Reform & Tories Don't Like Rows

 

Reform and the Conservatives aren't natural fighters — and that's exactly why they're needed now more than ever.

 These parties tend to attract the sensible majority: people who value stability, accountability, and reasoned debate. They're not interested in theatrical outrage or ideological purity — and they shouldn’t have to be.

But modern politics makes it difficult. Sensible voices are shouted down by a loud minority — often the same “scary, hairy, arrogant lefties” who believe they've got a monopoly on compassion and knowledge. In reality, their policies are frequently built on emotionalism and outdated utopian ideals. Tories and Reformers, often better read and more pragmatic, can see where this leads — and want none of it.

Without strong economic policy, there's no way to fund the public services many leftists claim to care about. As Milton Friedman warned, you can’t have government programs without first producing the wealth to fund them.

Let’s stop pretending Sweden is a socialist utopia.

• Sweden has a foreign-born population of 2.7 million (Statista, 2024).

• The UK’s is 10.7 million — nearly four times higher, despite having only about 6 times Sweden’s population.

That kind of imbalance makes a direct comparison absurd.

Crucially, Sweden promotes integration! Newcomers are taught Swedish culture, language, and values. There’s a cultural cohesion — even in their progressive model — that is lacking in Britain. As researchers like Paul Collier (Oxford economist) and Douglas Murray have noted, the erosion of national identity weakens defence, economic unity, and social trust.

And taxing the wealthy?

Repeatedly proven ineffective when taken too far.

• France's “super tax” led to an exodus of high earners.

• Sweden themselves rolled back many high-tax policies in the 1990s because of stagnation.

• Even Thomas Piketty, darling of the redistributionist crowd, has admitted wealth taxes are nearly impossible to enforce in a globalised world.

Kindness without boundaries becomes exploitation.

Compassion without realism becomes collapse.

And left-leaning ideologues are very good at manipulating both.

Liz Lucy Robillard 29/06/25

Blame Social Work for Child Abuse

 Social Work Is to Blame for Child Abuse and Neglect in the UK

Social work is to blame for child abuse and neglect due to the promotion of victimhood, dependence on mental health and big government, benefits and welfare, which keeps people trapped in a victim-dependent state encouraged by left-wing politics. 

Too many authentically vulnerable suffer as a consequence.

This isn’t just opinion—it’s observation from the ground. The UK social care system no longer uplifts or empowers.

 Instead, it disempowers. It labels people as broken, mentally ill, unstable, and in need of endless intervention.

 It encourages the idea that individuals cannot cope without state control. And this ideology is not neutral. It stems from decades of socialist thinking embedded in policy and practice.

The system thrives on helplessness. The more dependent a person becomes on welfare, mental health diagnoses, and services, the more they are rewarded—with housing, benefits, and pity. Those who resist these labels, who try to rise above trauma without becoming a 'case', are often ignored or punished.

In practical terms, this means that vulnerable parents—especially mothers—are subjected to intrusive assessments, often based on subjective interpretations.

 Real, severe abuse is often overlooked due to systemic incompetence or ideological bias.

Victimhood is rewarded. Resilience is pathologised. The message is clear: submit to the system, accept the diagnosis, follow the plan, or risk losing your children.

Socialism in the UK disempowers people and promotes anger and poor education. This is key.

The education system no longer teaches strength, logic, or responsibility—it teaches grievance, obedience, and dependence.

 Emotional literacy and critical thinking have been replaced with scripted slogans and vague mental health advice that encourages lifelong identification with being a victim.

The betrayal is real. What should be a service of last resort—called upon in rare, extreme cases—has become a surveillance and control tool embedded in everyday life. 

Communities are torn apart, parents are smeared, and children are removed not for clear-cut abuse, but for not conforming to the system’s narrow view of acceptable struggle.

The net result? The state grows stronger while the people grow weaker. The very people they scream to care about!

 Generational trauma is recycled, not healed - they need focus on this. And the professions tasked with protecting children have become one of the main sources of fear, injustice, and deep, silent harm.

