i feel like i am being bullied but the thing is the bullying isnt bad but the people doing it know i am unwell and still do it the thing is the things they are saying definately wouldnt hurt anyone else but because i am very week mentally it really does effect me i hope you know wat i mean thank you for your help xxx vici

I suffer from depression and a diary of mine was found someone snooped in my locker and handed my dairy too management. I have been told I have to attend an appointment with occupational health I was told it was not an option. My boss betrayed my confidence already she vowed to be my friend and help me yesterday she told me she was never my friend and that seeing occupational health is not an option. I was told they are doing a check up too see if I am fit for work. I am extremely anxious and my family do not want to accept my depression if I loose my job I may not be able to find a new one. Employment is very hard to find in my area. My boss says she is not bullying or harrassing me but it feels that way to me. I am alone once again. Does this effect my workers rights? Can my boss do this to me?

one of my friends is being threatned by capability disciplinary action but is infact being treated very poorly by there manager , they are put down at every given opportunity every peice of work that they do is never praised even though it is often of a very high standard the job is with a local authority and yet there is no support for my friend what should they do they belong to a union which is a part of the authority they have already discussed these issues with a HR advisor and the person in occupational health my friend had a large brain tumor last year which nearly killed them on return to work there was no real support or training the person has remarkably had no effects from the tumor but has found there boss becoming more and more difficult any advice what can they do next the salary is over is over 35K and theyhave a mortagage and children , they havent done anything wrong any advice welcome they also do not see why they should walkout

2 1/2 yrs and he gets worse by the day. he dosent let us train or learn more because his worklists are so long. He's always on the phone to his boss putting his associates down and questions every thing we do. He dosen't do a lick of work just gives orders and monopolizes all 8 hrs we are there. He is a bootlicker to his bosses and seems to have them all snowed. It is starting to effect my health, Stress and irregular heart beat...but I love what I do.....help.

A few years ago i was bullied by another adult which consisted of childish behaviour which went on for a long, long time. There were various actions they did that were completely bullying behaviour to the point that they tried to ruin my reputation by spreading rumours about me and my children. Their behaviour escalated to the point that i could involve the police. Up until this point i had stood upto them but then they acted as if they were the victim and this was very frustrating. When the police were involved the bully was charged with harrasment, but the real problem now is that since this, they have reported me to the police and there was nothing i could do as it was my word against theirs. All this has had a psychological effect on me and my health has been affected, my question is how do you deal with someone who will stop at nothing to bring you down and threaten you with violence but if you report them, they report you back. An outsiders opinion would be appreciated

Child Care Linked To Assertive, Noncompliant, and Aggressive Behaviors Vast Majority of Children Within Normal Range The more time children spent in child care from birth to age four-and-a-half, the more adults tended to rate them, both at age four-and-a-half and at kindergarten, as less likely to get along with others, as more assertive, as disobedient, and as aggressive, according to a study appearing in the July/August issue of Child Development. However, the researchers cautioned that for the vast majority of children, the levels of the behaviors reported were well within the normal range. In fact, a mother's sensitivity to her child was a better indicator of reported problem behaviors than was time in child care, with more sensitive mothering being linked to less problem behaviors. Higher maternal education and family income also predicted lower levels of children's problem behaviors.. The findings are from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development. "It's important to put these findings in perspective," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the NICHD. "The amount of time in child care is one of several family and child care factors linked to children's behaviors, both positive and negative." The NICHD launched the study of early child care in 1991. The 27 researchers conducting the study have been following the development of more than 1000 children from across the United States. The children were enrolled in the study at birth and come from an ethnically and economically diverse sample of families. In addition to focusing on time in child care, the current article focused on several other aspects of the child care experience: the quality of the child care arrangement, the proportion of time that the child was in a child care center, the proportion of time that the child was cared for in a group setting, and the number of times that the mother reported that the child started a new child care arrangement. In the current article, the researchers describe how child care experiences in the first four-and-a-half years of the children's lives relate to children's social competence and behavior problems, when the children were four-and-a-half years old, and later, when they reached kindergarten. The study measured children's social behavior by having mothers, child care providers and teachers complete standardized ratings of children's behavior problems and social competence-their ability to get along with children and adults and their ability to follow social rules. Information about the number of hours the children were in child care was obtained from the mothers every 3-4 months. The link between time in child care and problem behavior was greater than the link between infant temperament and problem behavior or maternal depression and problem behavior. This link between time in child care and problem behavior was also