• Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

    “That’s some of the reasons why the ACT party stands for the repeal of this anti-smacking legislation, and that’s why I do too,” said Mr Tashkoff Press Release: Friday, 26 June 2009
  • Recent Posts

  • Networkedblogs

  • Recent Comments

  • Christian Blog Topsites

    Christian Blog Topsites
  • Tags

  • Don’t Vote Labour

    www.dontvotelabour.org.nz
  • Unity For Liberty


    Anti-Smacking Petition
    Signature Counter


  • July 2018
    M T W T F S S
    « Oct    
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    3031  
  • abort73

    For more information about abortion and what you can do to help, please visit... Abort73.com http://www.abort73.com/
  • Archives

  • Statcounter since February 2008

  • online counter
  • Meta

  • Blog Catalog since May 2008

  • « | Main | »

    Is New Zealand looking more and more like Sweden?

    By admin | February 11, 2014

    I have several links to share on what is happening in Sweden:

    1.  In this first link it was also reported that when the “Italian politician pulled his son’s hair” he was pulling his son’s collar. Unfortunately some hair got caught in his hand at the same time he pulled at his son’s collar. As soon as his son screamed he stopped. But these two facts are being ignored.

    Italian politician convicted of child cruelty for pulling his son’s hair, (2011)

    There has been a very interesting development in the Malaysian case: On Jan 30, the deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs arrived in Stockholm and took the four children with him back to Malaysia. They arrived in Malaysia on January 31, and the children were received by the Prime Minister. There are articles about the case in many Swedish newspapers, but Swedish Radio and TV have not mentioned the case or the radical resolution – not with one single word.

    Here are some more articles on the Malaysian case:
    1 – Najib thanks Sweden for facilitating children’s return
    (What a diplomatic way to describe the situation!)

    2 – Children of M’sian couple glad to be in Malaysia

    Comments: After the Mumble incident Indian families started to flee from Sweden.

    3 –
    (The Romanian Family in Sweden, (2013))

    Comments: The Romanian family lost the public care case in December 2013. They have appealed, but as long as the criminal case has not been decided, their children will remain in care.

    4 – The Polish Family, (2012 – 2013) “Våldtogs i jourhem – nu kan syskonen få flytta hem igen (Raped in the temporary foster home . now the sibblings can return home)

    Quotes from the article:

    I will never be able to forget what they did to our family. But now I just want my children to come home, says the biological mother.

    Her lawyer, Kerstin Koorti, is critical of the social services.
    – This only shows that the system is not functioning. I think they have taken a great many hasty decisions and exposed these children to terrible things.”


    5 – The Malaysian Family, (2013 – 2014),

    Outrage over couple’s detention without trial in Sweden,

    As usual, there is no common sense at all and no sense of proportionality.

    Quote from the invitation to a seminarium that will take place at the Univ of Sthlm on February 11, 2014:

    “This year’s seminar series of Jurisprudence continues on Tuesday, February 11 with Pernilla Leviner and the theme: The Swedish smacking ban in the Parental Code –  effects, consequences and challenges 35 years after the implementation of the reform.

    Pernilla Leviner is PhD in public law and she works at the Faculty of Law, Stockholm University.

    Pernilla’s research lies within and on the boundary between public law and family law and it has mainly dealt with society’s responsibility to protect children from crime and victimization. The thesis from 2011 was about the social services’ legal prerequisites to intervene to protect children. After her Dissertation Pernilla spent for one and a half years as a visiting researcher at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, and there she conducted research concerning the role and function of courts in child protection but also prohibiting corporal punishment of children, among other issues.

    This seminar will deal with the Swedish smacking ban, its origins and meaning but also implications, dilemmas and challenges related to the protection of children from violence in Sweden today.

    Sweden as everyone knows, was the first country in the world which in 1979 imposed a ban on corporal punishment of children. To work for a similar ban in other countries is seen by many as a key measure of a child rights perspective and several international organizations have this at the very top of their agenda. In advocacy of a smacking ban in other countries Sweden is often referred to as a role model, especially given the positive changes that are shown in terms of attitudes and use of corporal punishment as a method of education. Even though the smacking ban should be seen in a broader context and that a number of factors conspired in the development that led to the low tolerance of violence, the reform itself must still seen as a legal political success in the sense that the objectives set by the legislature have largely been fulfilled. However, there is a danger that we in Sweden may be pleased with ourselves over our successful smacking ban and not problematize the victimization of children from a broader perspective . A closer analysis reveals that the Swedish system regarding the protection of children from violence and victimization in their homes is facing a series of challenges, some of which may even be linked to the introduction of the smacking ban and its effects. Recent studies indicate, for example, the creation of a problematic taboo around violence against children. Overall, despite the fact that the Swedish smacking ban in many ways must be seen as a success and an example, there is reason to critically examine the Swedish smacking ban from a broader perspective with regard to the child welfare system as a whole.