Support people who truly need it. 

see

• James Bartholomew – The Welfare State We're In

• Peter Hitchens – The Abolition of Britain

• Johann Hari – Lost Connections

• Tana Dineen – Manufacturing Victims: What the Psychology Industry is Doing to People

• Jonathan Haidt & Greg Lukianoff – The Coddling of the American Mind

• Parliament Reports on Baby P and Rotherham Scandals

• Theodore Dalrymple – various essays on British underclass culture

• Christopher Lasch – The Culture of Narcissism

liz lucy robillard 

Free Quote Book- Liz Lucy Robillard

 Free quote book original quotes by me

𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐡 𝐋𝐮𝐜𝐲 𝐑𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐝, 𝐐𝐮𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐬

Free Copy of Quote Book below!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hKb75DSCoboIAOeCAG7WfAVwnClm70xQ/view?usp=drivesdk

Liz Lucy Robillard Free Quote Book

Elon Musk isn't mad- oil

Why Oil Should Be Confined—and Why Musk Isn’t Mad

Less oil= less dependence on the Middle East

By any reckoning, oil is the black blood of the twentieth century. It coursed through our veins in the form of plastic, polyester, and petrol, infiltrating not only our homes but our wombs, our oceans, and our atmosphere. It has dictated wars, marriages of convenience between dictators and democracies, and the desecration of entire cultures. And like the worst sort of addiction, it leaves us numb, bloated, and belligerent, all while the planet withers under its chokehold.

It is time we treated oil for what it is: a resource too potent, too dirty, and too politically entangling to be left in the hands of ordinary people. A resource so ruinous in its ubiquity that its usage should be as tightly regulated as plutonium. Let Formula One have it—let them roar in their absurd metal missiles for the sake of sport, spectacle, and the testing of engineering limits. Confine it to race tracks, and to industries where no real alternative exists—aircraft manufacture, heavy shipping, specialist medical equipment. But commuting to the shops in a three-tonne SUV is not one of them. That’s just fetishism with a fuel tank.

And now enters Elon Musk—a man loathed by many feminists for his bombast, his cult of personality, and his techno-libertarian leanings. But let us, for once, look beyond the man and into the ideas. Musk has done more to disrupt the oil industry than a thousand protest marches. He understood that the only way to unshackle people from petrol was to make electric sexy, fast, and status-laden. He gave the capitalist male an excuse to abandon fossil fuels without having to abandon his toys.

His detractors will tell you he is self-serving. Of course he is. But so was Edison. So was Marie Curie, in her way. What matters is that the cultural tectonic plates are moving. Musk’s vision—electric cars, solar roofing, Mars dreams aside—is rooted in the correct assumption: we do not need oil to thrive. We have needed it to profit, to dominate, to indulge. But thriving is another matter.

So let oil be a tool of last resort. Confine its use to the industrial margins and let the rest of us detox. We cannot continue to suck on the teat of the Earth as though she is our endless wet nurse. That’s not progress—it’s infantilism with a carbon footprint.

And if Musk’s ideas get us weaned faster than policy or guilt-trips can, then by all means, let the man have his moment. Just don’t ask us to clap him into sainthood while we do it.

Ai and liz

Who creates online law? Imran does!

 This post is being throttled by facebook so here is a repost of the original at Medium:

Why We Need a Better Alternative to the CCDH

The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) was founded with the noble aim of tackling online hate, disinformation, and extremism. But over time, its methods, motives, and transparency have drawn serious concern. Critics from across the political spectrum have questioned the organisation’s opaque funding, ties to partisan politics, and lack of accountability. When any body—however well-intentioned—gains influence without public scrutiny, the result can be dangerous: censorship, bias, and erosion of trust.

What’s needed is not just a watchdog, but a secular, transparent, democratic, and independently audited organisation to monitor online harms. This replacement body should not be built by a political faction or driven by ideology. Instead, it must include diverse voices: ethicists, technologists, free speech advocates, psychologists, minority representatives, and civil society leaders. Its decisions should be reviewable, its data open-source, and its reports peer-reviewed.

Unlike CCDH, which has been criticised for black-box research and selectively naming targets, a new body must offer clarity—clearly stating how it defines “hate,” how it quantifies harm, and how it guards against partisan misuse. Algorithms and social media dynamics are complex. Combatting toxic content without silencing dissent requires both skill and humility.

The replacement should focus on digital education, platform transparency, and structural solutions—not just naming and shaming individuals or calling for bans. It must operate outside government and industry influence but in consultation with both. Above all, it must uphold the principle that truth is strengthened, not silenced, by openness.