greater for children in center-based care than for children in other types of care. The study authors noted that, of the children who displayed problem behaviors, the majority were well within the normal range. A small proportion of children showed levels of problem behavior that should be monitored to see if they developed into more serious problems. The proportion of children showing these higher levels of problem behavior is commensurate with the proportion of children in the U.S. population as a whole who also display these problems. The link between time in child care and problem behavior occurred across all family backgrounds and all types and quality of care. The authors added that the time in child care during infancy did not appear to have a greater bearing on the children's behavior than did the time they spent in care after infancy. The researchers also found evidence that children who experienced better quality child care-in which caregivers provided intellectual stimulation and were warm, positive, and sensitive to child behavior-had fewer child caregiver/teacher-reported problem behaviors and conflict than did children who experienced lower quality care. The researchers noted, however, that high quality child care did not eliminate the link between hours in care and behavior problems. The researchers could find no threshold of child-care hours above which problem behaviors were especially likely to emerge. To illustrate the reported findings that were based on the information from the group as a whole, the researchers classified the children into four groups, based on the amount of time they spent in child care: 16 percent of children were in child care an average of 0-9 hours a week 38 percent for 10-29 hours 36 percent for 30-45 hours 10 percent for more than 45 hours a week. In each of these groups, a minority of the children had a high score on behavior problems. However, the percent of children with high scores increased with the increase in the number of hours children spent in child care. Children were rated by mothers and teachers on items such as: child demands a lot of attention; argues a lot; bragging and boasting; cruelty, bullying or meanness to others; destroys things belonging to others; disobedient at home; disobedient at school; gets into many fights; lying or cheating; screams a lot. One of the important findings of this study is that the strongest predictor of how well a child behaves was a feature of maternal parenting that the researchers described as sensitivity--how attuned a mother is to a child's wants and needs. The behaviors of the sensitive mother are child centered; the sensitive mother is aware of the child's needs, moods, interests, and capabilities. She allows this awareness to guide her interactions with her child. Children of more sensitive mothers were more competent socially, less likely to engage in disruptive behavior, and less likely to be involved in conflicts with their caregivers and teachers. Similarly, children whose parents had higher incomes and who were more highly educated also were more socially competent and less likely to engage in problem behaviors. The study authors noted that their study was not designed to prove a cause and effect relationship. That is, the study cannot prove whether spending more time in child care causes children to have more problem behaviors. The behavior problems the researchers documented might be due to some other characteristic of the children or of their environment. Accompanying editorials in the July/August issue of Child Development offer possible explanations. Findings previously reported from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development showed that more time in care predicted more problem behavior among two-year olds, but not among three-year olds; less sensitive maternal behavior and less harmonious mother-child interaction when children were 6-36 months of age; as well as higher rates of insecure attachment to the mother if the mother's parenting was relatively insensitive. Preliminary findings pertaining to the research questions posed and answered by the current article were presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development in April of 2001. In the future, the researchers plan to focus on the relation between hours spent in child care and children's behavior during the school years. ### The NICHD is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the biomedical research arm of the federal government. NIH is an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The NICHD sponsors research on development, before and after birth; maternal, child, and family health; reproductive biology and population issues; and medical rehabilitation. NICHD publications, as well as information about the Institute, are available from the NICHD Web site, http://www.nichd.nih.gov, or from the NICHD Information Resource Center, 1-800-370-2943; e-mail NICHDInformationResourceCenter@mail.nih.gov. Child Care Linked To Assertive, Noncompliant, and Aggressive Behaviors Vast Majority of Children Within Normal Range The more time children spent in child care from birth to age four-and-a-half, the more adults tended to rate them, both at age four-and-a-half and at kindergarten, as less likely to get along with others, as more assertive, as disobedient, and as aggressive, according to a study appearing in the July/August issue of Child Development. However, the researchers cautioned that for the vast majority of children, the levels of the behaviors reported were well within the normal range. In fact, a mother's sensitivity to her child was a better indicator of reported problem behaviors than was time in child care, with more sensitive mothering being linked to less problem behaviors. Higher maternal education and family income also predicted lower levels of children's problem behaviors.. The findings are from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development. "It's important to put these findings in perspective," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the NICHD. "The amount of time in child care is one of several family and child care factors linked to children's behaviors, both positive and negative." The NICHD launched the study of early child care in 1991. The 27 researchers conducting the study have been following the development of more than 1000 children from across the United States. The children