Woman's Hour - Weekend Woman’s Hour: Dawn French; Nazanin Zaghari Ratcliffe’s sentence; Women’s Football

Episode Date: May 1, 2021

Today if you are a woman you are likely to live into your eighties. But what to do with those extra couple of decades? Dawn French is best known for her comedy and acting and is now an author long listed for the Women’s Prize. She talks about reinvention and still being relevant at any age.Kate Wilson talks about her court case against the Metropolitan Police and the National Police Chiefs Council. She's taking the legal action because she fell in love with a man who wasn't who he said he was. He was an undercover policeman whose job was to infiltrate environmental protest groups. Women's Football is seeing a huge growth in interest and exposure but there's some concern that the commentary of women's matches is too soft on mistakes and ends up sounding patronising. Ben Bloom, Telegraph sports columnist and commentator and Jacqui Oatley commentator and founding member of Women in Football discuss whether commentary should become more critical as the success of the game develops.Nazanin Zaghari Ratcliffe has been sentenced to another year in an Iranian prison and has been banned from travelling abroad. Her husband, Richard Ratcliffe talks about how Nazanin felt after hearing about the sentence and what it means for their family.Betty Webb MBE is 98 years old. During WW2 she worked at Bletchely Park and briefly at the Pentagon. She talks about promoting and remembering her war time experiences.How does the order in which we are born into our families affect us and our whole lives? The writer Lynn Berger discusses why people choose to have a second child and what does it mean to be one.Presenter: Anita Rani Producer: Paula McFarlane Editor: Lucinda Montefiore

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2, and of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme. Peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Good afternoon and welcome to the weekend edition of Woman's Hour. Choice cuts of the show from the week just gone, in case you missed us. Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been sentenced to another year in an Iranian prison and she's banned from travelling abroad. Her husband, Richard Ratcliffe, talks about what he's been told is being done to bring her home. We're doing all we can. I think we're close. I promise you that lots of people are doing lots of things

and we all really care about it. And that's probably true, but it hasn't worked. And sympathy's not only at Nazneen Home, it needs more than that. Then Kate Wilson was an environmental campaigner who's now suing the Metropolitan Police and the National Police Chiefs' Council because the man she was in a relationship with wasn't who he said he was. And writer Lynn Berger explores how the order in which we're born into our families affects us.

But first, today, if you're a woman, you're likely to live into your 80s. A hundred years ago, you were lucky if you saw 60. This really means that 50 is the new 30. But what to do with those extra couple of decades, when many would expect you to put your feet up? Well, one woman who knows all about reinvention and still being relevant at any age is Dawn French. She's best known for her comedy and acting, and is now an author who was long listed for the Women's Prize for her book Because of You. Emma started by asking Dawn about her second career. I suppose I think that having a skill in one area doesn't preclude you necessarily

from having a skill in another area. And in fact, in my first career, I think that I did a lot of writing. So it's only natural that I would have gone on to write a bit more. And as soon as I found out how much I loved writing, which I discovered when I wrote an autobiography back in 2008, I thought, oh, actually, I really love this. So I thought I was quite a collaborative person. I've always worked with other people. And when I sat down to write on my own, I really enjoyed the control of it. So writing for me has been a fantastic liberation. Was it nerve wracking anyway, though, to start as a novelist in your 50s? You know, I didn't even think of it as that. And I think if you give yourselves the kind of hurdles

of worrying about how you might be perceived or what this job is and are you up to it I tried to make myself not available to that kind of fug of surrender to your own insecurity if you like so if I thought oh can I be a novelist no novelists are people like Jane Austen and Henry James and I'm not as good as that and if I constantly measured myself by comparison to others I wouldn't do anything in life so what I thought was oh I'd like to write something let's see if I can and the only way to get experience with writing is to write and no doubt you get a little bit better each time. And I think this fantastic honour of being long listed for the Women's Prize is a little bit of proof to me that perhaps if you continue and you don't give up, perhaps you do get a little bit better each time.

How did you feel about approaching your 50s and beyond? You're in your 60s now. Had you been looking forward to it? Had you been dreading it? and beyond? You're in your 60s now. Had you been looking forward to it? Had you been dreading it? What did the adverts in your life be like? Well, of course, when I was a child, I remember thinking that people who were 40 just might as well die. Because what was the point of them? You know, when you're a child, you think somebody who's 40 and above is just ancient and pointless and of course as you grow into your 40s you're just starting to get to know yourself and now that I'm 63 now and I feel grateful to be 63 I have many friends who didn't make it into their 60s so I'm very glad to be here

and to be um you know alive and kicking and doing everything I want to do and getting to know myself more I spent a lot of my life up till now sort of people pleasing and trying to work out what's required of me by others and I'm settling into my skin now and I'm in my stride and I kind of take some ownership I guess of the person I genuinely am so So I'm okay with that. It's all about acceptance, I think, you know, including I'm accepting my rather annoying arthritic knee, even that I'm accepting. You're welcoming. Yes. Well, I sort of, I understand the limitations. And weirdly, like any boundaries, once you understand them, you have the freedom inside it, if you like,

you know, I'm not going to run a marathon. I know that I'm not going to win strictly. I know that, which is why I'm not going on strictly because I can't win it. But I know that there are many other things I can do. And I can enjoy, for instance, the fact that I am working out finally, that I'm a kind of functioning introvert, that I really enjoy being quiet. I can do all the other stuff. I can be loud and I can do the jazz hands and have some fun. I love all that too. But I mainly love being quiet. And so I take ownership of that now. We are getting some messages though, for instance, I think you are invisible as you get older.

