Gwent births up by 31%

Free Press Series: Gwent births up by 31% Gwent births up by 31%

MORE than 1,400 more babies were born in Gwent in the last year compared to 10 years ago, figures from an annual report have revealed – more than a quarter born by caesarian section.

Last year – April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013 – there were 5,998 deliveries in the Aneurin Bevan Health Board, the majority of which were at the Royal Gwent Hospital, a rise of 31 per cent on 2003/04 when 4,552 deliveries were recorded.

These figures translate to more births as the data doesn’t take into consideration instances with more than one birth per delivery such as twins and triplets.

Of those born last year, 28.5 per cent were delivered by caesarian section, a rise within the health board of 2.9 per cent in the last decade.

The report, published by the Welsh Government, looks at data from 2003 to 2013 of birth deliveries in hospitals across all the Welsh health boards.

The vast amount of children born in Wales are delivered in hospitals – just three per cent took place at home or elsewhere in 2012.

There has been a trend over the past ten years towards shorter hospital stays for all types of delivery, said the report. Last year 72 per cent of all stays within the Aneurin Bevan Health Board were for one to three days.

The number of older women giving birth has risen by a third in ten years.

A total of 52 women aged 45 or over gave birth in Wales last year compared to 39 in 2002/03.

The report shows six out of 10 mums over the age of 45 in Wales gave birth via caesarean section last year.

The percentage of mothers aged 45 years and over and having caesareans in Wales has increased from 46 per cent in 2003/04 to 60 per cent in 2012/13.

But only 37 per cent of all mothers who had caesareans stayed in hospital for four or more days, compared to 65 per cent 10 years ago.

Only 11 per cent of mothers who had unassisted births stayed in hospital for four or more days, compared to 13 per cent 10 years ago, and 23 per cent of all deliveries in Wales were induced, compared to 19 per cent in 2004/05 – the earliest data available.

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:50am Thu 13 Mar 14

gathin says...

What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?

You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request? gathin
  • Score: 6

11:56am Thu 13 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?


You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
[quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares? GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: -4

12:11pm Thu 13 Mar 14

grumpyandopinionated says...

Sounds like gathin is soiling for a fight and poking the bear on this one. I agree who cares, atleast there is some new blood. Although I can't help but wonder if the figures have been on the rise since people have been losing thier jobs and have more recreation time haha. Or is it because less people are putting the careers first before starting a family, seeing as jobs don't seem to be as secure any more.
Sounds like gathin is soiling for a fight and poking the bear on this one. I agree who cares, atleast there is some new blood. Although I can't help but wonder if the figures have been on the rise since people have been losing thier jobs and have more recreation time haha. Or is it because less people are putting the careers first before starting a family, seeing as jobs don't seem to be as secure any more. grumpyandopinionated
  • Score: -2

12:14pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Mr Holder says...

GardenVarietyMushroo
m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?



You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.
[quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns. Mr Holder
  • Score: 8

12:24pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Mwy Eira says...

gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
I wouldn't bother as this is hospital data and you won't be able to get that kind of break down. Employment status is not recorded anyway (why would they!?)
[quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]I wouldn't bother as this is hospital data and you won't be able to get that kind of break down. Employment status is not recorded anyway (why would they!?) Mwy Eira
  • Score: 0

12:24pm Thu 13 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo

m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?




You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.
'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what?

And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?
[quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.[/p][/quote]'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what? And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway? GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: 3

1:09pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Mwy Eira says...

I quite agree GVM. What is concerning is the ever increasing caesarean rate and the cost of this on the NHS. It costs way more than a normal delivery. As it seems to increase in older women and these tend to be working women who have delayed the start of their family, you could argue that this group are actually costing the NHS more than the younger women who are not employed and on benefits group. So this employed/unemployed is a load of old tosh and just another attempt to have ago at those on benefits. Obviously just a theory on my part but could be an interesting research project.
I quite agree GVM. What is concerning is the ever increasing caesarean rate and the cost of this on the NHS. It costs way more than a normal delivery. As it seems to increase in older women and these tend to be working women who have delayed the start of their family, you could argue that this group are actually costing the NHS more than the younger women who are not employed and on benefits group. So this employed/unemployed is a load of old tosh and just another attempt to have ago at those on benefits. Obviously just a theory on my part but could be an interesting research project. Mwy Eira
  • Score: 0

1:28pm Thu 13 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

I don't think it matters who they get born to, or how they get born, as long as they keep coming. Considering the birth rate is still only 1.93 - which, for those of you who don't get it, (looking at you, Daily Fail readers) despite a jump of a massive 18% in the last ten years (immigration) is still indicative of a declining population.
I don't think it matters who they get born to, or how they get born, as long as they keep coming. Considering the birth rate is still only 1.93 - which, for those of you who don't get it, (looking at you, Daily Fail readers) despite a jump of a massive 18% in the last ten years (immigration) is still indicative of a declining population. GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: -3

2:19pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Lenin says...