Imran Ahmed and the CCDH helped spark a crucial conversation about online harms. But now it's time to evolve. The stakes are too high to leave in the hands of any one unelected group. We need an accountable, impartial institution that defends both digital safety and freedom of expression. The internet deserves no less.

Who or What Should Replace CCDH?

1. Academic Institutions with Interdisciplinary Digital Ethics Programs

Examples include:

– Oxford Internet Institute (UK)

– MIT Media Lab (US)

– Berkman Klein Center at Harvard (US)

– Digital Methods Initiative, University of Amsterdam (Netherlands)

These institutions offer peer-reviewed research and high ethical standards, far from activist capture.

2. Civil Liberties and Digital Rights Organizations (Balanced Input)

Left-leaning: Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Access Now, Article 19

Right-leaning: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Free Speech Union (UK)

This creates ideological balance and avoids partisanship.

3. Psychologists and Neuroscientists Specializing in Online Behaviour

– Dr. Jonathan Haidt (NYU)

– Dr. Jean Twenge (San Diego State University)

– Dr. Tania Singer (Max Planck Institute)

– Dr. Gerd Gigerenzer (risk perception expert)

These experts offer science-based insight into why people believe and share misinformation.

4. Whistleblower-Backed Transparency Advocates

– Frances Haugen (Facebook whistleblower)

– Dr. Tristan Harris (Center for Humane Technology)

– Dr. Shoshana Zuboff (surveillance capitalism theorist)

They offer insider understanding of tech system failures and advocate for accountability.

5. A Publicly Mandated, Multi-Stakeholder Body

Modelled after institutions like ICANN or W3C. It would include:

– Tech platforms (limited voting rights)

– Academic and legal observers

– Citizen assemblies

– Human rights advocates

This ensures decentralised governance and rotating, transparent leadership.

6. Decentralised, Peer-Reviewed Knowledge Commons

Using tools like:

– Pol.is (for democratic debate)

– Metagov (online governance infrastructure)

– GitHub-style public review of data

This open science model ensures that research is visible, auditable, and collaborative.

7. Ethical Frameworks for Governance

Draw on:

– UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

– OECD’s AI Principles

– The UN’s proposed “Global Digital Compact”

– Rawlsian ethics (veil of ignorance)

These provide a principled, rights-based basis for decision-making.

8. Independent Legal Experts from Varied Traditions

Suggested voices:

– Lord Jonathan Sumption (UK)

– Nadine Strossen (US, former ACLU)

– Amal Clooney (international law)

– Alan Dershowitz (US constitutional law)

Legal expertise ensures moderation frameworks are lawful, proportionate, and appealable.

9. Consulted Communities, Not Just Activists

Include:

Free Speech Union

Ex-Muslim and reformist groups

Feminist and LGBT+ civil rights coalitions

National Secular Society 

A secular, pluralistic approach prevents monopolised representation and respects complexity within communities.

In summary, any replacement for CCDH should: – Be politically and financially independent

– Use transparent, peer-reviewed research methods

– Include a balance of perspectives from both left and right

– Involve experts in psychology, ethics, law, and tech

– Defend free speech and minority rights equally

– Be built with democratic legitimacy and public trust

This isn’t just about countering digital hate—it’s about preserving reasoned discourse in the digital age.

Ai & liz lucy robillard

The Legacy Act

---

Protecting Our Veterans Isn’t Rewriting History — It’s A Moral Duty

The Legacy Act, introduced by the last government, was a bold if flawed attempt to bring closure to the long, painful chapter of the Troubles. Its aim—to draw a line under endless investigations—was not about forgetting, but about protecting. Specifically, protecting those who served in uniform, under extraordinary pressure, in one of the most complex conflicts in British history.

Our soldiers were not terrorists. They did not seek out violence or plant bombs. They were deployed by the state to keep order during a deeply fractured period. Many were teenagers. Many made split-second decisions in fear for their lives. Some showed astonishing restraint. All bore witness to scenes that would leave lasting trauma.

It’s true the Legacy Act offered conditional immunity to all sides, and that’s where it stumbled—because the law made no moral distinction between state forces and illegal paramilitaries. In seeking a legal closure, it risked an ethical one. That’s why the courts ruled parts of it unlawful, and why it lacked full public backing.