It's not about being worried about being viewed as attractive, like gorgeous youngsters all around us. It's literally about being viewed as irrelevant or less than. It's about being barged into on the pavement or overlooked for opportunities of promotion at work. It's the association of age with slowing, lessening, losing value and worth, becoming invisible is the right word. So there are some women who do feel that. Yeah, there definitely are.

And we definitely live in a society that could decide that you are invisible and tries to make you such. But, you know, like I say, we can drown in that sea or we can be the red dots in the blue sea. You know, we need to make sure that we are noticeable. And it doesn't have to do with being attractive. It has to do with offering your skills in an interesting way and maybe trying to rethink how the focus can be pulled to the things that you do the best. I think that's what it's about. And certainly that's what we should strive for. We have got a lot of suggestions also coming in about what this period of life should be called.

Do you have one? I mean, some saying third act, some saying I don't necessarily need a name for this. Have you ever thought about that, Dawn French? Gosh, I haven't. Yeah, maybe we should think about what it is. I've always been confused about what middle age is. Does it mean you're in the middle of your life?

And that's sort of pre-deciding how long you're going to live. Yes, it is, isn't it? And then when does it finish? When does middle age finish? You know, I don't really know. I just call it juicy. Juicy. We're in a juicy age, yeah.

Well, lots of you juicy women got in touch with us. Jenny said, I'm 63 and just about to take my full motorbike test. I started to learn once I reached my 60s and absolutely love it. My all-male trainers are fantastic, incredibly encouraging and gallant, to use an old-fashioned word. My age is never mentioned and the world is opening up by me taking on this new challenge. Go Jenny. And Claire says, I'm approaching 68 and as Dawn says, you make yourself visible.

I had more disappointments when younger than currently. I did my first triathlon at 50 and row 18 kilometres on my rowing machine. At 65, I became a swimming teacher and have always taken more enjoyment from interaction with younger people than those my own age. And Sarah said, I've started a new career in my 50s and love to, metaphorically and literally, take up space as I walk along the street and in gatherings. I feel that it's much more about how much space we choose and decide to take up. Hear, hear. Now, Kate Wilson has spent this week and last giving evidence at the royal courts of

justice as she sues the metropolitan police and the national police chief's council she's taking the legal action because she fell in love with a man who wasn't who he said he was he was an undercover policeman who called himself mark stone he was really mark kennedy whose job was to infiltrate environmental protest groups. Kate will have to wait until later in the year to get a result, but she started by telling us how she met him. Well, I met Mark at a community centre in Nottingham at a political meeting. We sat next to each other in the meeting. We got talking. We became friends. And quite quickly, I think within about a week of that meeting, we had started a romantic relationship.

You were a protester, you were an activist. Yes, I was involved in environmental and social justice campaigning. Was he pretending to sort of be part of that world or interested? Yeah, he showed up, he was new in the city and he showed up saying that he wanted to get involved. And we were a very open space. We wanted to bring new people in, get people interested in the issues. So I think it was probably very easy for him to come in and start building relationships with us. And you began a relationship. How long did it go on for? We were together as partners for almost two years.

We moved in together and then I moved away, but we stayed very close friends. And he began a relationship with another close friend of mine, which lasted for six years. And we were close friends right up until 2010. So seven years. And how did you find out he wasn't who he said he was? His girlfriend at the time, who is known in the press as Lisa, she found a passport in a different name and she challenged him about it and looked into it and eventually it became clear

that Mark had been an undercover police officer and he was married with two children. And she let you know? Yes, yes. I got a phone call once people had the proof. I received a phone call to warn me that it would be going public. I know you don't want to go over all details here because you're in the middle of this fight and I want to come to that because not least you're taking on institutions here and you want to talk about those bigger problems. But could you just tell us

sort of how something like that does make you feel when you've trusted somebody and they're, you know, your love at that time? It's very, very difficult to explain how it feels. I think one of the most important things about it is that in the beginning, it feels like a very personal betrayal. This man that I loved, who was a very important part of my life, turned out not to exist at all. I mean, he was lying to me about everything. But it's more than that, because actually what we found out later is that it's not just the police officer who's lying to you. They have a cover officer. I mean, Mark had the same cover officer for the seven years that I knew him.

And that man was basically round the corner most of the time. And Mark was telling him everything that we did. Every 15, 20 minutes, he was on the phone or sending text messages. They had tracking devices that meant they could follow where we were going. And then there's a whole middle management team and a command structure within the police that are making decisions about that relationship. So it's not really a story of personal betrayal. Once you take a step back and look at it, it's a political betrayal. This is the state interfering in the most intimate parts of your life. And it's not just something between me and Mark. It's much bigger than that. You're the only one pursuing this current legal action, even though you and seven others started

a legal case 10 years ago. What are you trying to achieve and what keeps you going? 10 years ago, when we started this claim, what we wanted was answers. I mean, that's very important from a personal point of view we wanted to know what they were keeping about us on file we wanted to know who knew about what was going on how far up the command structure it went and we wanted to make sure it never happens again for me that's what's important about this ongoing part of the claim so this case that i've had this week has been going on in the investigatory powers tribunal and it's a human rights claim. And the point about the Human Rights Act is for the state to be able to investigate what's gone wrong and make sure that that can't happen again.