were enrolled in the study at birth and come from an ethnically and economically diverse sample of families. In addition to focusing on time in child care, the current article focused on several other aspects of the child care experience: the quality of the child care arrangement, the proportion of time that the child was in a child care center, the proportion of time that the child was cared for in a group setting, and the number of times that the mother reported that the child started a new child care arrangement. In the current article, the researchers describe how child care experiences in the first four-and-a-half years of the children's lives relate to children's social competence and behavior problems, when the children were four-and-a-half years old, and later, when they reached kindergarten. The study measured children's social behavior by having mothers, child care providers and teachers complete standardized ratings of children's behavior problems and social competence-their ability to get along with children and adults and their ability to follow social rules. Information about the number of hours the children were in child care was obtained from the mothers every 3-4 months. The link between time in child care and problem behavior was greater than the link between infant temperament and problem behavior or maternal depression and problem behavior. This link between time in child care and problem behavior was also greater for children in center-based care than for children in other types of care. The study authors noted that, of the children who displayed problem behaviors, the majority were well within the normal range. A small proportion of children showed levels of problem behavior that should be monitored to see if they developed into more serious problems. The proportion of children showing these higher levels of problem behavior is commensurate with the proportion of children in the U.S. population as a whole who also display these problems. The link between time in child care and problem behavior occurred across all family backgrounds and all types and quality of care. The authors added that the time in child care during infancy did not appear to have a greater bearing on the children's behavior than did the time they spent in care after infancy. The researchers also found evidence that children who experienced better quality child care-in which caregivers provided intellectual stimulation and were warm, positive, and sensitive to child behavior-had fewer child caregiver/teacher-reported problem behaviors and conflict than did children who experienced lower quality care. The researchers noted, however, that high quality child care did not eliminate the link between hours in care and behavior problems. The researchers could find no threshold of child-care hours above which problem behaviors were especially likely to emerge. To illustrate the reported findings that were based on the information from the group as a whole, the researchers classified the children into four groups, based on the amount of time they spent in child care: 16 percent of children were in child care an average of 0-9 hours a week 38 percent for 10-29 hours 36 percent for 30-45 hours 10 percent for more than 45 hours a week. In each of these groups, a minority of the children had a high score on behavior problems. However, the percent of children with high scores increased with the increase in the number of hours children spent in child care. Children were rated by mothers and teachers on items such as: child demands a lot of attention; argues a lot; bragging and boasting; cruelty, bullying or meanness to others; destroys things belonging to others; disobedient at home; disobedient at school; gets into many fights; lying or cheating; screams a lot. One of the important findings of this study is that the strongest predictor of how well a child behaves was a feature of maternal parenting that the researchers described as sensitivity--how attuned a mother is to a child's wants and needs. The behaviors of the sensitive mother are child centered; the sensitive mother is aware of the child's needs, moods, interests, and capabilities. She allows this awareness to guide her interactions with her child. Children of more sensitive mothers were more competent socially, less likely to engage in disruptive behavior, and less likely to be involved in conflicts with their caregivers and teachers. Similarly, children whose parents had higher incomes and who were more highly educated also were more socially competent and less likely to engage in problem behaviors. The study authors noted that their study was not designed to prove a cause and effect relationship. That is, the study cannot prove whether spending more time in child care causes children to have more problem behaviors. The behavior problems the researchers documented might be due to some other characteristic of the children or of their environment. Accompanying editorials in the July/August issue of Child Development offer possible explanations. Findings previously reported from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development showed that more time in care predicted more problem behavior among two-year olds, but not among three-year olds; less sensitive maternal behavior and less harmonious mother-child interaction when children were 6-36 months of age; as well as higher rates of insecure attachment to the mother if the mother's parenting was relatively insensitive. Preliminary findings pertaining to the research questions posed and answered by the current article were presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development in April of 2001. In the future, the researchers plan to focus on the relation between hours spent in child care and children's behavior during the school years. ### The NICHD is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the biomedical research arm of the federal government. NIH is an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The NICHD sponsors research on development, before and after birth; maternal, child, and family health; reproductive biology and population issues; and medical rehabilitation. NICHD publications, as well as information about the Institute, are available from the NICHD Web site, http://www.nichd.nih.gov, or from the NICHD Information Resource Center, 1-800-370-2943; e-mail NICHDInformationResourceCenter@mail.nih.gov.

