Episode 9 Sunday Morning Live

Episode 9

Similar Content

Browse content similar to Episode 9. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



On today's programme: North Korea continues its missile face off


Would military action against it be justified?


He has said things that are horrific and with me he's not getting away


with it. Justin Gatlin was back


on the track last night, a week after he was booed


by the London crowds. We ask - should there be more


forgiveness in sport? And Dame Esther Rantzen recalls


a lifetime of campaigning, That's Life, and the day she got


on the wrong side of the law. I try and bury that moment, I never


speak of it. I have just been arrested for handing out bat stew!


All that coming up later, and Emma Barnett is here ready


You can contact us by Facebook and Twitter -


don't forget to use the hashtag #bbcsml.


Or text SML followed by your message to 60011.


Texts are charged at your standard message rate.


Or email us at '[email protected]'.


However you choose to get in touch, please don't forget to include your


name so I can get you involved in our discussions.


Including whether the NHS should stop giving IVF to older women.


-- should stop giving IVF fertility treatment completely.


First, North Korea and the USA have spent this week trading threats.


The regime of Kim Jong-un have forecast that this week


they will fire missiles 2,000 miles into the sea near the American


President Donald Trump has warned the North Koreans of fire and fury


North Korea is best not make any more threats to the United States.


They will be met with fire and fury, like the world has never seen.


There's concern that the war of words could spark


a real conflict with potentially devastating


Washington is worried about the growing threat posed


by a country which has long-range rockets and nuclear weapons.


So, would military action against North Korea be justified?


Joining us now are Charlie Wolf, an American commentator,


Catherine Philp, diplomatic correspondent at The Times,


Peter Felstead, the editor of Jane's Defence Weekly,


and Bruce Kent from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.


Charlie, wouldn't we all be feeling a lot safer this


had avoided getting embroiled in this war of words?


This started way before Donald Trump, when they have the drive to


the inauguration, president Obama said he is going to be your biggest


problem. It has been going on for four or five presidencies. No one


wants to see hostilities but the threat is Kim Jong-un and the best


way to prevent the threat is to use force or this threat of force. The


credible threat of power or force is the best deterrent. Don't you think


Kim Jong-un is sitting in his palace laughing because Donald Trump has


taken the bait? No, this has been going on too long and you have to


stand up to these people. Bruce, what do you make of that? I think it


is off the wall. Donald Trump should be negotiating in good faith to get


rid of nuclear weapons, he's done nothing of the sort. Why should he


have them and not North Korea? But when you are dealing with a leader


like Kim Jong-un, isn't military threat the only way you can stop him


getting out of control? But then you have to implement your threat, which


means devastation of the large part of the world. UN sanctions haven't


worked before. 122 countries have signed up against nuclear weapons,


why can't Trump join that? Peter, where are we with this? Bruce made


the perfect point that many other countries, the west, USA, Russia,


got huge amounts of nuclear weapons, why shouldn't North Korea? That's an


interesting argument. I think we would have to look to a world where


nuclear weapons are not part of the equation. We can look forward to


technologies like ballistic missile defence as a counter to nuclear


weapons but I think what's most dangerous about this particular


situation is its proclivity to escalate very fast and I think


that's where the danger is. A war of words is good for any of us but


surely that is holding North Korea back from doing something that would


be very dangerous. The problem with North Korea is we simply don't know


what they are thinking. We can look at the Trump Administration and seek


sensible people in the room to know what it's like to put men in battle.


With North Korea we know absolutely nothing about what they are thinking


and that's a key danger. Catherine, North Korea said it would fire


missiles into the sea near Guam, what happens if they hit Guam?


Surely we are very close to something very dangerous and that's


because of North Korea. First of all we have to see whether they actually


do it or not. President Trump threatened action against a threat.


North Korea have made that threat and he hasn't followed through on


his threat, this is the problem. When you throw around threats, you


may feel compelled to follow through on them and that's where we get into


dangerous territory. Don't throw around threats if you are not


prepared to follow through on them, it's a basic rule of diplomacy and


military strategy. This is why we see his generals taking a different


line. I know of not one military man who thinks force will solve anything


in this conflict. So my response to the question we opened with, is


military force justified, I don't even get to justify it, I get to


this is a terrible idea for which there is no strategic objectives.