Do you believe that sexism is at play in any of this? Or what would you say to people who say undercover police have got to be convincing in their actions? So in terms of sexism, yes, I think. I mean, one part of our claim is under Article 14 of the Human Rights Act, which is about sexist discrimination. And I think it's really important to remember that even though I'm the only person who's been able to take this case this far, there were eight of us

in the beginning. There's now 27 women participating in the public inquiry into undercover policing who all had relationships with undercover officers like this. It's a systemic practice of abuse and using women's bodies as an operational tool by the police. You would argue, just to be clear, that you don't need to do that to do what you're doing in terms of trying to surveil. I don't actually think that what they were doing needed to happen at all. They were sending undercover police officers for years on end on what were basically extremely broad

ranging phishing missions. They weren't investigating crime. They were gathering intelligence on political dissent. It's the sort of thing that we hear about happening in the Soviet bloc. People talk about the Stasi. It's not about crime. This is about, I mean, what one of the judges said in the trial the other day, one might say that the government just has no business sending secret police officers in to spy on its political opponents. Even if you did agree with them having to do that, which it's clear that you don't, they don't need to actually go and have relationships with women. They don't need to take women into their trust and sleep with them and have loving relationships.

I mean, it's not just that they don't need to. The police have admitted that the relationship that Mark had with me was a violation of Article 3 of the Human Rights Act. Now, Article 3 is the article that deals with torture and inhumane and degrading treatment. And there are simply no circumstances in which it is acceptable to violate Article 3. So some of the other human rights, the right to privacy, the right to freedom of expression, they can be qualified. So if there is a question of national security or serious crime under the law, they can be qualified. So if there is a question of national security or serious crime, under the law they can justify breaching those rights. But there are rights like the right to life and the right to live free from torture

that they're simply not allowed to breach. It must have changed you in so many ways, this experience. Do you still protest? Do you still campaign on the environment? And how do you live, I suppose, within our society, having had this happen by a force within society you should be able to trust to look after you? It's very difficult. I find it very difficult to talk about that side of it.

I mean, this court case has been going on for 10 years, so in a way it has completely taken over my life. It's extremely difficult to trust people in general. So Mark isn't actually the only police officer that I knew. I now know that six different individuals who I knew as friends or housemates' friends turned out to be undercover police officers doing this kind of work. Mark was by no means the only police officer they were sending in. They had completely saturated political movements like the climate camp,

like the protests around the G8 summit. I mean, it's horrifying. And I do find it very difficult to engage with those kinds of spaces. But I also think it's incredibly important that people do. There's a phrase that came up a lot in the hearing, which was the judges are looking at whether this was necessary in a democratic society. And I think that we've all got to remember how important protest is. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal is considering an ongoing civil claim. The claim alleges breaches of human rights in relation to an inappropriate long-term relationship and undercover officer Mark Kennedy, a former Met officer who at the time was seconded to the now disbanded National Public Order Intelligence Unit, entered into with her whilst deployed and using a cover identity.

The hearing is finished now and we wait for the judgement. It would be inappropriate to make any further comment on the case. If there's anything that you'd like to comment on whilst listening to the programme, then please do so. You can email us by going to our website. We'd love to hear your thoughts. Now, women's football is seeing a huge growth in interest and exposure, with Sky Sports about to start televising the Women's Super League.

It's been described as a game-changer. But there's some concern that the commentary of women's matches is too soft on mistakes and ends up sounding patronising. Should it change and become more critical as the success of the game develops and players are now professionals with salaries, training and coaches? Well, I spoke to Telegraph sports columnist Ben Bloom and commentator Jackie Oatley, who's a football commentator for the BBC, Sky and ITV

and was one of the founding members of Women in Football. Ben recently wrote an article after the England v Canada International where the women lost 2-0 and in it he described the BBC coverage of the Lionesses' performance as nauseating. I started by asking Ben the lioness's performance as nauseating. I started by asking Ben what part of that he found nauseating. Look, I don't want to criticise that specific co-commentator or that specific piece of commentary. So come on then, tell us what you mean.

Look, it's not only England women's football. It's not even just women's football. It's women's team sport as a whole. Football, pundits, analysts when they're looking at the male game compared to the female game and there are very legitimate reasons for that. The women's game, football, cricket, rugby, netball, all of these go back 10 years in some of them some of the sports not even 10 years they weren't professional so these were essentially amateurs doing it for the love of the game. It's changed and moved on a lot in recent years. But I feel that the treatment, the analysis and the way that they are seen has not moved with that professionalisation. And the sportswomen themselves have said as much. They've said that some of the treatment can feel a little patronising at times.

Jackie, is Ben right? Well, I'm glad that Ben added some context there because I think the temptation is to watch women's sport and to think, well, I'm going to treat them exactly the same as the men. You know, they're professional. Therefore, I'm going to absolutely slate them for everything. But I think, and that's fine. That is fine to criticise and critique what you see.

But I do think it's important that people understand a little bit more about the backdrop of women's sport. It comes from a very different base. There have been so many more challenges. For example, people of my generation, I'm in my 40s, wasn't allowed to play football. There were no matches. There were no teams. We couldn't play at school. We were told, no, it's for boys, et cetera. There was a 50-year ban. And I don't want to hark on about that. But because we are having this conversation, it is important to understand that the development of the men's and women's game in football and in

some other sports is very different so we're very much playing catch-up and as Ben says there has been an acceleration in the past 10 years or so and I've spoken to quite a few people in women's football and an international hockey player as well in the last 24 hours and they all find this a fascinating subject. And they say that they would like more tactical analysis. They feel that on occasion, if somebody's maybe a bit too nice about a player making a mistake, they are ready to move on from that now. They do need to be called out for any kind of error. But with the new TV coverage next year, they would like to see more tactics and more analysis of the actual play. Tactics and analysis, not necessarily criticism, because why do we necessarily want