Japan Lower-Secondary School Lower-secondary school covers grades seven, eight, and nine-- children between the ages of roughly twelve and fifteen--with increased focus on academic studies. Although it is still possible to leave the formal education system after completing lowersecondary school and find employment, fewer than 4 percent did so by the late 1980s. Like elementary schools, most lower-secondary schools in the 1980s were public, but 5 percent were private. Private schools were costly, averaging ?58,592 (US,989) per student in 1988, about four times more than the ?30,828 (US4) that the ministry estimated as the cost for students enrolled in public lowersecondary schools. The teaching force in lower-secondary schools is two-thirds male. Schools are headed by principals, 99 percent of whom were men in 1988. Teachers often majored in the subjects they taught, and more than 80 percent graduated from a four-year college. Classes are large, with thirty-eight students per class on average, and each class is assigned a homeroom teacher who doubles as counselor. Unlike elementary students, lower-secondary school students have different teachers for different subjects. The teacher, however, rather than the students, moves to a new room for each fifty-minute period. Instruction in lower-secondary schools tends to rely on the lecture method. Teachers also use other media, such as television and radio, and there is some laboratory work. By 1989 about 45 percent of all public lower-secondary schools had computers, including schools that used them only for administrative purposes. Classroom organization is still based on small work groups, although no longer for reasons of discipline. By lower-secondary school, students are expected to have mastered daily routines and acceptable behavior. All course contents are specified in the Course of Study for Lower-Secondary Schools. Some subjects, such as Japanese language and mathematics, are coordinated with the elementary curriculum. Others, such as foreign-language study, usually English, begin at this level. The curriculum covers Japanese language, social studies, mathematics, science, music, fine arts, health, and physical education. All students also are exposed to either industrial arts or homemaking. Moral education and special activities continue to receive attention. Students also attend mandatory club meetings during school hours, and many also participate in after-school clubs. Most lowersecondary students say they liked school, although it is the chance to meet their friends daily--not the lessons--that is particularly attractive to them. The ministry recognizes a need to improve the teaching of all foreign languages, especially English. To improve instruction in spoken English, the government invites many young native speakers of English to Japan to serve as assistants to school boards and prefectures under its Japan Exchange and Teaching Program. By 1988 participants numbered over 1,000. As part of the movement to develop an integrated curriculum and the education reform movement of the late 1980s, the entire Course of Study for Lower-Secondary Schools was revised in 1989 and took effect in the 1992-93 school year. A main aim of the reform is to equip students with the basic knowledge needed for citizenship. In some measure, this means increased emphasis on Japanese history and culture, as well as understanding Japan as a nation and its relationships with other nations of the world. The course of study also increased elective hours, recommending that electives be chosen in light of individual student differences and with an eye toward diversification. Two problems of great concern to educators and citizens began to appear at the lower-secondary level in the 1980s: bullying, which seemed rampant in the mid-1980s but had abated somewhat by the end of the decade, and the school-refusal syndrome (toko kyohi--manifested by a student's excessive absenteeism), which was on the rise. Experts disagreed over the specific causes of these phenomena, but there is general agreement that the system offers little individualized or specialized assistance, thus contributing to disaffection among those who can not conform to its demands or who are otherwise experiencing difficulties. Another problem concerns Japanese children returning from abroad. These students, particularly if they have been overseas for extended periods, often need help not only in reading and writing but also in adjusting to rigid classroom demands. Even making the adjustment does not guarantee acceptance: besides having acquired a foreign language, many of these students have also acquired foreign customs of speech, dress, and behavior that mark them as different. i needa know the differences from school in japan and school in an American middle school i can't really figure out any

