Comments on: Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga http://familyintegrity.org.nz/2009/anti-smacking-law-insult-to-tino-rangatiratanga/ Fri, 05 Mar 2010 09:19:31 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Ruby Harrold-Claesson http://familyintegrity.org.nz/2009/anti-smacking-law-insult-to-tino-rangatiratanga/comment-page-1/#comment-1783 Ruby Harrold-Claesson Thu, 09 Jul 2009 06:24:26 +0000 http://familyintegrity.org.nz/?p=1027#comment-1783 In all the newspaper, radio and TV interviews and at all the public meetings and meetings with the Children’s Commissioner, the Family Commissioner and the lectures that I gave while I visited New Zealand in July - August 2006 at the invitation of the Section 59 Coalition to participate in the Parliamentary Hearing on the Anti-smacking law, I never failed to inform New Zealanders that the Swedish law had resulted in unruly children and parents who were afraid of their children. What Peter Tashkoff writes in his article only confirms my research and my professional experiences as a lawyer in Sweden. You can't turn back the clock, but it is necessary for New Zealand to repeal the dangerous Anti-smacking law before the situation becomes totally out of hand like it has in Sweden. Whether there be a referendum or not, New Zealand should not be allowed to become the Sweden of the South Pacific. In all the newspaper, radio and TV interviews and at all the public meetings and meetings with the Children’s Commissioner, the Family Commissioner and the lectures that I gave while I visited New Zealand in July – August 2006 at the invitation of the Section 59 Coalition to participate in the Parliamentary Hearing on the Anti-smacking law, I never failed to inform New Zealanders that the Swedish law had resulted in unruly children and parents who were afraid of their children.

What Peter Tashkoff writes in his article only confirms my research and my professional experiences as a lawyer in Sweden.

You can’t turn back the clock, but it is necessary for New Zealand to repeal the dangerous Anti-smacking law before the situation becomes totally out of hand like it has in Sweden.

Whether there be a referendum or not, New Zealand should not be allowed to become the Sweden of the South Pacific.

]]> By: Dianne Woodward http://familyintegrity.org.nz/2009/anti-smacking-law-insult-to-tino-rangatiratanga/comment-page-1/#comment-1667 Dianne Woodward Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:34:20 +0000 http://familyintegrity.org.nz/?p=1027#comment-1667 Mr Tashkoff needs to have a jolly good talk to THIS Families Commissioner WHY CAN JAN and seriouly Baffled Barnadoes MAN not meet up to chat. Meantime for years many government funded agencies have already cost us millions of $ WITH their Fronting of SPOKESPEOPLE CAMPAIGNING that A LIGHT SMACK leads to VIOLENCE against our precious babies when its JUST NOT CORRECT. TRYING TO brainwash us into thinking a stinging smack requires Police or CYFS investigating should it be in the publics interest confuses already overworked police. Mum and Dad are presently unsure by this inconsequential antismacking Bill much like our PM feels about the referendum question surely Sheryl Savill supported 390,000 of us getting a voice out against the antismacking law as only the Act MPs cared enough to listen to us in 2007. Most Kiwis would think just like Mr Tashkoff has voiced. If PM Key looks at Familyfirsts evidence of parents presently investigated and persecuted B4 3rd July 2009 then our question will not need to be answered in a VoteNo but if he ignores the facts then Simon Barnetts 90 minute video explains to those confused by question?. Mr Tashkoff needs to have a jolly good talk to THIS Families Commissioner WHY CAN JAN and seriouly Baffled Barnadoes MAN not meet up to chat. Meantime for years many government funded agencies have already cost us millions of $ WITH their Fronting of SPOKESPEOPLE CAMPAIGNING that A LIGHT SMACK leads to VIOLENCE against our precious babies when its JUST NOT CORRECT. TRYING TO brainwash us into thinking a stinging smack requires Police or CYFS investigating should it be in the publics interest confuses already overworked police. Mum and Dad are presently unsure by this inconsequential antismacking Bill much like our PM feels about the referendum question surely Sheryl Savill supported 390,000 of us getting a voice out against the antismacking law as only the Act MPs cared enough to listen to us in 2007. Most Kiwis would think just like Mr Tashkoff has voiced. If PM Key looks at Familyfirsts evidence of parents presently investigated and persecuted B4 3rd July 2009 then our question will not need to be answered in a VoteNo but if he ignores the facts then Simon Barnetts 90 minute video explains to those confused by question?.

]]>