to be the same as the male game, Jackie? Yeah, criticism. I think if you're talking tactics, if you're talking about somebody makes an error, it's absolutely fine to say that. And there is more of a call now from players themselves to have that criticism but then I have to also put the other side and say that some of the players really struggle to take it at the moment because they are not used to it in the way that boys have grown up in academies they know what's coming to them they see it on tv girls haven't necessarily grown up and if you recall a couple of months ago Dubai Gate as it's called that some players went to to Dubai. And it was a bit of a tone deaf thing to do. They talked about it being for business reasons. And right, OK. But it went down

really badly in women's football. And I think those players didn't feel they were going to get the scrutiny that a male player would get. They were internationals and they weren't named. Whereas if there were men's players in the situation, they'd have been all over the front pages and the back pages. So the players players themselves particularly with new tv deals next year with football being on league games being on bbc one being bbc two on sky sports i personally think that those players are going to have to have some extra training and manage their expectations that this is what you're facing if you want to have top level salaries in the women's game you want to have more tv coverage, more chance of boot deals,

more chance of TV appearances on all sorts of fun TV shows, you have to take the criticism. Why? Why should, you know, big TV deals come alongside criticism? Why should one be aligned with the other, Ben? Why is that what we should expect? Well, it's more exposure and it's how the game grows. Me saying that there should be more criticism in the game, this is not a case of me saying we need to slate women.

This is how do you grow women's sport? And it has grown incredibly in the last few years from the grassroots right up to the elite level. But now that it's getting on tv on a very very regular basis it has to like jackie said like the players want it has to be analyzed with more rigor that then brings with it some criticism and that's how you elevate it that's how you have an increasingly professional setup and outlook and that's how you grow it to eventually, hopefully, be on a par with men's sport. And grow it, but not in terms of the way they play the game,

because surely if you're good, you're good. Someone critiquing you whilst you're playing isn't going to improve your game, is it necessarily? No, of course not. All of the people we're talking about, they are professional. They are at the very pinnacle of their game and they are outstanding sportswomen. So, no, we're not looking to analyse for their benefit. It's more for the viewer's benefit and how to lift and show what they're doing to the viewer. There is a fine line, though, isn't there? Because if you open the floodgates to more criticism and then it opens up to social media, you end up in a situation possibly which we

have now where you've got footballers boycotting social media because of the abuse that they get so you know it's do we really want the women's game is what I'm saying to go down the same route as the male game or maybe there's a balance to be had yeah I mean you're absolutely right in terms but you have to say if there's a bad area you have to say that you can't say oh she'll be a bit disappointed. Unlucky she tried. So why are they doing that? Why are they doing that, Jackie?

Are they just being nice? What's going on? I'm not sure people actually say unlucky she tried. But I think there is a sense that perhaps it's not as strong as in the main. I think part of the thing, and I know I hold myself accountable here because I've covered women's football since 2004 and I've hosted World Cups and Euros and commentated as well. Yeah, why are you being so nice, Jackie? No, I don't think I'm being nice.

But I think it's important to note that it's a very small world, women's sport and women's football, and a lot of people know each other and a lot of the time you know the players who are playing. I think it is difficult for players who are coming from having played with the players they're then critiquing to then go on the sofa and then criticise them. I'm not saying they shouldn't do it. And it happens in the men's game as well. I think the likes of Alan Shearer have said

they found it really hard at first and didn't want to dig out their mates, so to speak. But then they found ways around it and they've had conversations with players and they've made them appreciate, this is the job, this is what I have to do. And of course, I think everybody who has an interest in women's sport

wants more robust analysis. And I think it is happening. I think we have some very good pundits on the women's game. But I mean, I'll take you back to Euro 2013, when England, unfortunately, had a terrible campaign, the Finnish bottom of the group. And we had a pundit on there who didn't know any of the players, didn't know Hope Powell, the manager't know hope pal the manager and was

extremely strong it was michael gray it was extremely strong in his criticism he wasn't doing it on purpose to be nasty it was just he was saying what he saw and i think some of the players found that refreshing some of them found it really hard to take because they weren't used to it and i think it's part of the development of women's sport that as long as it's fair and as long as it's not personal then they're fine to sport that as long as it's fair and as long as it's not personal then they're fine to take that criticism and also just one more point if I may is that the top level of women's football in this country the FAWSL is known for being professional but I covered the women's league cup final recently the Conte cup final and Bristol City yes they're a top

division side but three of their players have to finish training at three o'clock and go and deliver Hermes parcels, or for a parcel company, in the afternoon to top up their salary because they are only on such low-level salaries. There's a vast disparity between Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester City, Manchester United, and the teams towards the bottom in terms of budget. And on this occasion, that is relevant. And so how should women prepare? Because it sounds like a change is going to come if these conversations

are happening within the sports and journalists like Ben are calling it out so how should the players prepare? Yeah well I think it's important that there's communication I spoke to a chairman of a WSL club yesterday about this subject and he said that we have a meeting called next week to talk about social media and how the players will deal with it next season and they're going to get their communications team to manage that side of things to help the players prepare for extra scrutiny and personally I think this is really important they mustn't just be thrown in and go well you know you've got extra money or your clubs are receiving more money and you've got more coverage that you want it's therefore you just got to take it on the chin. Because don't forget, as we saw when Leeds United thought they were being hilarious in targeting

Karen Carney for something she said, which I think was slightly taken out of context about their promotion. They weren't thinking about the amount of abuse that women already take just for doing their job and for doing it well. They don't think about that. They think, well, we'd have done it to Jermaine Jenner, so we'll do it to Karen Carney. And yes, you want equality, but you also have to understand the reality. And that is that women are already ridiculed, criticized way more for the way they look, for everything, the goalkeeping in the women's game, everything that people have these preconceived ideas about, which actually may not be true, but they lay it on thick anyway. And Alex emailed in to say, I've been watching women's football on and off for the last decade

or more. The skills level and the analysis have changed immensely over the years for the better. We do not need to overanalyse things. It will get even better as we support and watch all very exciting. Now, Nazanin Zaghari Ratcliffe has been sentenced to another year in an Iranian prison. Plus, she's banned from travelling abroad. This time, she's charged with spreading propaganda. Her husband, Richard Ratcliffe, has not seen his wife, a British-Iranian charity worker, since her initial imprisonment in 2016 and is living in London with their six-year-old daughter, Gabriela. He maintains that his wife was imprisoned as leverage for a debt owed by the UK over its

failure to deliver tanks to Iran in the 70s that the Shah of Iran had paid for. On Tuesday, Rana Rahimpo, who's from the BBC's Persian service, spoke about the background to the case. We all remember that Nazanin already served a five-year prison sentence and she was only recently released. But while she was in prison, we heard about a second case that was opened against her. And we now found out that she has been, as you said, sentenced to one year imprisonment and one year travel ban. This time she has been accused of taking part in protests in front of the Iranian embassy in London in 2009. Those protests were against the election results. There was a presidential election in Iran and the results of which were disputed.

And there were hundreds of thousands of people protesting all over the country. And at the same time, there were protests in London and several other cities around the world in front of the Iranian embassy. And Nazanin was one of those protesters. And like many other people, she gave an interview to BBC Persian. And it has now turned into this new case against her. And how much of this do you read into the wider background of what's going on with Iran, its negotiations around a nuclear deal and also with that unpaid debt? The unpaid debt is a 400 million pound debt, which the UK has acknowledged that they owe to Iran. The story goes back to before the Islamic Revolution in 1979, and the Shah of Iran had ordered 1,500 chieftain tanks, and he had already paid for the tanks, and he only received about 150 of them. And then the Islamic Revolution happened, and the money

or the tanks have never been delivered. So Iran has won a case and the UK has acknowledged that they have to repay the debt, but they're now discussing the interests that Iran is demanding to be paid. And unfortunately, it seems that Nazanin's case is entangled in this large dispute over the debt that the UK has to pay. And Richard Ratcliffe, I must turn to you. First of all, how are you? Obviously, Nazanin had a court case a few weeks back, and there was always the potential of getting a sentence. But it was a surprise when it came. And probably as the days gone on, it sunk in more. And certainly, Nazanin was very angry that you know I mean she's done five

years and and here we are about to start a whole new present prison sentence um and and it's not just the sentence as you say it's another year on that where she can't come home um so that you know takes us to 2023 by which time I mean I won't have seen her for seven years um and Gabriella won't have seen her for three and a half years. That's a very long time to be wrapped up in someone else's fights. When you say she was angry, what sort of things is she saying at the moment about this? How can she process this? Well, I think probably she still is processing and I still am

and certainly even this morning she hadn't slept last night and, you know, kind of just going over your head on the unfairness of it and why does this have to be me? Why, you know, I did five years. Why can't they find someone else to pick on almost? And, yeah, angry with the government that this hasn't been solved. She wanted to speak to Dominic Raab, Foreign Secretary. I think that should happen in the next couple of days.

Probably just to rant at him and just to say, listen, you promised me. Because they spoke maybe six weeks ago where he said, listen, we're doing all we can. I think we're close. I promise you that lots of people are doing lots of things and we all really care about it. And that's probably true, but it hasn't worked. And sympathy is not only it, it needs more than that. So she did speak to the foreign Secretary six weeks or so ago, promised there that they're doing all they can. And also an assertion, as you were, you know,

I remember images of you and your daughter with a countdown calendar when it was coming up to the end of her sentence. You were expecting to be able to see her. Yeah, I mean, I think you never know what's going to happen in this, but that's right. We were counting down the end of a sentence. And Nazanin had a calendar that she was counting down. Gabriella saw it.

And then you know wanted to compete with mummy. So she did a better calendar. Lots of nice pictures. And then was crossing the days. Much like an advent calendar. And had great fun doing it. Until we got close to the end. And then started asking questions about.

Is mummy really going to come home? And obviously mummy didn't. And it was hard to explain to her when when she didn't because of course it's not the first time her mum and dad have made promises that they've not kept um and and now i mean i was talking to nazanin yesterday about how we explain this to gabriella and um her strong view was that well let's wait to see if see if it really happens. At the moment, Nazanin is still our mums and dads and the threat is still there, but she hasn't been sent back to us. And so this morning we just had a normal phone call where, you know, she watched Gabriella brush her hair and get ready for school and wished her luck and Gabriella was showing her reading and, you know, the kind of the normal things that she can't do in person,

but even on Skype is still important to try and maintain. So at the moment, you're not going to tell Gabriella about this latest? No, I mean, she'll pick up stuff. So obviously at the school gate, lots of the mums were really distraught and were saying, you know, lovely messages. So, you know, we'll see at what point she asks questions and I'm not going to hide it from her, but we didn't volunteer it. And in terms of your understanding as to what has gone on here,

what is your reading of it? So I think there's two things. I think, you know, as you said in the introduction, Nazanin has been linked to this debt for a long time. This debt has a court case. That court case was supposed to be last Tuesday and it got postponed. And last week I had a meeting with the government where I was, you know, across from them and said, listen, we're going to get some bad stuff now. Every time it gets

postponed, something bad happens to us. And indeed, it did happen. And then more broadly, there are lots of international negotiations going on with Iran at the moment. So they're all in Vienna, talking through the nuclear deal and everything else. And I think probably this debt is in and all the hostages are all wrapped up in a big grand push to try and solve things. That was partly what the government was signalling a few months back they were trying to do and the risk of it of course is we then get embroiled in lots of complicated disputes that could take a very long time to solve. The phrase that kept going around yesterday, one of them certainly when this news broke,