But rejecting the Legacy Act must not mean rejecting veterans. Repeal should not become scapegoating. The current government now has a chance to get this right—by crafting new legislation that both honours the rights of victims and protects those who served with integrity under Operation Banner.

This isn’t about rewriting history. It’s about resisting the temptation to view history through a lens of easy blame. It’s about recognising that soldiers were not aggressors but instruments of a difficult peace. And it’s about ensuring that in seeking justice, we do not perpetrate new injustices—against those who already sacrificed so much.

The debt we owe our veterans is real. Their legacy deserves protection—not prosecution.

---

Ai article prompted by liz lucy robillard, 5/06/25

Financial incentives for bread manufacturers

 The Folic Acid Illusion: Rethinking Fortification in the Age of Genetic Diversity

Let me begin by stating what should be obvious: public health policy is not immune to the distorting influence of financial incentives, bureaucratic momentum, or intellectual inertia. When the state mandates a biochemical intervention across an entire population — as it has done with folic acid fortification — we are entering a realm that requires careful scrutiny, not blind acceptance. And yet, in most countries where folic acid fortification is law, very few questions are asked about its long-term effects on genetically diverse populations.

Approximately 40–60% of the global population is estimated to carry a polymorphism in the MTHFR gene — most commonly the C677T (rs1801133) variant. This gene encodes an enzyme critical to the methylation cycle, converting folic acid (the synthetic form) into its biologically active form, 5-methyltetrahydrofolate (5-MTHF). Carriers of this variant have reduced enzymatic activity, leading to impaired folate metabolism and potential accumulation of unmetabolized folic acid (UMFA) in the bloodstream — a substance now being studied for its potential to disrupt immune function, mask B12 deficiency, and even contribute to tumor growth (Kalmbach et al., 2008; Pickell et al., 2011).

What would happen if food manufacturers began producing folic acid–free breads and flours on a large scale? The answer is: they would tap into a substantial, underserved market. Individuals with MTHFR polymorphisms — numbering in the hundreds of millions globally — are increasingly aware of their genetic profile and actively seeking products that support rather than compromise their health. In the age of genetic testing and personalized nutrition, demand for bio-individual products is growing rapidly. The consumer appetite already exists.

Offering folic acid–free options would also serve individuals with B12 deficiency, autoimmune conditions, or those recovering from chemotherapy — all groups for whom UMFA may pose a risk. Furthermore, many individuals who do not yet know their MTHFR status could benefit from reduced exposure to synthetic folic acid simply by default. In essence, folic acid–free products would not be niche. They would be foundationally inclusive.

The business case is equally strong. In a competitive health food market, "folic acid free" could carry the same weight and recognition as "gluten free" or "low FODMAP" — a marker of safety and sophistication for a discerning consumer base. Brands that act early will position themselves as leaders in the next wave of functional, genomically aware nutrition.

The rational response is not to abandon folate supplementation, but to rethink the form it takes. L-5-MTHF supplementation has been shown to be both effective and safe, even at high doses (Scaglione & Panzavolta, 2014). It bypasses the MTHFR bottleneck and reduces the risk of UMFA accumulation. Yet adoption has been slow — not because the science is unclear, but because public systems have yet to update their framework to reflect what we now know about genetic diversity.

It is worth emphasizing that the MTHFR gene, long dismissed as a niche interest of the alternative health world, is anything but irrelevant. While it does not determine destiny, it offers insight into how nutrients are processed and why standard supplementation may fail for some individuals. In this sense, the gene acts as a gateway to precision medicine — a reminder that even something as seemingly universal as bread is not metabolized equally by all.

Meanwhile, physicians are rarely trained in the nuances of folate metabolism or genetic variability. Diagnostic tools such as the methylfolate-to-tetrahydrofolate ratio are virtually unavailable in standard practice. The RBC folate test — flawed though it is — has become a relic in many public systems, replaced with serum folate levels that fluctuate daily and reveal little about long-term sufficiency or metabolic utilization.

There are signs of resistance. Some EU countries — including Sweden and Germany — have resisted mandatory folic acid fortification altogether, citing concerns about long-term risks. A growing contingent of functional medicine practitioners are screening for MTHFR variants before prescribing supplements. Consumer demand for "methylated" or "active" B vitamins is rising. In Indonesia, researchers have recommended genotype-guided supplementation strategies based on MTHFR prevalence (Suwarto et al., 2021). But systemic change will require more.