The issues that aren't addressed in the story are how many births were Midwifery led, how many were homebirths and is Woman Centred Midwifery making a difference and improving quality of birthing experience for women.

On the face of it the increased number of Caesarian Sections and Inductions would seem to indicate that Obstreticians are still driving the process rather than women gaining control of birth.

A deeper analysis please.
The issues that aren't addressed in the story are how many births were Midwifery led, how many were homebirths and is Woman Centred Midwifery making a difference and improving quality of birthing experience for women. On the face of it the increased number of Caesarian Sections and Inductions would seem to indicate that Obstreticians are still driving the process rather than women gaining control of birth. A deeper analysis please. Lenin
  • Score: -1

3:02pm Thu 13 Mar 14

cymruamblyth says...

GardenVarietyMushroo
m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?



You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Most people here think "Who the hell cares" when they read your numerous posts..

For such a free thinking opening minded individual your always quick to threaten violence when folks disagree with you such a threatening to punch Woodgnome, I'd say your just a bully!
[quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Most people here think "Who the hell cares" when they read your numerous posts.. For such a free thinking opening minded individual your always quick to threaten violence when folks disagree with you such a threatening to punch Woodgnome, I'd say your just a bully! cymruamblyth
  • Score: 2

3:14pm Thu 13 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

cymruamblyth wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo

m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?




You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Most people here think "Who the hell cares" when they read your numerous posts..

For such a free thinking opening minded individual your always quick to threaten violence when folks disagree with you such a threatening to punch Woodgnome, I'd say your just a bully!
What a complete load of crap. Not that I'm surprised coming from you. Your comments frequently make so little sense that I call you 'cymruamblathered'

I've never - EVER threatened violence to anyone that disagrees with me. Nor would I. I comment here because I enjoy a debate - it would seem a bit weird, yeah? - if I then threatened people who obliged me.

I also never threatened to punch Woodgnome either - that would be against the rules, and completely impossible through a computer screen.

I think you need to
a) Get your facts straight
b) Offer me an apology
c) Either stop drinking or start taking your meds, mate
[quote][p][bold]cymruamblyth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Most people here think "Who the hell cares" when they read your numerous posts.. For such a free thinking opening minded individual your always quick to threaten violence when folks disagree with you such a threatening to punch Woodgnome, I'd say your just a bully![/p][/quote]What a complete load of crap. Not that I'm surprised coming from you. Your comments frequently make so little sense that I call you 'cymruamblathered' I've never - EVER threatened violence to anyone that disagrees with me. Nor would I. I comment here because I enjoy a debate - it would seem a bit weird, yeah? - if I then threatened people who obliged me. I also never threatened to punch Woodgnome either - that would be against the rules, and completely impossible through a computer screen. I think you need to a) Get your facts straight b) Offer me an apology c) Either stop drinking or start taking your meds, mate GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: -3

3:29pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Mr Holder says...

GardenVarietyMushroo
m
wrote:
Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo


m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?





You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.
'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what?

And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?
Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.
[quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.[/p][/quote]'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what? And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?[/p][/quote]Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport. Mr Holder
  • Score: 2

3:43pm Thu 13 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo

m
wrote:
Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo



m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?






You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.
'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what?

And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?
Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.
My reply is a contradiction? I see you say that but you don't appear to explain why that is.

I didn't see Gathin make a point, valid or otherwise - just ask a question.

Don't you mean 'some' readers of this publication?

What recent polls? Who published them? How were they worded? How on earth did they ask everyone in the country? Were they in the Daily Fail by any chance? If they were, I'm really not interested, as they're more than likely complete b****cks.

Maybe my response was disrespectful - here's ten pence, go phone someone who gives a crap. Respect is EARNED not automatically afforded - and anyone who immediately jumps to 'immigrants' in any conversation starts way down the ladder in my book... in fact, they aren't even on the ladder, they're over the wall, looking at the guy holding the ladder and wishing they were them.