was that she's a pawn and I wonder what you make of that, because you are living this. I think that's right. Without doubt, it's true. You know, she was arrested on holiday for no reason. Took more than a year before a story was made to justify it. Now she's being accused of having been at a demonstration 12 years ago. You know, what's clear is they're holding her and what's clear is they're signalling politically to do stuff. And yeah, there's something very hard for her to be, you know, held powerless in other people's battles. It is one of the reasons why I always come on the media and talk about it, because at least then we have a voice and that voice protects her. But fundamentally, you know, we're waiting for other people to solve their problems

before we can come home. Do you want the government to pay that debt? Is it as simple as that for you? So I think it is as simple as that. And I think that's what the Iranian authorities are trying to signal. And I think it's for the government to, you know, for the government's conscience

to look at what their choices are meaning. And one of the conversations I had with the government last week was say, listen, what risk assessment did you do? What checks did you do? What was going to happen when you postponed this? This isn't just a bunny dispute. It's not just Nazanin. There is another British citizen in court tomorrow.

They will get another sentence. And there's a legacy of innocent people's lives being really, really taken apart due to this. Do you still have any trust or faith left in our government to do this? I've got faith that Dominic Raab and actually Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, care and that personally it matters to them. I'm not sure I, well in fact at this point I'm very sceptical of the government's approach and I said that on this show and others, that I don't think the way the government is handling hostage-taking is discouraging hostage-taking.

They're essentially waiting the other side out, which means that more people are taken and the bad guys take more people. Would you ever go to Iran? Yeah, so I think certainly if they put her back inside. We tried quite hard when Gabrilla was there for the last two years of her being there and they wouldn't ever way to go. If that really comes true and they really do put her back in prison, yeah, no, I will have to go and see her. Because all sorts of fallout will follow.

The one thing I can do is to try and be there and hold her hand again. And see your wife. Yeah, yeah, because, I mean, it's a long time to be apart. I mean, it is, it's more than five years now. We heard from Richard Ratcliffe and Rana Rahimpur. Now, Betty Webb, MBE, lives on her own a few miles outside Birmingham. She's 98 years old. During World War II, she worked at Bletchley Park and briefly at the Pentagon.

In the last year, Betty has appeared on the cover of National Geographic, given 15 newspaper interviews, and this Sunday, coming, will take part in a virtual conversation year, Betty has appeared on the cover of National Geographic, given 15 newspaper interviews, and this Sunday, Cumming will take part in a virtual conversation with another Bletchley veteran, Pat Davis, then out from age 97. You might have heard Pat and her sister Jean on the programme last August. I started by asking her the difference all the attention has made to her life. Well, it just means that I'm never bored. And especially in these difficult times when we can't get about very much, it's been a godsend, actually.

And how has the last year been for you, Betty? Well, extremely busy, as I say, with all this. Starting with the remembering VE Day and VJ Day, clearly I was involved in both. And because there are not many of us left, I was chosen to talk about it. And have you been okay through lockdown? Oh, yes. It hasn't bothered me very much. I have very good neighbours who make sure I've got plenty of food. And I can still drive so I can get out a little bit. You're still driving. That's wonderful. And you can operate Zoom perfectly as well. Well, I don't know about perfectly, you should see me sometimes.

I get in a terrible tangle. Now people have described what we're living through at the moment and the epidemic as like living through a war. Does it compare to living through the war? I've been asked this question many times, and I hope that the younger people can understand this. During the war, 1939 to 1945, we knew who our enemies were. Today, we know very little about our enemy. And I don't honestly think you can compare it. Let's talk about the war, because you did get a job at Bletchley Park. How did you get it? Well, that's been a complete mystery all my life, because I joined the HES, that's the Auxiliary Territorial Service, the army side of women's side.

And of course, I had to do basic training up in Wrexham. And then comes the day when they ask you what you want to do, whether you want to be a cook, northerly or a driver or whatever. And I said I hadn't the faintest idea, which I hadn't. And because my CV mentioned that I'm bilingual in German, I had an interview in London with an intelligence corps officer. I had it in German, actually, at the end of which he said, here's a railway round, get yourself to Bletchley. Well, I'd never heard of Bletchley and certainly didn't know what was going on there. And in the middle of the night, I arrived there, again, as I say, not knowing what on earth was ahead. And I was then asked to read and sign the Official Secrets Act, which is a fairly

formidable document, to say the least. And from that moment on, I realised that I could not communicate with anybody, not even my parents, as to where I was and what I was doing until 1975. And there were lots of women that worked at Bletchley. What impact did it have on your life and the lives of the other women there working there? Well, for me, bearing in mind I was only 18 and I'd been brought up in Shropshire in very country-fied surroundings. I'd never been anywhere very much except to Germany in 1937. And suddenly I was in a very different social situation. For me, especially looking back on it now, I realised that it was a situation akin to going to a university. It was a tremendous

mix of people from very clever, important people to junior people like me. There were very important people there, including Alan Turing. Did you meet him? Well, I might have done, but then you see, he wasn't famous then. And because he had asthma, he used to cycle to work with his gas mask on. So many of us may have seen him, but we wouldn't obviously have recognised him. And you got your MBE in 2015 for remembering and promoting work of Bletchley Park and you're still involved with Bletchley Park very much now, aren't you?