What would change look like?

Financial incentives or subsidies for manufacturers to produce L-5-MTHF fortified and folic acid–free products

Mandatory labeling of folic acid content and form on all processed foods

Funding for large-scale public studies on UMFA accumulation, especially in MTHFR-variant carriers

Integration of genetic screening for folate metabolism disorders into prenatal and preventative care

Public health messaging that acknowledges variation, not just statistical averages

Until then, we remain in a situation where a chemical once hailed as a universal good is, in fact, a targeted risk for millions. This is not merely a failure of policy. It is a failure of imagination — and of empathy.

---

Further Reading and Scientific References

Kalmbach, R. et al. (2008). Unmetabolized folic acid is detected in nearly all serum samples from US children, adolescents, and adults. The Journal of Nutrition, link

Pickell, L. et al. (2011). High intake of folic acid disrupts embryonic development in mice. Birth Defects Research Part A, link

Scaglione, F., & Panzavolta, G. (2014). Folate, folic acid and 5-methyltetrahydrofolate: are they the same thing? Current Drug Metabolism, link

Suwarto, S. et al. (2021). The MTHFR C677T polymorphism among reproductive-age women in West Java, Indonesia. Journal of Biomedical Science, link

Bailey, L. B., & Gregory, J. F. (1999). Folate metabolism and requirements. The Journal of Nutrition, link

Wilcken, B. et al. (2003). Geographical and ethnic variation of the MTHFR C677T allele in Europe. The Lancet, link

Lucock, M. (2000). Folic acid: nutritional biochemistry, molecular biology, and role in disease processes. Molecular Genetics and Metabolism, link

Green, T. J. et al. (2007). Folic acid supplementation and cancer risk: point of view. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, link

Until policymakers treat genomic variability with the seriousness it deserves, individuals must do the work that institutions will not. And that begins with knowledge.

It now makes a solid argument that manufacturing folic acid–free breads and flours is not just ethically necessary, but commercially smart. Let me know if you’d like a summary or pitch-ready version next.

BH4 and Autism, Treatments

 The BH4 (tetrahydrobiopterin) pathway plays a key role in neurotransmitter synthesis and immune regulation. Disruptions in this pathway have been implicated in autism spectrum disorder (ASD)—especially via effects on serotonin, dopamine, and nitric oxide metabolism, and through oxidative stress and immune dysfunction.

BH4 Pathway and Autism: Key Points

BH4 is a cofactor needed to produce serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, epinephrine, and nitric oxide.

In ASD, the BH4 pathway may be compromised due to:

Oxidative stress

Chronic inflammation

Low folate availability (especially in MTHFR polymorphisms)

GTP cyclohydrolase I dysfunction (the rate-limiting enzyme in BH4 synthesis)

---

Natural Support Strategies

1. Boost BH4 production or recycling

Folinic acid (not folic acid) – supports methylation and BH4 recycling.

Vitamin C – regenerates oxidized BH4 back to its active form.

Vitamin B2 (riboflavin) – essential cofactor in BH4 production.

Tetrahydrobiopterin (Kuvan/Sapropterin) – prescription form, but sometimes used in clinical trials for ASD.

Methylcobalamin (B12) – supports methylation and neurotransmitter balance.

2. Reduce oxidative stress and inflammation

NAC (N-acetylcysteine) – boosts glutathione, lowers oxidative damage.

CoQ10 / Ubiquinol – mitochondrial and antioxidant support.

Omega-3 fatty acids – anti-inflammatory, support brain function.

Curcumin / turmeric – anti-inflammatory, crosses blood-brain barrier.

Resveratrol – supports nitric oxide balance and antioxidant defenses.

3. Dietary approaches

Anti-inflammatory diet – Whole foods, rich in vegetables, fruits, fish, olive oil.

Low-glutamate diet – Helps reduce excitotoxicity, which may interact with BH4 dysfunction.

Low-oxalate diet – Some children with autism have oxalate overload, which may interfere with BH4.

Gluten- and casein-free (GFCF) – anecdotal and research support for helping some children with ASD.

Low-phenol / Feingold-type diet – helpful for kids with sulfation or phenol sensitivity, which can burden the BH4 pathway.

4. Gut health restoration

Address gut dysbiosis and leaky gut, which can indirectly affect BH4 via inflammation.