Nothing you can make happen by the use of military force that we would


want to happen. But if a missile lands on Guam, surely you have to do


something? You cannot speak to them because diplomacy doesn't work at


that stage. We haven't seriously tried diplomacy recently with North


Korea. There was a process under the Clinton Administration when their


word direct talks and they haven't happened since so I'm not sure you


have a choice. If North Korea have the ability to strike the US


mainland with a nuclear weapon, I don't see the choice. They don't


have it yet and we don't want them to have it. I think that ship has


sailed. With me now is someone who has


first hand experience Jihyun Park fled the country


after her brother was beaten After a terrible ordeal at the hand


of people traffickers, she finally arrived in this


country in 2008. What do people in North Korea know


of the world beyond it? I have read every column inch written about


this, I follow diplomacy laws and often I cannot sleep at night. I am


frightened about what should happen to the families who live in North


Korea. President Trump has accused the Chinese bank of laundering money


and ... I worry about these strong assumptions but we usually... I


understand nowadays what accuracy is, it is information to North Korea


dictators because members of the Kim family have always controlled the


North Korean people and don't like North Korean people changing their


mind. But this information changes the North Korean people and one day


we stand up and... Let me ask you, do people in North Korea know that


the country has nuclear weapons? What are they taught or told about


them? The North Korean people not too much know about what happens


nowadays outside the country and insight North Korea because there is


only one TV and newspaper, and not describing other countries. So


people heard about the Government, but nowadays many North Korean


people complain about that. We cannot divide the USA army. Jihyun


Park, thank you for giving us inside. So not much known on the


ground about what is going on. These are real people, Charlie, who


will be caught up in a war of words between two big egos. It is the


commander-in-chief of the United States, not two big egos. But they


are real people. Yes, and this is a prison, an open-air prison, North


Korea. Besides that, we have a right and duty to protect our citizens. Is


-- Trump is giving a consequence. We want to make peace with everybody.


But as Catherine says, it is difficult once you go down the path


to follow up with the threat. I just want to talk to Peter about actually


how close are they to firing a nuclear weapon at Guam or anywhere


else in the world. How close are North Korea to doing that? They have


demonstrated capacity to conduct nuclear tests. They have


demonstrated their capacity to fire intercontinental ballistic missiles.


To what extent they can weaponised those missiles we are not entirely


sure but the US defence and intelligence community has recently


said they believe they do have that capacity. What are the options if


they do? Troops on the ground? Are targeted attack by the USA?


Militarily the USA said they do have the capacity to defend against a


limited missile strike and that's probably what we are talking about


here because I don't think they will have that many missiles that are


long range and weaponised but the danger is escalation from that


point. Let's find out what people are saying at home. Chris says we


should be standing by America when it comes to North Korea and be


prepared to destroy the regime and establish a working government for


them. Elaine says I think Kim Jong-un is dangerous but has become


more dangerous with Mr Trump in the White House continually baiting him.


He's a rare outtake TV star who forgets he's dealing with real life.


Robert says they are like pathetic schoolyard bullies. Paul chimed in


and says why are they doing this when Nato exists for this reason. We


shouldn't go in just because Trump and the US do. We all know Trump is


talking big to help his abysmal poll numbers. I don't need to die in a


war to help an ego driven man get over his multiple inadequacies, says


Chris. In the past we have had an awful lot of words between North


Korea and America and the rest of the world, but what's new here? The


rhetoric isn't new, is it? It is from the American side. The North


Korean rhetoric has sounded like this for years. We are used to that.


It is profoundly destabilising when the commander-in-chief of the United


States departs from the script quite so dramatically. Also, as we just


heard, the intelligence assessments are new. North Korea is far further


down the road than we believed it would be. We thought this moment


wouldn't come for two or three years minimum so their capability is much


more advanced. Because we have allowed it to get


that way. We do not know what Kim Jong-un will do but to the same


extent, we do not know what Donald Trump will do. In this instance, it


is good. The Chinese are the ones who will say, the guy could do it,


and it will be the incentive for them to say, it is time to talk to


North Korea, you have to stop this. Is there a place for military


action? Certainly not. Never? In some situations, maybe, but in this,


certainly not. They are both risking national suicide, not protecting


anything. Nuclear weapons now are five times as big as the ones that


destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we have thousands of them. Will


China keep out of it? Will Russia? We are on the edge of catastrophe


and to talk about protecting a country is ridiculous. We should


have other ways of resolving the conflict. You have had the final


say, thank you very much. Dame Esther Rantzen has


always been a fighter. She founded the charity Childline


to help vulnerable children and Silver Line to combat loneliness


in older people. But it is as a television presenter


that Esther made her name, most notably with a hugely


successful TV programme which ran for more than 20 years and mixed


hard-hitting journalism, moving personal stories and quirky


humour - That's Life - which she recalled when Sean went


to meet her. APPLAUSE


Esther Rantzen, let us talk about That's Life, a huge success, getting


figures of up to 22 million. It looked like a lot of fun to make.