    This is the
    overall aim of this seminar. The ban will be described and placed in a historical and contextual perspective after which the effects and consequences? both positive and potentially negative? will be discussed. The situation in Sweden in this area will also be compared with the situation in Australia where prohibition does not exist despite strong pressure from some areas and where a recurring debate on the issue has taken place in recent years.”

    Time and place: Tuesday, February 11 kl.16 :00-18: 00 in the Faculty Room (8th floor next to the elevator, building C)

    Welcome

    Swedish:

    Årets seminarieserie i allmän rättslära fortsätter på tisdag den 11 februari med Pernilla Leviner och temat Det svenska i agaförbudet i föräldrabalken – effekter, konsekvenser och utmaningar 35 år efter reformens genomförande.

    Pernilla Leviner är juris doktor i offentlig rätt verksam vid juridiska fakulteten Stockholms universitet.

    Pernillas forskning ligger inom och i gränslandet mellan offentlig rätt och familjerätt och har framförallt behandlat samhällets ansvar att skydda barn från brott och utsatthet. Avhandlingen från 2011 handlade om socialtjänstens rättsliga förutsättningar att ingripa till skydd för barn.  Efter disputation vistades Pernilla under ett och ett halvt år som gästforskare vid Monash University, Melbourne, Australien och där bedrivit forskning bland annat i frågor rörande domstolars roll och funktion i barnskyddsarbetet men även om förbud mot barnaga.

    Detta seminarium kommer behandla det svenska agaförbudet, dess tillkomst och innebörd men även konsekvenser, dilemman och utmaningar som är kopplade till skyddet för barn från våldsutsatthet i Sverige idag.

    Sverige var som bekant det första landet i världen som 1979 införde ett förbud mot barnaga. Att verka för ett liknande förbud i andra länder ses av många som en central åtgärd ur ett barnrättsperspektiv och flera internationella organisationer har detta allra högst på sin agenda. I förespråkandet av agaförbud i andra länder hänvisas ofta till Sverige som ett föredöme, särskilt med tanke på de positiva förändringar som här visats i fråga om attityder och bruk av aga som en uppfostringsmetod.  Även om agareformen bör ses i ett större sammanhang och att en rad faktorer samverkat i den utveckling som lett fram till den låga toleransen i fråga om våld, måste reformen i sig ändå ses som en rättspolitisk succé i den meningen att de mål som uppställdes av lagstiftaren i hög grad har uppfyllts. Det finns dock en risk för att vi i Sverige slår oss till ro med vår lyckade agareform utan att problematisera barns utsatthet ur ett större perspektiv. Vid en närmare analys framkommer att det svenska systemet i fråga om skydd för barn från våld och utsatthet i sina hem står inför en rad utmaningar, varav vissa till och med möjligen kan kopplas till agaförbudets införande och effekter. Senare studier talar bland annat för att det skapats ett problematiskt tabu kring våld mot barn. Sammantaget finns det, trots att den svenska agareformen på många sätt måste ses som en framgång och ett föredöme, skäl att kritiskt granska det svenska agaförbudet ur ett större perspektiv med beaktande av barnskyddssystemet som helhet.

    Detta är det övergripande syfte med detta seminarium. Förbudet kommer att beskrivas och sättas i ett historiskt och kontextuellt perspektiv varefter effekter och konsekvenser ? både positiva och eventuellt negativa ? kommer att diskuteras. Situationen i Sverige på detta område kommer även övergripande att jämföras med situationen i Australien där något förbud inte finns trots starka påtryckningar från vissa håll och där en flitig debatt i frågan pågått under senare år.

    Tid och plats: tisdag den 11 februari kl.16:00-18:00 i Fakultetsrummet (plan 8 intill hissen, C-huset)

    Topics: Sweden | No Comments »

    Comments