Very much, yes, especially this last year and this year, very much indeed. They're very kind, they invite me to give interviews and so on and I just love doing it because, only because, not because it's me, it's because it's promoting Bletchley Park, which is very, very important, especially for the young. Yes, absolutely. It's important for us to remember, important for us to hear your story. And it's also important for us to just be inspired by you, Betty. You live independently. You've said you drive, you use your mobile your hearing is wonderful your your capacity to work technology is better than mine what's your secret

i don't know whether it's a secret i come from a family of long livers lots of hundreds and 101 i think there was 102 and i'm very fortunate in having a reasonable health wonderful and what's the what what's what have you got any plans lined up? What's happening next? You've got this, you're doing the talk, aren't you? Yes, one or two talks in view, apparently. And I've heard today that at last, we're going to be able to unveil our monument

to the Women's Royal Army Corps up at the NAM in Litchfield. Wonderful. Because that's been put on hold because of the situation for nearly two years. So that's going to be a wonderful gathering of former ATS and WRAC ladies. You can hear more from Betty in a virtual conversation with 97-year-old Pat Davis and Dr Tessa Dunlop, author of The Bletchley Girls, this Sunday the the 2nd of May. Now, why do people choose to have a second child? And what does it mean to be one?

And how does the order in which we're born into our families affect us and our whole lives? The writer Lynn Berger decided to explore this thorny area in her book Second Thoughts on Having and Being a Second Child. Lynn Berger explained why she chose to delve into second children. I was expecting a second child. Lindberger explained why she chose to delve into second children. I was expecting a second child, and I had all these questions that were different from the questions I had when I was pregnant for the first time.

So I was wondering what it would mean to go through a supposedly transformative experience for the second time. I wondered what it meant for my daughter to become a big sister and also for our future son to be born into a family that already existed that had already found its routines and its ways and so I went and looked for books because that's what I do when I have questions like that but unlike when I was pregnant for the first time I couldn't find that many books that would sort of help me think through these questions I could find tons and tons of social scientific studies

on the topic, sociologists, biologists, psychologists, and so on, but not a book that would sort of synthesize the findings in the science with the more personal anecdotal questions that parents-to-be might have. So I decided to write it myself. You are a firstborn. I'm a firstborn and an only born. So I've been thinking about this all night since looking through your book. What is the latest evidence that if you are the firstborn, you are more intelligent and more likely to succeed? Obviously, I'm asking for a friend. Uh-huh. Well, it's complicated. There is a slight difference in IQ and school results between firstborns and secondborns. And firstborns do do a little bit better. But I have to say these are averages and the differences are very small.

So it would be like one or two IQ points, which I've been told by psychologists is a difference that you notice only on an IQ test. Okay, so the idea of that has been essentially debunked or it's closed to an area that you can't really say is discernible that much anymore? It is discernible, but it's very small. What has been debunked is the idea that birth order has an influence on your personality, so that firstborns are, let's say, more responsible, perhaps more neurotic, and secondborns are more outgoing's say, more responsible, perhaps more neurotic, and secondborns are more outgoing and more rebellious, that there are different personality types associated with birth order. These ideas have been around for a long time, and a lot of people believe them.

They sort of seem to float in the ether, and you pick them out, and you sort of absorb them as your general knowledge. And this, it turns out, is actually not the case. You found yourself feeling sorry for your second child a bit, that they weren't the firstborn. And this relates a little bit, I think, and tell us more about your relationship with your sibling. Yeah, so I'm a firstborn. And I was one of those sort of neurotic type A personality, high achieving students. And I felt like, you know, it's good that I was a firstborn,

because that's why I ended this way. Whereas sister um who was more yeah she was more rebellious more social more outgoing um and I thought well yeah that's that's nice when you're young but really would have been better for her to be a firstborn as well I mean this is totally a self-serving explanation of who we were obviously um and but then when I was pregnant for the second time I was suddenly wondering well um what about all of that is true and also um you know I think I think a lot of parents end up having a second child so that the first child will have a sibling so it's almost a sort of an instrumental uh motivation and I and I suddenly thought but that's not very nice for the second child is it to be sort of a present for the first one.

So yeah, that was another reason why I felt a bit sorry for him. Does your sibling agree with that view? Have you spoken this through? Oh, we have, yeah. So the other thing is that we used to fight a lot, my sister and I, and I was sort of bossy and not very nice to her. I love the way you just sort of say that. This is why I'm fascinated by siblings. I watch you in all, how you, you know, hate each other and also love each other so much.

I know, yeah, it's both there in extreme measures. But yeah, so when I was pregnant for the second time, I started talking to her and sort of asking her, well, what's it like to be a second child? Which, of course, is a sort of general question. But what I was really asking her was what it's like to have me as a big sister. And the review wasn't at all positive, I have to say. We're good now, so I can say this and not cry about it.

But, yeah. Well, that's the thing. It can have a very, even though you have the thought of having a child for the child that's already there which is what a lot of people think about having a sibling for them they might not get on you know it can be a real risk yeah and there's what's also interesting is there have been some studies where researchers asked parents for instance to assess which of their two children was the better student and almost always parents would say that the oldest one was the better student. But even the researchers would then look at the report cards

and this wasn't always based in fact, but it was the perception of parents that the older one was sort of smarter. And it's a perception that's based on an age gap because you have two children of different ages and you usually see them at the same time. And naturally, especially when they're young, the oldest one will just be able to do more

stuff that the youngest one can't do yet. So the oldest one may produce beautiful drawings when the youngest is still just sort of doodling all over the paper, or the oldest one maybe can do sums when the youngest can't. And so you perceive a difference in age, but you think or parents think it's a difference in capability. And of course, the expectations that we have of our children end up influencing our children, the way they see themselves and even perhaps the way they might perform. What have you found out around the view of only children and the evidence around that?