And again I ask - what concerns exactly? Great, you have some concerns... you've mentioned them twice now but still haven't told me what they are.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.[/p][/quote]'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what? And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?[/p][/quote]Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.[/p][/quote]My reply is a contradiction? I see you say that but you don't appear to explain why that is. I didn't see Gathin make a point, valid or otherwise - just ask a question. Don't you mean 'some' readers of this publication? What recent polls? Who published them? How were they worded? How on earth did they ask everyone in the country? Were they in the Daily Fail by any chance? If they were, I'm really not interested, as they're more than likely complete b****cks. Maybe my response was disrespectful - here's ten pence, go phone someone who gives a crap. Respect is EARNED not automatically afforded - and anyone who immediately jumps to 'immigrants' in any conversation starts way down the ladder in my book... in fact, they aren't even on the ladder, they're over the wall, looking at the guy holding the ladder and wishing they were them. And again I ask - what concerns exactly? Great, you have some concerns... you've mentioned them twice now but still haven't told me what they are. GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: -3

4:08pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Mr Holder says...

GardenVarietyMushroo
m
wrote:
Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo


m
wrote:
Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo




m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?







You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.
'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what?

And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?
Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.
My reply is a contradiction? I see you say that but you don't appear to explain why that is.

I didn't see Gathin make a point, valid or otherwise - just ask a question.

Don't you mean 'some' readers of this publication?

What recent polls? Who published them? How were they worded? How on earth did they ask everyone in the country? Were they in the Daily Fail by any chance? If they were, I'm really not interested, as they're more than likely complete b****cks.

Maybe my response was disrespectful - here's ten pence, go phone someone who gives a crap. Respect is EARNED not automatically afforded - and anyone who immediately jumps to 'immigrants' in any conversation starts way down the ladder in my book... in fact, they aren't even on the ladder, they're over the wall, looking at the guy holding the ladder and wishing they were them.

And again I ask - what concerns exactly? Great, you have some concerns... you've mentioned them twice now but still haven't told me what they are.
Immigration is and can be a good thing, unfettered immigration to which we have no control is not.

Your response about 'being on the ladder' is about you wishing to shut down the debate, it's akin to a child sticking their fingers in their ears whilst singing LA LA LA LA.

To be fair to you it's nothing I would not expect from someone of your obvious political persuasion.
[quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.[/p][/quote]'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what? And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?[/p][/quote]Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.[/p][/quote]My reply is a contradiction? I see you say that but you don't appear to explain why that is. I didn't see Gathin make a point, valid or otherwise - just ask a question. Don't you mean 'some' readers of this publication? What recent polls? Who published them? How were they worded? How on earth did they ask everyone in the country? Were they in the Daily Fail by any chance? If they were, I'm really not interested, as they're more than likely complete b****cks. Maybe my response was disrespectful - here's ten pence, go phone someone who gives a crap. Respect is EARNED not automatically afforded - and anyone who immediately jumps to 'immigrants' in any conversation starts way down the ladder in my book... in fact, they aren't even on the ladder, they're over the wall, looking at the guy holding the ladder and wishing they were them. And again I ask - what concerns exactly? Great, you have some concerns... you've mentioned them twice now but still haven't told me what they are.[/p][/quote]Immigration is and can be a good thing, unfettered immigration to which we have no control is not. Your response about 'being on the ladder' is about you wishing to shut down the debate, it's akin to a child sticking their fingers in their ears whilst singing LA LA LA LA. To be fair to you it's nothing I would not expect from someone of your obvious political persuasion. Mr Holder
  • Score: 2

4:27pm Thu 13 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo

m
wrote:
Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo



m
wrote:
Mr Holder wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo





m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?








You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.
'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what?

And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?
Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.
My reply is a contradiction? I see you say that but you don't appear to explain why that is.

I didn't see Gathin make a point, valid or otherwise - just ask a question.

Don't you mean 'some' readers of this publication?

What recent polls? Who published them? How were they worded? How on earth did they ask everyone in the country? Were they in the Daily Fail by any chance? If they were, I'm really not interested, as they're more than likely complete b****cks.

Maybe my response was disrespectful - here's ten pence, go phone someone who gives a crap. Respect is EARNED not automatically afforded - and anyone who immediately jumps to 'immigrants' in any conversation starts way down the ladder in my book... in fact, they aren't even on the ladder, they're over the wall, looking at the guy holding the ladder and wishing they were them.

And again I ask - what concerns exactly? Great, you have some concerns... you've mentioned them twice now but still haven't told me what they are.
Immigration is and can be a good thing, unfettered immigration to which we have no control is not.

Your response about 'being on the ladder' is about you wishing to shut down the debate, it's akin to a child sticking their fingers in their ears whilst singing LA LA LA LA.