Was it? Yes, it was. That was our slogan, actually, on the Tuesday


morning, when we were reading a fresh batch of letters that came in


from viewers, the material came from the audience for That's Life. We


must thank everyone who has sent us the pictures. In Middlesbrough,


window magic... And Virginia Stevens in Enfield, sticks almost


everything. What we would say is, wouldn't it be fun if...? And it was


fun. But also very serious. We had very heart-rending stories at the


centre of the programme. I would like to thank him for saving my


life. If it had not been for this man, I would not be here. With us


tonight, hello. I should tell you you are sitting next to Nicholas




You also got arrested during filming. Tell us about that. I try


and bury that moment. I never speak of it. Not your proudest moment? I


was arrested for handing out bat stew, not because they were worried


about the bat but because the policeman decided I was obstructing


the pavement. You are blocking the pavement. I don't care if you have


something for the last ten years, if you do not move, will arrest you.


You are rested. I have just been arrested for handing out bat stew.


Can you tell our director I was not obstructing. It was the bat! It was


very entertaining, of course, but it also was ground-breaking and I am


thinking of Childline, you did pretty serious stuff you have


touched on, talk to us about that, 30 years ago now. Absolutely. The


launch of Childline is a night I will never ever forget. Hello,


Childline, can I help you? 50,000 attempted calls when we opened the


lines because we were giving an opportunity to children and indeed


some adults too to talk about things they had never dared talk about


before. And we were able to assure them that it was not therefore is --


it was not their fault, the abuse should not be happening to them. It


changed my life, obviously, but much more important than that, it changed


the lives of more than 4 million children. Let us get onto Silver


Line, there are similarities and big differences. With Silver Line,


people left alone and lonely and ignored. What is the aim and what


would you like to happen with Silver Line? What we want to do is make


children understand that we care about them, but with that Silver


Line, we want older people to understand we care about them. And


when we piloted that Silver Line, one of our callers in the very early


days said, when I put the phone down after I had called Silver Line, I


feel like I have joined the human race. That makes me quite angry


because our older people should always feel like they are valued


members of the human race. In 2000, you lost your husband, Desmond


Wilcox. Can you remember much of that time and how painful it was? I


think anybody who has been through this sort of loss, we never really


get over it. We never forget it. But we learn to cope with it, I think.


If we are lucky, and I have got family and friends and work and all


kinds of things which I rely upon, really, but nothing fills the gap.


Is that the spark to get you to do that Silver Line? I found myself


coming home to the flat and it was dark and empty and cold and there


was no one to have a cup of tea with and talk about the day with and I


did not like it. I am not a religious person, I am agnostic. My


daughter is religious. I was rather appalled when I found myself saying,


I think God wants you to move in with me. Fortunately, she laughed!


You are sitting in your kitchen with your daughter, you are agnostic, she


is religious, what religion is she? She is Jewish. You were brought up


in a Jewish household, has that shaped your life? Yes, I feel very


grateful because I know I was born in 1940 and if I had been born in a


different country, I would not be sitting here today. My family would


not have survived. At the difficult times in your life, has faith played


any sort of role? I am agnostic, I am also a sceptic. I am thrilled for


people for whom faith makes a difference. As I say, if I am wrong,


if you are there, I apologise, I should have realised earlier. It is


never too late! Finally, if there was a television programme about


your life, what would you will sign off be? I am going to resist that's


life, that was life, that is afterlife... That sounds morbid! You


are making this programme... What would my sign off be? I'm afraid


that is all we have time for. Thank you so much. Thank you. She is very


keen to hear from anyone who has been helped by Childline.


Contact her on [email protected]


Still to come on Sunday Morning Live...


The Archbishop of Canterbury travels to Uganda to highlight


I am quite bowled over by the genuine level to which Uganda has


accepted refugees which is the equivalent of us taking


2.5-3,000,000. It was a golden time last night at the athletics


championships with a stunning first place in the relay. But for Usain


Bolt, it was a sad occasion as he pulled short with an injury. Last


week Usain Bolt had further heartache when he was beaten by


Justin Gatlin in the 100 metres final. Despite his success, Justin


Gatlin was loudly booed because he has been banned twice over doping


allegations in the second instance, serving a four year suspension. The


medal ceremony was also low. His father described the crowd's


reaction as disrespectful to the sport. Do athletes judged to have


broken the rules deserve the cold shoulder?


