are safe.”

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

When A Cardiologist Says To Take Aspirin For Heart Health

Published

on

When A Cardiologist Says To Take Aspirin For Heart Health

The NHS says that after you have called 999 to ask for help, taking 300mg of aspirin if you have it may be useful should you notice signs of a heart attack.

Of course, this only applies if you don’t have an aspirin allergy, and if you don’t have any within easy access, don’t worry. The British Heart Foundation (BHF) says, “Do not go looking for it if you think you’re having a heart attack because it’s important to rest and stay calm until help arrives”.

The BHF added that sometimes doctors prescribe a daily low dose of aspirin, which can cost 50p a pack, for those who have had heart attacks or are at risk of having one.

Here, we asked private cardiologist and founder of The National Heart Clinic, Dr Francesco Lo Monaco, why it works, and whether we should all consider keeping aspirin in our routines.

Advertisement

Why might aspirin be helpful during a heart attack?

“Aspirin is an antiplatelet medicine and works by making the blood less sticky. In normal health, it’s important that cells can stick together to block cuts and breaks in blood vessels, but in people who are at risk of heart attacks and strokes, aspirin can stop blood cells from sticking together and forming a clot,” Dr Lo Monaco said.

For that reason, “People who have had a heart attack or stroke are often advised to take a low daily dose of aspirin to reduce the chances of it happening again, [and] people who have a cardiovascular disease may also be advised to take a low dose of daily aspirin”.

But all medications have side effects, he added.

Advertisement

That includes aspirin, the long-term use of which includes indigestion, bleeding more than usual, and even stomach ulcers. Some research shows taking aspirin daily can almost double your risk of experiencing major bleeding episodes.

“The current advice is that aspirin is not suitable to be taken daily by everyone… it’s important to understand what is right for you. Only take daily low-dose aspirin if it has been recommended for your doctor.”

What’s the bottom line?

“If someone has symptoms suggestive of a heart attack (central crushing chest pain), aspirin reduces clot formation and improves outcomes,” Dr Lo Monaco ended.

Advertisement

“However, it is not recommended for routine prophylactic use in the general population, as the bleeding risk outweighs the benefit in those without established cardiovascular disease.

“Worth noting: always call emergency services first – aspirin is an adjunct, not a substitute.”

Symptoms of a heart attack can include:

  • Crushing or squeezing chest pain that might spread to your arm, neck, or jaw,
  • Feeling short of breath,
  • Feeling nauseous or vomiting,
  • Feeling like you have indigestion, including a burning feeling in your chest,
  • Sweating,
  • Pale, blue, or grey skin: “on black or brown skin this may be easier to see on the palms of the hands,” the NHS said.

Call 999 immediately if you experience these.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

The House | Sir Robert Buckland: Politicians Who “Bleat On” About Overdiagnosis “Literally Don’t Know What They’re Talking About”

Published

on

Sir Robert Buckland: Politicians Who 'Bleat On' About Overdiagnosis 'Literally Don't Know What They're Talking About'
Sir Robert Buckland: Politicians Who 'Bleat On' About Overdiagnosis 'Literally Don't Know What They're Talking About'


9 min read

Former cabinet minister Robert Buckland, a SEND campaigner and parent to an autistic child, speaks to Matilda Martin about why the government’s approach could fail those with the most complex needs, and what lessons can be learned from mistakes made by the Tories

Advertisement

Sir Robert Buckland is concerned that history is repeating itself. “Having been through the process myself as a parent, and having done the Children and Families Act as a backbencher, just before I entered government, I’ve got the scars on my back about all of this, and I’ve seen a lot of this before.”

Twelve years ago, as a backbench Tory MP, the former cabinet minister contributed to what was arguably the biggest shake-up of the education system in a generation, as children’s rights to support for special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) were set out in law under education, health and care plans (EHCPs). More than a decade later, a system introduced to bring greater certainty for young people is in crisis, described by the National Audit Office as “financially unsustainable”, and coming under increasing strain as families fight for the support they need.

For Buckland, this situation is personal. Like millions of parents up and down the country, he has battled through a process that often feels like it is working against families rather than with them. His daughter Millie, now 23, is autistic. She also has learning disabilities and a physical condition (the nature of which Buckland wishes to keep private). Millie is now coming out the other end of an education system that he feels “has been pretty good” in her case, though he acknowledges that “this is not the story of a lot of families, far too often”.

Advertisement

“Without that pushing by me and my wife, I don’t think we would have got to where we were so quickly. And that’s wrong.”

The journey to Millie’s diagnosis was far from smooth. “You find, to begin with, the system is sort of designed to minimise and to say: ‘Don’t worry, it’ll all come out in the wash.’ And we got a lot of that, right up to about the age of two-and-a-half, three, when clearly she was missing all her milestones.”

For Buckland and his wife, it was plain to see. Millie, born a twin, was missing all of the milestones that her brother was hitting. In the end, the family put together the money and went privately to get a diagnosis. But even that was not easy: “[It was] particularly complicated because, in those days, there were many fewer diagnoses for girls and women with autism. It was much rarer.”

Buckland, 57, a lawyer by trade, was first elected in 2010. He was a Conservative MP for 14 years, during which he held the roles of solicitor general, prisons minister, justice secretary and Welsh secretary before losing his seat to Labour in 2024. Most recently, he was appointed to lead an independent review into state failings before the murder of the MP David Amess.

Advertisement

Now outside of the House of Commons, the former Conservative politician has watched the government’s SEND announcements unfold with special interest.

In February, the government finally published its plans to reform the system. Under the proposals, only those children with the most severe and complex needs will receive an EHCP. Instead, the government will expect most pupils with SEND to be educated in mainstream schools with an individual support plan (ISP).

Six months ago, it was difficult to see how Labour could successfully land its reforms. PoliticsHome reported in September that the white paper setting out the proposals was likely to be delayed until 2026. It was understood that the Department for Education (DfE) and the Treasury had settled on a funding settlement for SEND reforms earlier in 2025, but the welfare rebellion forced the government to look again at what it was preparing to put before Labour MPs.

Buckland is concerned that under the government’s proposed changes to the SEND system, it will be those children with the most severe and complex needs who will fall through the cracks.

Advertisement

While speaking with The House, he gestures frequently, sometimes with irritation and often in relation to the 120 pages of the white paper he has meticulously printed out. He refers to notes throughout: he has a number of clear points he wishes to make.

Today, while Buckland praises the government for its deft political manoeuvring in landing the reforms, he is certain there are “hidden explosives” in the proposals – including over what will happen to the special schools for the most acute end of the spectrum.

If it doesn’t work at a local level, all this rhetoric is just rhetoric, and we’ll come back in 10 years’ time and go, ‘We missed an opportunity with those reforms’

Advertisement

While he was pleased to see Health Secretary Wes Streeting appear alongside Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson in the foreword of the white paper, Buckland laments the lack of involvement of other departments, as he would like to see more joined-up thinking.

These aren’t his only concerns. While he agrees with the inclusive approach of a “universal offer” in principle, and understands the wish to move away from the EHCP as the sole funnel, he is worried that the replacement just “isn’t as strong”. While Buckland feels that Millie’s needs are acute enough that she would still receive an EHCP under the new system, he worries that there are many other youngsters who will have needs that are significant but not acute, who won’t get near that process”.

He is willing to be proved wrong: “If the new ISPs genuinely work, great. I’ll be the first in the queue to say well done. But without the training and the resources to make the words [into] action, you’re going to end up with the same problem. Some parents are still going to say, ‘that’s not been enough’.”

Currently, parents can apply to a local tribunal to seek support for their child if they are unhappy with the approach. Under the new system, the tribunal will still exist, but its role will be more limited, with concerns from parents over the ISPs going through the school complaints system. Buckland says this could be a “real problem”.

Advertisement

“Some parents might say: ‘Well, the complaint system has failed us, do we resort then to law anyway? Do we try and seek a judicial review, or whatever it might be?’ Do you find another means in, and do you actually create more uncertainty and more wrangling?”

It is understood that parents will still be able to appeal to the tribunal regarding whether their child should be assessed for an EHCP and around the child’s place in a school. He nonetheless warns: “There is a particular cohort of youngsters, a small cohort, but very, very resource-intensive, that could really fall through the net again if we’re not careful.”

While Buckland acknowledges that the planned proposals allow time for embedding change in the system, he doesn’t think the lag is long enough “if they’re really going to scale up the workforce in the way that they say they are”.

Phillipson
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson (Alamy)

He is worried that the same mistakes that were made in 2014 could be repeated, urging Parliament to look “beyond the black letter of the legislation and look to the actual reality on the ground” and make sure that “all parts of the system are really ready for the changes”.

Buckland also believes that the pressure on schools to deliver on the reforms could be acute.

Advertisement

“I trust schools and academies to get it right, but it is also quite a challenge for them when they’ve got workforce issues, they’ve got resource issues, and they’re being asked to deliver more and more at a school level.”

This is an issue many in the schools sector are alive to, specifically the NEU teaching union, The House points out.

“For once, I agree with them,” Buckland says. “If it doesn’t work at a local level, all this rhetoric is just rhetoric, and we’ll come back in 10 years’ time and go, ‘We missed an opportunity with those reforms.’”

Whatever your political colour, it was clear by 2024 that the SEND system was not working. In 2023, the-then education secretary Gillian Keegan infamously described the system as “lose, lose, lose”.

Advertisement

How does Buckland reflect on the 2014 reforms now?

“I’ve no regrets about the bill.” But he admits: “We were probably all a little bit too dewy-eyed about the fact that the legislation has been passed, therefore everything would change.”

Reflecting on his own experience of the system, Buckland says he can remember the annual reviews for Millie’s EHCP did not always meet expectations, and the “good intention behind the reforms was not fully carried out in practice”.

“You want health in the room, but so often they wouldn’t turn up. And I can remember saying, I don’t think we can agree anything until we’ve got a health representative here to actually sign off on the plan that is needed for Millie if there was an emergency.”

Advertisement

As the number of young people with SEND support has increased, so has the narrative around a perceived overdiagnosis epidemic. Last year, Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice prompted outrage from some quarters when he claimed there was a “colossal overdiagnosis going on in neurodiverse areas such as ADHD, dyspraxia and dyslexia”. Former Ofsted boss Baroness Spielman has also lamented a world of overdiagnosis.

While Buckland is generally softly spoken and calm, this is one topic that makes him visibly incensed.

“Those politicians who bleat on about overdiagnosis – they literally don’t know what they’re talking about. They’re one step away from Robert Kennedy in the US, in my opinion,” he says, referring to RFK Jr, the US health secretary who promotes conspiracy theories, “because this sort of narrative is very damaging, not just to wider society, but to the individuals and families concerned.

“I don’t know any parent of an autistic child that says: ‘I really want a diagnosis because, I know it’s an exaggeration, but I want the diagnosis just to feel better.’ You want the diagnosis, a) so that the full needs of your child are understood, and b) of course, you want those statutory duties.”

Advertisement

Leader of the opposition Kemi Badenoch has also faced criticism for suggesting there is an “overdiagnosis” of mental health conditions and saying those with an autism diagnosis get “economic advantages and protections”.

Buckland is careful not to criticise Badenoch, but does say: “Do I think that they’re in a privileged position? No, it’s all about trying to make sure that people with that condition have access to the same mainstream facilities the rest of us do.” And he thinks the narrative of overdiagnosis is “deeply insulting”.

“As far as I’m concerned, it’s not the job of ill-informed politicians to sit there in judgment. It’s the job of all of us to try and devise a system that doesn’t create perverse incentives, but which genuinely understands the child before them.” 

 

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump Shares New Footage Of Shooting At White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Published

on

Trump Shares New Footage Of Shooting At White House Correspondents' Dinner

President Donald Trump shared on Truth Social a photo and video footage of a shooter’s attempt to barrel past a security checkpoint at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

The video, shared shortly before a hastily convened press conference at the White House on Saturday night, shows a blur of a man running past law enforcement officers standing near magnetometers at the Washington Hilton.

Trump also posted photos of the suspect seen shirtless on the ground with his hands restrained behind his back.

“The man has been captured. They’ve gone to his apartment,” Trump said. He added that the suspect is in his 30s and from California.

Advertisement

“He’s a sick person, a very sick person, and we don’t want things like this to happen,” Trump added.

One law enforcement officer was shot during the incident but was wearing a bulletproof vest.

“The vest did the job. I just spoke to the officer and he’s doing great, great shape,” Trump said at the press conference.

Trump also used the shooting to promote his plans for a new White House ballroom, saying it will be “drone proof” with “bulletproof glass.”

Advertisement

“That’s why the military are demanding it,” Trump said.

“They’ve wanted the ballroom for 150 years, for a lot of different reasons, but today is a little bit different, because we need levels of security that no one has probably ever seen before,” Trump added.

Asked by a reporter how he’s coping following multiple assassination attempts, Trump said at least it hasn’t made him a “basket case.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Keir Starmer Mocked Over Mandelson Scandal In SNL Sketch

Published

on

Keir Starmer Mocked Over Mandelson Scandal In SNL Sketch

Keir Starmer has been mocked over his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to America in a brutal Saturday Night Live UK sketch.

The prime minister was portrayed as a confused and indecisive ‘Who Wants To Remain A Millionaire’ contestant on the Sky TV show.

Asked “is it ever a good idea to give Peter Mandelson a job”, the fake PM is presented with four possible answers.

They are no, of course not, not in a million years, and yes.

Advertisement

Actor George Fouracres, who plays Starmer on the show, says “it’s a tricky one” before saying he wants to ask the audience for their view.

After none of them choose yes, the PM says that has “put a seed of doubt ion my mind” and then asks for two wrong answers to be taken away.

With only “not in a million years” and “yes” left, Starmer says: “Oh gosh, this looks so much easier at home.”

He then adds: “I’m afraid I’m just not being presented with the facts.”

Advertisement

Starmer then asks to phone a friend, who turns out to be Mandelson himself.

After asking to go 50-50 again, and despite being left with only “not in a million years” as a possible answer, the prime minister says: “I have my answer. I know it’s not conventional, but I’d like to actually bring back one of the previous options, because I’m going to go with [yes], final answer.”

Asked if he is totally sure, the PM says: “Oh never.”

When told the correct answer was “not in a million years”, he replies: “It’s clear to me now that was the wrong decision. Would I make the same decision again, knowing what I know now? Quite possibly.”

Advertisement

It is not the first time that SNL has mocked the PM.

Last month, Donald Trump shared a clip from the show in which Starmer was presented as a weak and ineffectual prime minister who is scared of the US president.

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025