To be fair to you it's nothing I would not expect from someone of your obvious political persuasion.
We have 'unfettered immigration' do we? News to me. And I'm sure it'll be welcome news to all those who are, apparently unjustly, being detained in immgration detention centres at present.

The ladder comment had nothing to do with the debate. It was a side point I was making in reference to your accusation that I was being disrespectful.

The debate is about the number of children being born - I was merely trying to illustrate that, babies = good thing. I hope you noticed too that I backed that up with facts and logic - something I've yet to see you do, I might add.

And go on, I'll bite. Don't see how you could possibly guage my political persuasion from the content of this comments section - but go ahead and have a stab at it.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mr Holder[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]Regarding the immigrant figures, quite a lot of people care actually. Judging from your response you don't seem to care, that however doesn't allow you try and shut down the debate with a deliberate obfuscation of peoples genuine concerns.[/p][/quote]'Quite a lot of people'? What does that mean exactly? Quite a lot compared to what? And 'genuine concerns'? Speaking for myself, a free thinking, open minded individual, I can't possibly imagine what those genuine concerns may be. Why don't you elaborate so the debate can get underway?[/p][/quote]Your reply is a contradiction. gathin had a perfectly valid point, a point shared not only by readers of this publication but (as recent polls have concluded) 80% of the population. Your response was not only disrespectful but was contrived in such a way as to discredit his (and other peoples) concerns regarding the birth rate amongst the immigrant population of Newport.[/p][/quote]My reply is a contradiction? I see you say that but you don't appear to explain why that is. I didn't see Gathin make a point, valid or otherwise - just ask a question. Don't you mean 'some' readers of this publication? What recent polls? Who published them? How were they worded? How on earth did they ask everyone in the country? Were they in the Daily Fail by any chance? If they were, I'm really not interested, as they're more than likely complete b****cks. Maybe my response was disrespectful - here's ten pence, go phone someone who gives a crap. Respect is EARNED not automatically afforded - and anyone who immediately jumps to 'immigrants' in any conversation starts way down the ladder in my book... in fact, they aren't even on the ladder, they're over the wall, looking at the guy holding the ladder and wishing they were them. And again I ask - what concerns exactly? Great, you have some concerns... you've mentioned them twice now but still haven't told me what they are.[/p][/quote]Immigration is and can be a good thing, unfettered immigration to which we have no control is not. Your response about 'being on the ladder' is about you wishing to shut down the debate, it's akin to a child sticking their fingers in their ears whilst singing LA LA LA LA. To be fair to you it's nothing I would not expect from someone of your obvious political persuasion.[/p][/quote]We have 'unfettered immigration' do we? News to me. And I'm sure it'll be welcome news to all those who are, apparently unjustly, being detained in immgration detention centres at present. The ladder comment had nothing to do with the debate. It was a side point I was making in reference to your accusation that I was being disrespectful. The debate is about the number of children being born - I was merely trying to illustrate that, babies = good thing. I hope you noticed too that I backed that up with facts and logic - something I've yet to see you do, I might add. And go on, I'll bite. Don't see how you could possibly guage my political persuasion from the content of this comments section - but go ahead and have a stab at it. GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: -1

5:27pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Floppy backed says...

Mwy Eira wrote:
I quite agree GVM. What is concerning is the ever increasing caesarean rate and the cost of this on the NHS. It costs way more than a normal delivery. As it seems to increase in older women and these tend to be working women who have delayed the start of their family, you could argue that this group are actually costing the NHS more than the younger women who are not employed and on benefits group. So this employed/unemployed is a load of old tosh and just another attempt to have ago at those on benefits. Obviously just a theory on my part but could be an interesting research project.
Not sure how factual this is - isnt the average first time mother 29/30? Is that classed as an older mother - I think not.

Its the serial birth-ers who continually bang out baby after baby with health problems who think its their right to reproduce when their and childrens health is in the hands of the tax payers.

Think its the middle class 'older' parents who have on average 2 children and continue to bring them up with a good standard of education & health and dont rely on benefits.

Its the easiest option out there in this country to be young, knock out children while replying on state aid and when the going gets tough dump them on social services and blame society!
[quote][p][bold]Mwy Eira[/bold] wrote: I quite agree GVM. What is concerning is the ever increasing caesarean rate and the cost of this on the NHS. It costs way more than a normal delivery. As it seems to increase in older women and these tend to be working women who have delayed the start of their family, you could argue that this group are actually costing the NHS more than the younger women who are not employed and on benefits group. So this employed/unemployed is a load of old tosh and just another attempt to have ago at those on benefits. Obviously just a theory on my part but could be an interesting research project.[/p][/quote]Not sure how factual this is - isnt the average first time mother 29/30? Is that classed as an older mother - I think not. Its the serial birth-ers who continually bang out baby after baby with health problems who think its their right to reproduce when their and childrens health is in the hands of the tax payers. Think its the middle class 'older' parents who have on average 2 children and continue to bring them up with a good standard of education & health and dont rely on benefits. Its the easiest option out there in this country to be young, knock out children while replying on state aid and when the going gets tough dump them on social services and blame society! Floppy backed
  • Score: 1

7:40pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Dave on his Soapbox says...