Should there be more forgiveness in sport?


Joining us now are Mihir Bose, journalist and former


Martha Kelner, chief sports reporter at the Guardian,


Habir Singh, anti-doping team leader at London 2012.


If an athlete who's done wrong, has served their punishment,


I think it depends on the circumstances, but with Justin


Gatlin, he has been found guilty of two doping offences now, the second


was very serious, so I can understand the crowd taking out


their frustration in the form of booing him. The only issue was the


double standards from the crowd in that there are many people who have


committed anti-doping offences competing at the London 2017 Games,


so I think Justin Gatlin was taking the flat for the rest of the people


who have committed offences. In life, if you do something wrong,


very wrong, you go to prison, serve your time, there are no sanctions,


people do not who you on the street. It is life, isn't it? I think that


is true but sport has to be divorced from life. It is a job, isn't it? It


is. But if you commit fraud in a financial job, it is unlikely your


employer will invite you back, the same if you are a lawyer and you are


correct, you will be disbarred. You are not banned? You are, on


occasion. If you are Doctor, you do wrong, you are struck off the


register. Sport is a privilege, not a God-given right. If you are


abusing that privilege... OK, the crowd did not seem very forgiving.


Usain Bolt seem to accept it. He applauded Justin Gatlin, shouldn't


the crowd have been doing the same? I think they should have. I think it


was wrong for the crowd to boo him. I agree sport is special but we


should not forgive because forgiveness is part of life -- but


we should forgive. Sport is magical. The two incident you showed were


surprising, unexpected results, sport is the only place you can get


unexpected results. Everything in life is predictable and the magic of


sport means that people who follow it think that everybody is pure and


wonderful and what they do is because they have worked for it.


That is not right. If we do not forgive, we are missing out the


redemptive part of sport. Surely sport is about people coming back


and winning when you did not think they could. You test athletes, is it


time to stop forgiving and bring in much harsher punishments? I think


there is this narrative about athletes and particularly the Justin


Gatlin case, but I think the intricacies are not always


understood. The first case, the United States anti-doping agency


said there was no intent to cheat and he did not cheat but the


international association for athletics Federation said that


because he tested positive, he has to be banned. We do not get that


part of the story. The second time he tested positive, he had 34 tests


during that event prior to the positive test and he was negative.


We do not hear that. We just hear, he tested positive twice, he beat


our hero, Usain Bolt, so the public opinion is he is the bad guy. The


narrative is we think, they have done something wrong. You are on the


coal face and you are saying, half the time, they do not mean to break


the rules. We have to look at it from the wider perspective which is


they are human beings, their livelihood, and the bigger issues,


why are athletes doping but I'm not forgiving athletes is not addressing


it. I think it is very rarely you get an athlete who holds up their


hands and says, yes, I cheated intentionally. When was the last


time there was an Olympic champion who had not failed a drugs test who


said, actually, I have deceived you, I have been doping? It does not


happen. Not in human nature. Emma, you've got


a guest on this one. With me now is the former javelin


athlete Goldie Sayers, who finished fourth


at the Beijing Olympics in 2008. She's waiting to hear if she will be


upgraded to bronze after one of the Russian athletes in that


competition was found to have taken The athlete is appealing


the decision. So, whilst the legal


challenge is under way, we don't want to get


into the details of that case but when you were competing,


what impact did the issue of athletes taking banned


substances have on you? As an athlete at the time, you have


to remain naive, otherwise it probably sends you a bit mad. You


have no physical evidence someone is cheating, but having found out an


athlete who finished ahead of me in the Olympic Games perhaps has been


doping, it is... It does tarnish your career somewhat. The biggest


thing it robs you of is knowing how good you were at the time and all


the self-confidence and also financial reward that comes with


that. You are pushing yourself harder while this is going on, you


can risk greater injury because you are competing maybe against


standards that are not natural? Exactly. When you have just missed


out on a medal, you are making up a gap in performance and it is an


imaginary gap so you end up pushing yourself, getting injured, that is


what happened to me the year after, 2009, and has happen to a lot of


other clean athletes. You end up getting injured and that has a big


impact on your performance. It is not just missing out on the medal,


it is also what impact that has on the rest of your career physically


but also mentally. Do you think there should be tougher


penalties for the athletes and also for the people around them? I think


that's something we are not talking about a lot, it is who is pushing


performance and enhancing drugs onto the athletes. I think harsher


penalties have to be put in place for the coaches around the athletes


who make them think it is OK to cheat. We are doing a lot more in


sport to highlight the doping issue and getting to grips with testing


more athletes and punishing them appropriately. I do think it is a


grey area in that some athletes who test positively have inadvertently


taken a banned substance but I think now we have got this second strike


and URL policy, and I think that is right.


I'll be in danger of letting athletes like Goldie down because we


are not punishing people who test positive for banned substances


enough? I don't think anyone is it against introducing sanctions,


whether it is monetary or legal, to athletes. We are isolating sport and


forgetting about the humanistic aspect. We are humans and can make


mistakes and we would want a fair trial and to demonstrate intent


before we label somebody. When we say athletes rarely admit to


cheating or doping offences, I agree with that, but like anyone else we


would want to be innocent until proven guilty entities that grey


area. Can I turn away from drugs and talk more about sport generally.


Mihir, all sportsmen and women are trying to get the edge, should we be


stricter in that area? There is a difference between gamesmanship and


cheating. In cricket ball tries to hide the ball from the batsmen in


order to deceive him over whether the ball will swing. Is it cheating


or clever play? You won't see the ball until the last minute so you


won't know. That is good play, if you like, clever play. Like diving


in football? If they used television replay they could work out the


diving but they have gone in for retrospective punishment which means


you punish the player and penalise the team that has suffered at the


hands of the player. This is where I think sport has got into a model.


You should punish the player straightaway so that the team, the


player is part of the team, and we have this in the World Cup. The team


is punished straightaway, not later on. What you want to see in sport is


immediate results and spectators want to see it is fair. It's the


first time I've seen you in agreement. You're nodding, Martha? I


do agree with football and the punishment taking place immediately,


but that level of offence this very different from something that alters


the trajectory of someone else's career. You see it more in athletics


than any other sport but when you are taking away someone's


opportunities in the future you are also having a financial effect on


their lives. You steal not only that moment on the podium but also the


commercial opportunities they have. I don't think diving in football is


comparable to doping or... But Martha, we also have a whole team


behind the athletes and we don't do enough to look at what this team is.


Advisers, managers, what are they doing? Let's find out what social


media is saying. Peter says once is an error of


judgment if your doping, twice is criminal intent. Francis says sport


should always be about fair play and respect to your opponent, drug users


show neither quality and should be dismissed from their sport for life.


Emily says I explained to my eight-year-old son why everyone was


booing Justin Gatlin and he said if I cheat at my games are not allowed


to play, why should he be allowed? Out of the mouths of babes. Someone


else says I would like to see two versions of the games, one clean and


one with performance enhancing drugs.


We will have to discuss that another time because we are out of time.


Thank you very much indeed. The Archbishop of Canterbury has


just returned from a trip to Africa Justin Welby joined forces


with the Archbishop of Uganda, Stanley Ntagali, to highlight


the plight of thousands of refugees who have fled the civil war


in neighbouring South Sudan. Martin Bashir, the BBC's religious


affairs correspondent, joined the two archbishops


on their humanitarian journey. Cruising above the lush plains of


east Africa, the archbishops of Canterbury and Uganda are on a


mission to refugees who fled tribal conflict in South Sudan. Despite


desperate circumstances, they offer the warmest of welcomes. More than


900,000 people have rushed across the border into northern Uganda over


the last five years. As the two main tribes have taken sides with either


the current or previous presidents. I am really quite bowled over by the


genuine level to which Uganda has accepted a volume of refugees which


proportionate to their population is the equivalent of us taking 2.5


million. This town houses 18,000 refugees. Can I come in? Thank you.


Is it watertight when it rains? It is full of holes and sometimes they


leak. So you get food from the United Nations? Yes. They only get


that food and if it is not there, it is not there. This is a couple who


from one moment to the next grab what you can and Rome and didn't


tell us the horrendous things they saw. But others did.


The United Nations is providing the bulk of support for food and


shelter, but the Ugandan church is also involved. We pray for the


refugees and for southern Sudan to resolve the conflict. We buy food,


we give the children and the mothers because the majority of refugees are


children and mothers. And educating these children is one of the camp's


biggest challenges. How many children? 784. In one of the brief


talks you gave, you said God especially loves refugees. Jesus was


himself a refugee so he understands what it is like to have run from


your house, suddenly, and find yourself in a strange land.


One of the most striking things about the culture here is that in


all our inadequacy of relationships, relating to the people who are


suffering, there is this response which you will have heard to hope


and faith in Jesus Christ because that is their experience. The UN


continues to encourage the warring factions to negotiate peace but as


yet there is little sign of an agreement.


You have worked in Africa in the secular business of the oil


industry, you have travelled extensively, you have taught, you


now come as the Archbishop of Canterbury. Do you feel optimistic


about the future of this continent or is there a sense of pessimism?


When I look at Africa, I am full of hope. Let's not be hypocritical as


Europeans. Within our lifetime, and many people still around, we killed


20 million of each other, and look where Europe is now. We are not in a


position to lecture other people on civilisation. We are in a position


humbling, and with love and respect to help Africa in its great movement


forward. The Archbishop prepares to leave Uganda, inspired by its


response in welcoming almost 1 million people. This is in a poor


country, led by the president who says we don't use the word refugee,


these are fellow human beings, fellow Africans.


The Archbishop of Canterbury with refugees in Uganda.


Figures out this week reveal that access to IVF fertility treatment


The research by Fertility Network UK says that some health authorities


have stopped offering the three cycles of treatment,


And three NHS providers are considering restricting IVF


The technique fertilises eggs outside the womb and then


So, in a time when the NHS is struggling for cash,


Joining the panel now are Serena Bergman,


a feminist journalist, Geeta Nargund, a fertility


expert, Richard Clothier, who is a former fertility patient,


and Caroline Farrow, a Catholic commentator.


Geeta, in a time of cutbacks and shortages the NHS


is struggling to meet all the demands placed on it.


Is IVF a luxury we can no longer afford?


IVF is not a luxury. Infertility is a disease, and it needs treatment


like any other medical condition. Secondly, as regards the funding,


it's not a problem. There is enough money in the NHS at the moment


within the existing budget to fund IVF. It is how it is being spent.


The question is the problem is how it's being spent and how it's being


managed. Right now IVF is not considered as a national Health


Service, as we all know it is a postcode lottery with regional


variations. One authority paying 2500, another one a different amount


and it is unacceptable. It is creating inequality in our society.


The NHS does many things. One of the things it does save lives, one of


the things it does is IVF. Many people would say the IVF is


struggling for cash, if something is to go what comes first, saving lives


or IVF? Creating life is equally important. There is a bigger picture


here, fertility is not just for family benefit from it is for


societal and long-term benefit. We need children for the long-term


economy so we cannot be narrow-minded, we cannot be


short-sighted. IVF is a solution, a technological solution to a disease


and we cannot cut back. What do you make of that, Serena? It is


everyone's right to have a baby? That is maybe. These are doctors and


nurses, members of the community, they understand the struggle, but at


the end of the day we need to remember that the NHS is struggling


for cash in areas that really affect people's health and while I


understand that IVF is so important to some people, the reality is, with


all due respect, we don't need more children. It affects people's health


when they cannot have children. We will ask Richard in a minute. I


accept that, and we need more support for people with mental


health issues whether it is because they cannot have children or for


other reasons. We also need to reframe the idea that having a child


biologically is something everyone should do in order to lead a happy


life. Richard, what do you make of that? The mental health side alone


will have a cost. If you move IVF treatment altogether the cost of


dealing with the mental health demographic you will single-handedly


create so that will have a financial cost in itself. The other thing you


will do if you remove IVF treatment is send people abroad where


treatment is far cheaper. But is it the right of everybody to have a


baby and the role of the NHS to pay for it? I think the NHS has a


responsibility for it because everybody has held events of some


sort, but everybody's are different. Mine was infertility and the NHS


wasn't there for me. I don't have any problem with the money I have


put in the system to cater for other people's health events regardless of


whether it is naturally caused or from a clear lifestyle decision they


have made. Caroline, is IVF isn't on the NHS for free, surely just rich


people would be able to do it? The role of the NHS is not to get


involved in social engineering, to make things fairer for which or poor


people. But I do have some sympathy with Richard and Geeta's point of


the mental health impacts of infertility. I am a mother of five


children and I know it is easy for me to pontificate about why IVF


should not be available on the NHS, but when we look at what IVF does,


it does not solve the underlying issue of infertility, it offers, for


some people, the hope of a sticking plaster. The other day,


interestingly, the Government's Public health authority has put out


a survey for women's fertility, it asked women of all ages to


contribute about different fertility and reproductive experiences, really


valuable survey, worth filling in, and it does not mention something


called natural fertility awareness, a woman monitoring her cycle, not


just noting when her period is, how long the cycle is, but the various


biological markers. There are quite a few people who have managed to


conceive successfully... There will be people who can't. The NHS is not


at the moment helping with that at all, women's fertility, the NHS


treats women's fertility as if it is a problem that has to be stopped


because people do not want to get pregnant. Then suddenly you decide


you want to have children and you are faced with this at the last


minute, goodness, I would like to have children, I am not conceiving,


perhaps... With that attitude, if people who smoke have lung cancer,


you are on your own, your decision. Absolutely not. When you have


smoked, this is not about deserving and undeserving, this is why we must


not take this attitude... When you have smoked, you have contracted a


life-threatening disease and unique treatment. Presumably, you have put


in a lot of money through taxation on cigarettes towards the NHS. It is


not to do with who has contributed and who has not, but what is the


best use of funds? Is creating life the best use of funds? I think


actually no. Emma has a guest who might be interested. Someone in a


very different position. Joining me now with Jessica who had a loving


rounds of IVF which unfortunately has not been successful -- 11


rounds. You are in your mid 30s, you found you were struggling to have


children, EU funded privately, why was it so important for you? -- EU


funded it privately. Having a baby is something we all think is a


given, we know that we might not have everything in life, but we


assume we are going to be able to have a family. When that is denied


to you, it is exceptionally hard and it affects everything, your


self-esteem, your relationship with your family and friends, your


partner, how you feel about work. That is certainly why I went to such


extremes and we were diagnosed with unexplained infertility. As many


people are. Absolutely. I seemed to be able to get pregnant and I had


multiple miscarriages and an ectopic pregnancy that almost took my life.


I now dedicate my time to campaigning. We are only having this


debate partly because people do not understand the impact that not being


able to have a child has on your life. How does it make you feel when


you hear someone able to have five children safe, IVF should not be


offered on the NHS, it is not something important for the NHS to


be offering, especially considering what the NHS is there to do?


Obviously, that is really hard to hear. But at the same time, I think


she said many valuable things about improving fertility education. One


of the reasons we have had this exponential growth in infertility is


that women are leaving it later and something that I feel really


passionate about is that we are taught in school how not to get


pregnant and actually getting pregnant is quite hard, especially


if you leave it later. We have not created the conditions to enable


people to have families that the biological optimum age. I think


before we eradicate IVF on the NHS, perhaps we need to do more about


that. And this is a growing issue. We will pick up some of these


points. Jessica, thank you. Not easy.


It affects relationships, work, friends, everything. It affected


that lady in every aspect of life. What is wrong with giving women the


chance to try? The problem is, as the lady mentioned, we perceive


infertility as being denied a family. This is not the case. When


you provide IVF on the NHS and you are not giving support to people who


want to go down other routes such as adoption or fostering or the


emotional support they need to reframe the idea of a happy life and


a family life, you end up in horrendous situations where people


are paying for 11 rounds of IVF. It shows the desperation. It may not be


something you feel, but it is a feeling many couples feel.


Absolutely. I think those feelings are very valid but I do not think


the NHS should be funding the solutions and I do not think the


solution is IVF. How do you feel about that? I think you cannot


overstate the mental health impact of infertility and I think if there


is such a delta between what some parts of the country are paying,


2000 up to 11.5 thousand, there is so much that can be done with that


pot of money. What is the value of... It does not work for everyone,


but what is the harm, the financial return, of spending a little bit of


money of taking someone from having serious mental health issues to


being happy? Let us give people at home they say. Duncan says, 25 weeks


pregnant having had IVF on the NHS, hard enough process to go through


without having the financial pressure on top, congratulations!


And says the NHS should be treating the sick, being unable to conceive


is life-threatening, why should we pay? Rebecca says, infertility is a


medical condition like any other and if receiving IVF is a cure, the NHS


has a moral duty to help. It should be available for anybody who wants


it. The final word to Geeta, what do you


want the NHS to do? Place a cap on the price of IVF, to have a national


price. One price everywhere, national problem, needs a national


solution, so we can fund more cycles. Three rounds? Three rounds,


there is money in the budget, it is how it is being spent. We should do


it as a priority rather than talking about cutbacks. Fidelity is a man's


problem as well, 50% of IVF is done for male infertility. We cannot


create a society where there is inequality and we need to help


people and infertility is a medical condition and IVF is a technological


solution. Thank you very much, thank you to all of you.