Floyd Mayweather Jr. is days away from a guest-starring role at World Wrestling Entertainment’s annual WrestleMania event, where he will wrestle against nearly 7-foot tall Paul “Big Show” Wight. But the WWE has changed directions constantly with their plans for the Yahoo! Sports No. 1 pound-for-pound boxer for Sunday’s event at the Florida Citrus Bowl in Orlando, Fla. The original idea was a tag-team match in which Mayweather’s role was to be Wight’s partner as villains against a Latino superstar team of boxer Oscar De La Hoya and wrestler Rey Mysterio, the company’s diminutive but spectacular masked kids favorite. The idea on paper was a winner. You’ve got the biggest rivalry in boxing with two guys who last year did the biggest pay-per-view numbers in history, and with the 441-pound Wight and the 5-2, 165-pound Mysterio, you have a David vs. Goliath tale. Mysterio, already the company’s top Latin draw, would have only gotten bigger as De La Hoya’s partner But things changed quickly. De La Hoya turned down the offer, as it would have interfered with his training for his May fight against Steve Forbes. Another wrestler, Dave Batista, was put in De La Hoya’s spot. But then Mysterio suffered a full biceps tear in a match in Santiago, Chile, which needed surgery and removed him from the equation. At that point the decision was made for a Mayweather vs. Wight singles match, with the idea of making Mayweather into Mysterio’s buddy. The story started in Las Vegas on Feb. 17 on a WWE pay-per-view event. Big Show was bullying the injured Mysterio, who took one for the team by performing with his biceps injury before going in for surgery. Earlier in the show, they had done an interview establishing Mayweather and Mysterio and running mates. Mayweather hit the ring. Show mocked him by getting on his knees, and Mayweather unleashed a barrage of punches to the face. The next problem was, wrestling fans didn’t like Mayweather. He was heavily booed whenever he appeared at wrestling functions, or whenever his name was mentioned. When a press conference in Los Angeles featured loud chants of “De La Hoya,” Mayweather threw money into the crowd. The only clips that aired on television were the fans excited over the money being thrown, making it appear the fans actually liked him. After a few weeks of portraying him as the smiling hero facing an enormous challenge, the fans completely rejected the portrayal and the company did an about-face and made Mayweather Jr. into a villain. Wrestling, of course, is a blend of a reality and illusion. Here’s what’s real and what isn’t regarding Mayweather in WrestleMania: million: The alleged amount of money Mayweather is supposed to be getting for his appearance. Not real. The most money anyone has ever earned for a one-time pro wrestling appearance was Mike Tyson at WrestleMania in 1998, which was good for about .5 million. Even though pro wrestling was more popular in America then, WrestleMania itself is a bigger money show now, partially because WWE’s popularity has expanded outside North America. But the Tyson of 1998 had more drawing power than the Mayweather of 2008. Wrestling sources indicate Mayweather is getting a million flat fee, plus a percentage that should put him in Tyson’s range. -42 million: The very real amount of money WWE will gross from the event, combining their percentage of the worldwide pay-per-view, the live gate, merchandise sold at the event and the subsequent DVD release that comes out a month later. The event will top 1 million buys, and the company’s goal is to break its all-time record of 1.25 million worldwide buys set for a similar event last year, in which Donald Trump put his hair at stake against WWE owner Vince McMahon, the latter of whom was shaved bald. After the cable companies get their share, WWE’s take should be anywhere from .5 million to million. With the exception of the proposed De La Hoya vs. Mayweather match in September, this should be the biggest pay-per-view event of any kind in 2008, and if it beats last year, will become the largest non-boxing pay-per-view event in history. The expected crowd of more than 70,000 fans will pay million or so in ticket sales, setting a North American pro wrestling