Use probiotics, digestive enzymes, and prebiotic-rich foods (unless sensitive).

Consider rotating diets and food intolerance testing if behavioral reactions are observed.

---

Testing (optional but helpful)

Organic Acids Test (OAT) – assesses neurotransmitter metabolites, oxidative stress, and BH4 indicators.

Genetic testing (e.g., 23andMe + interpretation) – for MTHFR, GCH1, COMT, MAO-A, etc.

Folate receptor antibodies, methylation panel, and ammonia levels 

Chatgpt 21/05/25

A healthcare professional speaks up

 On facebook

'As a healthcare professional, I want to explain the reactions many of you receive when you share your stories. It often comes down to cognitive dissonance…a psychological conflict that occurs when people are confronted with information that contradicts their deeply held beliefs. For many in healthcare, it is almost impossible to grasp that what they were taught to help people might actually cause harm and even harder to accept that they may have played a role in that harm.

This was a difficult realization for me. Understanding that not only were my children injured by vaccines, but that I may have inadvertently contributed to the harm of many other children, was a bitter pill to swallow. But it was a necessary one.

True change began for me when I chose to listen…to genuinely hear the stories of others and consider the possibility that what I had been taught wasn’t the complete truth. That there might be conflicts of interest within healthcare, discouraging providers from recognizing certain realities.

I didn’t believe it at first. Not the second time, either. But when I watched my third child experience a traumatic reaction to a vaccine right before my eyes, I couldn’t ignore it any longer. Even then, I gaslit myself, just as my pediatrician did, telling myself that what I saw was normal, despite knowing deep down it was anything but.

It took hearing the same stories, over and over, from other mothers, women I knew, trusted, and respected for my guard to finally come down. It wasn’t easy, but it opened my eyes.

So, to those of you who feel your stories don’t matter, who believe your voices aren’t being heard-KEEP SPEAKING! Keep telling your stories. Because it was mothers like you, who refused to be silenced, that changed a healthcare professional like me.

A drop in the bucket might seem insignificant, but enough drops can overflow even the largest container. Keep going. Your voice matters.'

Sympathy for Psychiatrists

Rescuing dozens of emotionally tortured people every day is not a profession; it’s an instinct, a calling, a relentless pull toward the places where pain festers unseen. 

One doesn’t wear a white coat or wield a clipboard—no, the tools are far older: presence, patience, and the stubborn refusal to look away from another’s suffering. People open up not because of credentials, but because they sense that—at last—someone is actually listening. And in that moment, something miraculous happens. They mistake you for a therapist.

And why wouldn’t they? After all, you’re doing what therapy was meant to be: human, compassionate, curious, and courageous. You’re not ticking diagnostic boxes or chasing insurance codes. You’re sitting in the dark with them until their eyes adjust and they can begin to see themselves clearly.

This is, understandably, frustrating for psychiatrists. Not because they are cruel or stupid, but because they have been shackled by a system that taught them to reduce people to symptoms. They are as trapped as the rest of us—hemmed in by training that prizes detachment over connection, theory over lived truth. Many of them went into the field out of a genuine desire to help, but somewhere along the way, they were pulled off course by the gravity of textbooks, protocols, and pharmaceutical algorithms.

They are fallible, fragile humans too. Most are exhausted, carrying the weight of unspoken traumas of their own, silenced by the very culture they serve. They don’t need ridicule—they need guidance. A reminder that healing is not found in jargon, but in the gutsy vulnerability of being with another person, soul to soul.

The fact that unqualified “nobodies” are doing this work—quietly, consistently, online and off—ought not to humiliate psychiatrists, but inspire them. There is no shame in not knowing what they were never taught. But there is power, tremendous power, in unlearning.

So let the rescue continue. Let the heart guide what academia forgot. And let those in white coats be welcomed back—not to the ivory tower, but to the human fold, where empathy is the first and last prescription.

Liz Lucy Robillard and chatgpt 9/05/25

Autistic Child Sleeps with Eyes Open?

 An autistic child sleeping with their eyes half open can be due to several factors—most of which aren't dangerous in themselves, but they may reflect sensory or neurological differences common in autism. Here are the most likely reasons:

1. Immature or altered sleep regulation: Neurological differences in autism can affect how the brain transitions between sleep stages, leading to partial eye opening during lighter phases of sleep.


2. High arousal or hypervigilance: Some autistic individuals have an overactive nervous system. Even in sleep, their bodies may remain slightly “on guard,” which can manifest as sleeping with eyes partially open.


3. Muscle tone differences: Autism is often associated with either low or high muscle tone (hypotonia/hypertonia). This can affect eyelid control during sleep.


4. REM sleep disturbances: Disrupted REM cycles are common in autism. Since eye movement is active in this stage, it may correlate with partially open eyes.


5. Genetic or familial trait: Some children (autistic or not) naturally sleep with eyes partially open, especially in early childhood. It sometimes resolves with age.



If it’s accompanied by other issues—like poor sleep quality, night waking, seizures, or eye dryness—it’s worth mentioning to a pediatrician or sleep specialist.


Here’s a simple visual bedtime schedule and some calming sensory activity ideas you can use to help your son transition smoothly into sleep.


Visual Bedtime Schedule (Example)

You can print icons or use photo cards for each step, arranged left to right:

1. Toilet / Nappy


2. Warm Bath


3. Pajamas On


4. Snack / Drink (if needed)


5. Toothbrush


6. Quiet Play (e.g., puzzle, sensory toy)


7. Story or Song


8. Cuddles / Weighted Blanket


9. Lights Dim


10. Goodnight + Sleep



Let me know if you want a printable version with images tailored to age and preferences.


Calming Sensory Activities for Evening (15–30 min before bed)

Tactile:

Playdough or soft putty (not overly scented)

Stroking soft fabric or faux fur

Brushing hair or gentle body brushing (Wilbarger protocol)


Proprioceptive (deep pressure):

Wall pushes

Rolling up in a blanket (“burrito”)

Carrying a soft, weighted object


Vestibular (only gentle):

Slow rocking in a chair

Gentle swinging (but stop at least 30–60 minutes before sleep, as it can overstimulate)


Auditory:

Soft instrumental music or nature sounds

Humming or singing from a trusted adult (deep tones are more calming)


Visual:

Lava lamp or slow color-changing light

Watching calming motion visuals (like a slow sensory video—if not too stimulating)

Honouring Abused Women

 The idea that vulnerability disqualifies you from safety is perverse. It’s a cruel inversion of morality, peddled by the very professions sworn to protect. Social workers (not all, but enough to matter), lawyers, psychiatrists, police—these institutions too often treat a traumatised woman as a nuisance, a liability, or worse, a fantasist. If you flinch, you’re dramatic. If you weep, you’re unstable. If you speak up, you’re paranoid. This grotesque logic renders a woman’s suffering not only invisible, but suspect.

They do not ask, What happened to her? They ask, What is wrong with her? It’s psychiatry’s favourite bait-and-switch. Diagnoses fly like confetti—borderline, histrionic, treatment-resistant—as though medical jargon could smother the stench of misogyny. And the legal profession is no better. A woman under siege is told to document everything while her stalker moves freely, slipping through legal loopholes like grease through fingers.

The solution is not to plead more prettily. The solution is to reframe the narrative entirely. Behavioural therapy—particularly Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)—offers one path back to agency. Steven C. Hayes’ work reminds us: pain is inevitable, but suffering is optional when we cease struggling against the uncontrollable and instead commit to meaningful action, despite the negatives.

This is not weakness. It is a brave act of defiance for the sake of honour.

Begin with values. Not theirs—yours. Choose behaviours aligned with what matters to you. Not as performance for the watchers, but as reclamation. Take the walk. Experience the fear. Name it. Breathe it. Walk anyway. Not for them. For you.

And when systems fail, document their failure with precision. Keep records. Build pressure. Demand accountability. Use their language against them—not because it’s just, but because it’s strategic.

Further reading:

1. The Body Keeps the Score – Bessel van der Kolk


2. Women and Madness – Phyllis Chesler


3. The Politics of Experience – R.D. Laing


4. Trauma and Recovery – Judith Herman


5. The Happiness Trap – Russ Harris


6. A Liberated Mind – Steven C. Hayes


7. The Female Eunuch – Germaine Greer


8. No Visible Bruises – Rachel Louise Snyder


9. Invisible Women – Caroline Criado Perez


10. The Gaslight Effect – Robin Stern


11. CPTSD: From Surviving to Thriving – Pete Walker


12. The Ethics of Care – Virginia Held