Because there's a huge stigma attached to being an only child and only having one child for a very long time. Yeah, yeah, I found there's this one quotation from an American psychologist in the 19th century who said, being an only child was like a disease in itself. It wasn't until the 1980s that a number of social scientists decided to actually study whether only children were in fact maybe more lonely or more egocentric or whatever the stereotypes are. And they couldn't find any evidence that only children differ from children of small families. The one difference that comes up in some studies is that only children might have a bit more self-confidence

and are a bit more motivated in school, which is hardly something that you wouldn't wish upon your children. It's quite a quiet house. I remember going to homes with lots of siblings and being quite overwhelmed by the noise. And you do sit with adults for most of your life. But I do think it's quite funny how I still, you know, in my late 30s now, people say, oh, you know, do you have a brother or sister? And I say, no, I'm an only child. And they still look at me like, are you OK?

Yeah. And it's a stereotype that's probably just born from the fact that, you know, only children are the minorities. Most children do have siblings. But we've sort of come to mistaken the norm for what is good or beneficial. We've got a message here. Family ordering is a fascinating subject. I'm the youngest of three, indulged, benignly overlooked, able to get away with more than my older siblings. My big sister can reduce me to a spoiled child wanting to assert my independence with one careless comment. I'm a 63-year-old married music teacher

with three grown-up sons and a granddaughter of my own. And that's what her sibling can still do. Wow. No, but it's true. Those family dynamics, even when you leave the house and you grow up, they stay with you. And I mean, I think everyone finds this also when they, for example, have family reunions over Christmas. You immediately go back to that role that you played when you grew up.

I also read recently that your siblings are your lifelong companions. Your parents will die. Your spouses meet you relatively late in life with your development, but your siblings are there, you hope, throughout. Yeah. Yeah, and when you're young, you spend more time with your siblings than with anyone else. So they really know you from,

they know the nest that you came from, which is quite unique. No one else is going to have that same knowledge. Do you still feel sorry for your second born or have you got on board with it? I got on board with it and I found also that, you know, it's not that bad to come in second.

And your emails came in. Hannah said, I'm a second child with a brother 16 months older. We've always been very close with a deep bond which lasted through all our lives. We're now in our 60s. He grew up following in our parents' footsteps whilst I was more of a rebel.

Our younger brother never became part of our close bond and I still find myself being bossy towards him, continuing the parental role I took on when he came along when I was six. I'm not so sure that the archetypal sibling beliefs are unfounded. And Lynn said, I think the main trouble I found with being an only child is that you don't learn to cope with difficulties in a safe environment as part of a family. If you have siblings who criticise and can be generally mean to you as well as love you, you just learn to cope with having toys snatched off you, etc.

For only children, this doesn't happen until they're much older and you go into the world to you as well as love you you just learn to cope with having toys snatched off you etc for only children this doesn't happen until they're much older and you go into the world unprotected and without coping systems and it's hard to learn then i've only been used to adults who play fair and make allowances and so tended to be happier with adults not good and katie says this has been my lifelong obsession i have a foot in both camps as I was my mother's only child and my father's third. I had two older half-brothers. I've always hated having to admit the half. I wanted full siblings. They are over 10 years older than me and we never lived in the same house, though they always visited, but grew up and worked abroad just when I really wanted them. They're very

successful and I've always trailed behind. I played with a trio of siblings who lived down the road and desperately used to wish we were all one family. My husband is a twin and that's an endlessly fascinating relationship to me, though they give it little thought themselves. It was hugely important to me that my own children be siblings and I now have three aged four to ten. I recently realised that being the parent of three is still not the same as being one of them. But I do love seeing their relationships develop. Their bickering can be maddening and we don't have things like holidays but I strongly feel that these relationships are the most important thing I could give them. No doubt they will have an entirely different view. And John emailed in to

say my only sibling sister is over nine years older than me and we've always had a great relationship. I honestly can't even remember having an argument with her and we're now in our eighth and ninth decades. The main difference between us is she definitely didn't have the opportunities I had because of her gender. And being born in 1939 didn't have the educational benefits

of post-war children like me. Having said that, I've always regretted not having a sibling nearer my age as well. With so many years between us, I guess, I had some of the so-called benefits of being an only child. However, when I was younger, I always wished I had a slightly younger sister as well,

as all my friends with younger sisters seem to have great circles of shared friends. And if you're interested, me and my brother have a wonderful relationship, but then as the bossy older sister, I would say that, wouldn't I? Have a lovely weekend. Join Emma from Monday. Climate change is real. It's happening, but it's not the end of the world. I'm Tom Heap and in a new podcast from BBC Radio 4, I'll reveal 39 ways to save the planet. We've got a new material and a new way of putting solar cells together

that produces much more power than traditional or existing photovoltaics. Our brightest brains are developing potent carbon-cutting ideas and I'll be meeting them from the paddy fields of the Punjab. The whole plant can flower in here, set seed, and we harvest the seed and do experiments. To the Siberian permafrost. There is a much deeper freeze of the permafrost when you're having a bunch of herbivores trampling on the snow.

They trample on the snow by just being there and trying to find food. We made this mess, but we can clean it up. My biggest dream is actually contributing significantly to stopping climate change. Subscribe to 39 Ways to Save the Planet on BBC Sounds. I'm Sarah Treleaven, and for over a year, I've been working on one of the most complex stories I've ever covered. There was somebody out there who was faking pregnancies. I started, like, warning everybody. Every doula that I know. There was somebody out there who's faking pregnancies. I started like warning everybody.

Every doula that I know. It was fake. No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this? From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby.

It's a long story, settle in. Available now.