......where are all these children going to go to school....for years the council's have justified closing schools because of the surplus places caused by dwindling birth rates......are we going to end up with larger class sizes again....because it's not that easy to re-open schools that no longer exist....
......where are all these children going to go to school....for years the council's have justified closing schools because of the surplus places caused by dwindling birth rates......are we going to end up with larger class sizes again....because it's not that easy to re-open schools that no longer exist.... Dave on his Soapbox
  • Score: 1

11:02am Fri 14 Mar 14

whatintheworld says...

Floppy backed wrote:
Mwy Eira wrote: I quite agree GVM. What is concerning is the ever increasing caesarean rate and the cost of this on the NHS. It costs way more than a normal delivery. As it seems to increase in older women and these tend to be working women who have delayed the start of their family, you could argue that this group are actually costing the NHS more than the younger women who are not employed and on benefits group. So this employed/unemployed is a load of old tosh and just another attempt to have ago at those on benefits. Obviously just a theory on my part but could be an interesting research project.
Not sure how factual this is - isnt the average first time mother 29/30? Is that classed as an older mother - I think not. Its the serial birth-ers who continually bang out baby after baby with health problems who think its their right to reproduce when their and childrens health is in the hands of the tax payers. Think its the middle class 'older' parents who have on average 2 children and continue to bring them up with a good standard of education & health and dont rely on benefits. Its the easiest option out there in this country to be young, knock out children while replying on state aid and when the going gets tough dump them on social services and blame society!
you are peddling myths.

teenage pregnancies are at a 40 year low.
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-26353267

two of the largest areas of spend in the welfare budget are pensions and housing benefit. these are certainly not restricted to the working class.
[quote][p][bold]Floppy backed[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mwy Eira[/bold] wrote: I quite agree GVM. What is concerning is the ever increasing caesarean rate and the cost of this on the NHS. It costs way more than a normal delivery. As it seems to increase in older women and these tend to be working women who have delayed the start of their family, you could argue that this group are actually costing the NHS more than the younger women who are not employed and on benefits group. So this employed/unemployed is a load of old tosh and just another attempt to have ago at those on benefits. Obviously just a theory on my part but could be an interesting research project.[/p][/quote]Not sure how factual this is - isnt the average first time mother 29/30? Is that classed as an older mother - I think not. Its the serial birth-ers who continually bang out baby after baby with health problems who think its their right to reproduce when their and childrens health is in the hands of the tax payers. Think its the middle class 'older' parents who have on average 2 children and continue to bring them up with a good standard of education & health and dont rely on benefits. Its the easiest option out there in this country to be young, knock out children while replying on state aid and when the going gets tough dump them on social services and blame society![/p][/quote]you are peddling myths. teenage pregnancies are at a 40 year low. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-26353267 two of the largest areas of spend in the welfare budget are pensions and housing benefit. these are certainly not restricted to the working class. whatintheworld
  • Score: 0

12:03pm Fri 14 Mar 14

Templar05 says...

GardenVarietyMushroo
m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?



You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
What about teenage pregnancy ? or pregnancies from so called fathers ,that have legged it ?
[quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]What about teenage pregnancy ? or pregnancies from so called fathers ,that have legged it ? Templar05
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Fri 14 Mar 14

GardenVarietyMushroom says...

Templar05 wrote:
GardenVarietyMushroo

m
wrote:
gathin wrote:
What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates?
Employed/unemployed?




You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?
Who the hell cares?
What about teenage pregnancy ? or pregnancies from so called fathers ,that have legged it ?
What about them?
[quote][p][bold]Templar05[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GardenVarietyMushroo m[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gathin[/bold] wrote: What are the stats on indigenous/immigrant birth rates? Employed/unemployed? You definitely have the details so why don't you share them or do we have to go through a FOI request?[/p][/quote]Who the hell cares?[/p][/quote]What about teenage pregnancy ? or pregnancies from so called fathers ,that have legged it ?[/p][/quote]What about them? GardenVarietyMushroom
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree