You may not know us as people, Mary, but you do know us as our board entities, and within that narrow frame of reference, you probably know sides of us very well. The few members that I've so far met off-board may not look our sound as I imagined them exactly, yet there's always been something at the core which I have recognised instantly: I'd guess that if we were to put you in a room with ten anonymous members for even ten minutes or so, you'd be able to identify the majority after just a few sentences. It's not the same as people you meet down the road or on the bus: most folk here have revealed more personal thoughts than they might to those who can actually see them. And we tend to share interests which many others we might come across won't have at all, and those shared loves and passions normally suggest a meeting of like minds.

Most importantly, as has been seen over and again, the majority here care very much for their fellow members: such supportive companionship is a commodity rare enough these days, and worth its weight in gold, (let alone chocolate or alcohol).

Mary,

Once again, Ron hits the nail on the head. The care and concern exhibited here towards fellow Members is really quite astonishing, and no less real for it happening within a cyber community. People here have to make a conscious decision to sit down and write their acknowledgement of a persons problems. In `real` life a I suspect we often feel constrained from saying "I feel sad/angry/awful" to those we know, if only because we feel that we are burdening them with our woes. Or that we will be judged, or worse, have our problem lightly dismissed.

Ron is right, we `know` eachother as board entities but personality will out and it is that we are responding to, possibly in a more honest way than in face to face communication.

I do hope that things lighten for you soon Mary, but in the meantime you know that there is a listening post here.

Mary, such a shame if you are a worrier but there's not much you can do about it.  I have several friends who have the same make-up as you and have watched them behave as you describe.   I have a sister-in-law who roundly castigated me for allowing my then 13-year old son to travel to Biarritz and back on his own to stay with a school friend during the holidays.  He was an "unaccompanied minor" and was looked after all the way - as I quickly explained - but then she said "What if the plane had gone down?"  Well how would that have been better if the whole family were with him?  Or....should none of us travel anywhere?  She thought I was a very bad mother.  I looked on it that I was giving him confidence and broadening his mind.  He absolutely LOVED the whole experience.  He was away for three weeks and came back home very happy indeed.  There are risks even if you stay at home.

Thing is, as you say, there's no point in "what if".  It may never happen. You have to be prepared for some generalities in case but no point dwelling on anything.  Difficult I know.

We're off to Lapland the week after next for 3 nights to see Santa - if you thought of all the things that could go wrong with such a trip, you'd never go.  I'm just preparing us both for the weather and looking forward to being there.  I don't allow anything else to creep in.  I do hope you feel better now you're back home. 

Funnily enough, I tend not to worry about such things - even though it has actually happened to me in the past.

Ah yes, the train to Glasgow that arrived 4 hours late (or rather, the passengers arrived four hours late, on a coach - the train was well and truly dead and had been left at Carlisle).  Having allowed a mere 3hrs 45mins leeway, I missed Act 1.  Fortunately I was due to stay up for three nights, and did eventually manage to see the show in its entirety, prior to having two trains break down on me on the return trip.

The last time I paid Scottish Opera a visit I made sure I was due to arrive 13 hours in advance   I can thoroughly recommend the Caledonian Sleeper - only one day off work, no hotel bills, and a return fare of £48 if I remember correctly!

Oh I see!  I thought you were imagining all sorts of doom!  If I go to a concert in London, I always go the night before if possible.  It takes all the rush and worry out of the journey down.  Anyway, you made it and it was good and the worst didn't happen.

Regarding being overprotective towards the children - in spite of the permitted travels, I think I possibly was and still am overprotective in other ways.  I thought the flight over was ok because it was totally supervised, literally door-to-door.  I tend not to be so happy about unsupervised arrangements.  This day and age though we live in much more scary times and children are taught not to trust people from an early age, even though we're assured that problems are in fact rare.  None of us like to take any risks.  If you do and the worst happens - well just think of Madeleine McCann.  The parents thought that leaving them in the room was safe and it probably had been so for hundreds of other people.  All the same, I'd never have left my children alone.  I wonder who is right?  They were obviously incredibly unlucky but to me they took a definite risk. 

Milly - I certainly wouldn't have left children at that age. Not sensible or responsible.

I was always aware that children could be snatched, but it really is very rare, and the media are utterly silly about it. I know someone who was still meeting her 17-year-old daughter from school because she was so convinced something would happen to her! Now that's
over-protective. Naturally, when the girl went to university she dropped out within a term. and came back home. She hadn't learnt how to be independent. So sad.

I don't think I've ever known anybody with a wooden leg!