record. Merchandise accounts for another .5 million. The event DVD should gross the company more than million and could easily top million. The vast majority of that money was drawn on the name WrestleMania, the 24th incarnation of an annual tradition, not because of the publicity Mayweather is bringing to the event. This is actually the first WrestleMania in over a decade not to sell out well in advance, and live tickets have moved relatively slowly, maybe around 1,000 per week, since Mayweather was announced. His value as a pay-per-view attraction is a wild card. The key selling point: When the challenge of Mayweather gaining revenge for his injured buddy and slaying the fire-breathing giant went up in smoke when the fans wouldn’t cooperate with the portrayal, a new idea had to be formulated. The selling point now is that Show has vowed to injure Mayweather and end his boxing career. Because of the size difference, Mayweather has no chance and thus if you buy the show, you’ll see history. Even though pro wrestling is scripted, the real injury rate is obscenely high. But Mayweather will be taking no risks that will threaten future payoffs. Not real. The nearly two feet in height and 300 pound size difference: Bad math. While pro wrestling is a world where anyone who is 6-7 can be labeled a 7-footer (the most famous exaggeration being the late Andre the Giant, billed at 7-4 and 7-5 his entire career even though he was really 6-9 3/4), Wight is close enough to seven feet that he was listed as being a 7-footer when he had limited playing time as a basketball player at Wichita State University in the early ’90s. Mayweather is 5-8. At the weigh-in a few weeks ago, a brawl broke out. According to the scales, Wight was 441.4 pounds, down from 530 a year ago when he retired as a wrestler – to try boxing. The year of training did wonders for his health, but evidently he didn’t believe he could box, because he’s back to wrestling. Mayweather was 159. Believe it or not, the scale was legitimate. The broken nose: The story for this match started on Feb. 17, when Mayweather jumped into the ring to save Mysterio, and threw a flurry of bare-knuckle punches at Show’s head. An errant blow hit the nose and a significant amount of blood came from his nose and mouth. Thee blood was real, and not planned, but for visual effect, it was a fortunate mistake. Sources say the nose, however, was not broken. The elbow injury: After the weigh-in, Wight picked Mayweather up for in a “SportsCenter” moment and threw him out of the ring where a group of WWE wrestlers were waiting to catch him. Mayweather got up, starting holding his elbow, and ran to the back. The WWE then put out a story that Mayweather had injured his elbow, pushing the story line that Mayweather is risking his boxing career by participating in the match. The story of this alleged injury received no media attention and WWE quietly forgot they staged the injury. As far as what will happen on Sunday? Expect a lot of distractions from outside the ring and a carefully choreographed encounter. Mayweather will be protected from any physical risks. Wrestling fans have been conditioned to believe small guys have no chance with big guys, so even though Mayweather is as legitimate a fighter as there is, fans won’t buy too many minutes of him beating on a guy that much bigger than him. Whenever a boxer does pro wrestling, the climactic spot is always the knockout punch. But Mayweather is more likely to deliver on someone not in the match who jumps into the ring. In the end, somebody will lose, probably due to interference from another wrestler, getting the clip on “SportsCenter” later that night. what are your thought about this

es esta pagina link http://notmilk.com/kradjian.html The most important information dissemination my. Not that, but I can make your text too long jajaja. If I write bad is that I am leading a translator jaja

wanted to be? for example if youve suffered immense trauma at the hands of bullies and different people throughout your life...youve been victimized....the system let you down...high school, mental health services, if youve suffered hardship for a prolonged time because of these people, plus your family hurt and abused you to.....can all this have a detremental effect upon you and turn you into a person you never wanted to be? a bitter, confused, no self esteem with immense rage and anger in your system who has mental health problems? have they made me this way? have they moulded me as a person to be a person i never wanted to be?