70 years ago, the partition of India led to the movement


Muslims travelled to the new, mainly Muslim, state of Pakistan,


while many Hindus and Sikhs headed in the opposite direction.


The upheaval led to some bitter inter-religious violence.


A BBC programme to mark the anniversary of partition takes


members of families from the UK back to trace their roots and explore


the impact that the creation of the two states had


We'll talk to Sameer Butt and Binita Kane,


two of those who went on this journey of discovery, in a moment.


First, a taster of the programme, My Family, Partition


So, recognise it? That was a very beautiful house, everything has


changed. From here to there, I think. Our house. We used to live


here... Hugely emotional scenes, you and your grandfather, Sameer. He


broke down? When I think back to that moment, stood in front of the


house, there was a time when he could not believe it was his because


it had changed so much. The realisation on his face and the


emotion that followed, it was overwhelming. He became a child in


that moment, he said, where is my dad? Did he? That is what he said.


70 years disappeared and he was a child again in that moment of


realisation. A very emotional time for him and myself as well. I cannot


even imagine. Growing up, did you talk about partition? Did you


understand what it had done the millions of people? I knew the


basics of it, a split between India and Pakistan. I knew roughly that my


grandparents had gone through a tough time to get to where they are


now. This experience, it actually helped me to explore exactly what


they went through. I have experienced it in a certain way


following the footsteps my grandfather took. People around you


growing up in the UK, did you feel they knew about it, the hatred


between the religions that had happened? It is really interesting


because I have friends who are Hindus and friends who are Sikhs but


we do not have the animosity that was there in the partition time.


Only 70 years ago? Exactly. Still within our lifetime. There are a lot


of people I work with, friends, they had no idea what partition was. I am


glad we now have an opportunity to explore what happened and to show


people what happened. Let me bring in Binita. Good morning. In the


programme, we see you meeting some of those who helped your father


escape, the violence as a seven-year-old. Let us look at an


extract now. I just want to thank your family and for you, you saved


my dad's life. You helped my family escape. Thank you so much. Thank


you. I have a photograph to show you. He is here. This is the little


boy you saved. Also very powerful moment, Binita. From the whole


experience, was there a particular feeling or thought that stood out?


The whole journey was an emotional roller-coaster from start to finish.


From a personal point of view, I did not know if the village even existed


anymore. In my mind, it had been burnt to the ground, everyone had


fled. To find it was there and to meet people who remembered my family


and my grandfather... In the next episode, you find out what has


happened to them. It was just overwhelming. I cannot even describe


how that felt, to thank the gentleman who saved my dad's life,


it was an incredible moment. Very special. Did you grow up also having


these conversations or was it talked about a little bit? Like Sameer, I


knew in very factual terms that partition happened, two new states


were created, and I knew the basics of what had happened, but I had


absolutely no idea what a cataclysmic event it was, millions


of people died, so many were made refugees, and the actual human


impact of dividing people on those grounds, that really did not


register. I am embarrassed to say I did not know more about it. I do not


think you are alone, even though it affected your family. At any time,


has it been difficult now learning more about it to learn what the


British role was and obviously living in the UK? To be honest, a


lot of people that we met at that time did speak about the role the


British had, they had their role to play, but for myself, I think


whether it should have happened or shouldn't have happened, I do not


want to comment, but it did not happen in the right way. They could


have been what organisation, guidelines to follow. There could


have been a system in place to ensure millions of people did not


lose their lives. Politicians incited hatred at the time, there


was a feeling of that. Final word to you, Binita. When you look back at


history, there will always be dark periods, we must not shy away from


it, we must learn from it and look at what happened and so much of it


is relevant to the modern world and we feel quite passionately, and I


know Anita Rani does too, that we must raise awareness of it. I am


sure the programme will do that. And you can see the second part


of Partition, My Family and Me - India, 1947 on BBC One at 9pm this


Wednesday. That's nearly all


from us for this week. Many thanks to all our


guests and you at home But Emma will be carrying


on the conversation online. Yes, I'll be talking


to Sameer and Binita. Log on to


facebook.com/bbcsundaymorninglive In the meantime, from everyone


here in the studio and the whole Sunday Morning Live team,




Download Subtitles