Family Integrity

Year: 2009

  • Latest Smacking Poll – Same Result

    MEDIA RELEASE

    17 June 2009

    Latest Smacking Poll – Same Result

    Family First NZ says the latest poll on smacking shows that the opposition to non-abusive smacking remains minimal and the law should be changed now rather than after a costly Referendum.

    “The Yahoo online poll has had over 16,000 votes and shows huge support for parents using a smack for the purpose of correction,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “This poll simply reflects every independent poll done both before the law was changed and after the law was changed.”

    The question asks “Is smacking an acceptable form of punishment for kids?”

    35% (5696 votes) responded ‘Yes, if they need a short, sharp shock’ and 52% (8451 votes)  said ‘Sometimes – if the situation demands it.”

    Only 11% (1870 votes) said ‘No, it’s never okay’, and 2% were undecided.

    Family First is calling on the government to  establish a Commission of Enquiry into tackling the real causes of child abuse.

    “We owe it to good parents to get this law right,” says Mr McCoskrie. “Let’s target the real causes of child abuse – not real parents.”

    AFTER LAW PASSED

    Curia Research Mar 08 83% want law changed to allow light smacking
    Research International     Feb 2008                       74%     parents should be able to smack

    Curia Research May 08                                    85% want law changed to allow light smacking

    TVNZ June 08                                                  85% NO – do you think anti-smacking law should stay

    NZ Herald Online Poll 25 June 2008 Should there be a referendum on the smacking legislation at this year’s election?

    Yes: 3746 (81%)  No: 878 (19%)   Total Votes: 4624

    Otago Daily Times 28 June 08 68% up to parents to decide

    (280 votes) 21% children should be legally protected

    11% depends on the case

    www.littlies.co.nz/ July 2008 One year on, do you think the anti-smacking Bill has proved to be effective?
    Yes (7%)
    No (87%)
    Unsure (7%)

    NZ Herald Sep 08 Should smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in NZ 86% No

    Online 90% (2800 votes)

    BEFORE LAW PASSED

    MARAE DigiPoll (1,000 Maori voters)               80%

    Anti-smackingvote.co.nz Apr 2007                  70% (43,000 votes!)

    http://www.antismackingvote.co.nz/poll+results Zenago Internet Solutions

    Treasures website Apr 2007                               85% (1972 votes)

    Waikato Times Apr 4 2007                                 87%

    TV3 TNS Mar 29 2007                                        69% (70% support smacking)  **

    TVNZ Colmar Brunton Mar 26 2007                   83%

    Research NZ Mar 26 2007                                  73%

    Bay of Plenty Times Text Poll Mar 26 2007 94.6%

    TV3 Website poll Mar 14 2007                           89%

    NZ News – Yahoo .com Mar 13 2007     92%    (7643 votes)

    TV3 News Poll Mar 2007                                   83%

    NZ Herald Feb 2007                                           90%      (3874 votes)

    TVNZ website Feb 2007                                   87%

    STUFF website July 2006                                  82%     (6700 votes!)

    TVNZ website July 2006                                    88%

    Bay of Plenty Times May 2006                          83%

    Child Abuse Conference Feb 2006                   82%

    STUFF website Feb 2006                                 84%

    Dominion Post Feb 2006                                   82%

    STUFF website March 2005                              86%

    NZ Herald July 2005                                          71%

    STUFF website June 2005                                82%

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Bradford Referendum Bill Should be Sent to Time Out

    MEDIA RELEASE

    17 June 2009

    Bradford Referendum Bill Should be Sent to Time Out

    Family First NZ says that NZ’ers have no problem understanding the Referendum question, and the claims that it is misleading and ambiguous is simply an expression of frustration from the politicians who introduced the flawed law in the first place.

    “The squeals of horror coming from the politicians is not because of the question asked, but because of the answer that they come to – no!,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “The law currently states that a good parent raising great kids and who may use a smack on the bottom for the purpose of correction is to be treated under the law in the same way as a rotten parent who abuses their kids.”

    “This is complete nonsense, shows a disrespect for the already difficult role of parenting, and explains why the opposition to the anti-smacking law continues to remain at such high levels.”

    “NZ’ers are desparate for laws that target the real causes of child abuse – not laws that target real parents.”

    “Sue Bradford’s proposal to amend the law is simply chucking the toys out of the cot in a tantrum, and the proposal should be immediately sent to ‘time out’,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • PM Attempting to Shut Down Referendum Debate

    MEDIA RELEASE

    18 June 2009

    PM Attempting to Shut Down Referendum Debate

    Family First NZ is annoyed with comments by the Prime Minister John Key that he will ignore the results of the upcoming anti-smacking Referendum and will not be allowing Families Commissioner Christine Rankin to enter the debate.

    “The Referendum is an expensive exercise made necessary because of a failure by politicians to listen to the voters,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “It is hypocritical of politicians to criticize the cost when their own actions have led to this public outcry.”

    “John Key is undermining the process by suggesting that, while he will ‘listen to the public’, any law change will be subject to what he thinks.”

    “It is especially ironic because while he was the leader of the Opposition he said

    The Labour Government has shown utter contempt for New Zealanders and the democratic process with its plan to railroad the anti-smacking bill through Parliament. The Labour-led Government knows the measure is deeply unpopular, so it plans to act against the wishes of the majority of Kiwis and ram the bill through under urgency. This is a deeply cynical abuse of power as Labour tries to clear the decks of this controversial issue. Helen Clark has refused to let her MPs vote the way they really think on this bill. To ram it through under the cover of urgency shows just how out of touch her government has become.”


    Family First has provided the evidence he has set as the benchmark for changing the law – that is, evidence of good families being prosecuted in court under the anti-smacking law.

    “It is also completely unacceptable that he is attempting to shut down debate by preventing Christine Rankin from being part of the debate. It appears that the government has adopted an attitude of ‘agree with us or don’t speak’.”

    “This suggests that the new government is following down the road of the previous government – which ultimately led to its downfall – of ignoring the voice of NZ’ers and shutting down debate,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Sue Reid: Smacking laws were never about the real issue of child abuse

    This was in the NZ Herald .

    It is a shame that we have a Families Commission that is driven by ideology rather than listening to families.

    Chief commissioner Jan Pryor espouses her beliefs that “positive parenting should never include a smack” (Herald, April 3).

    Her so-called justification for the anti-smacking laws are inflammatory and continue to vilify good parents who may use a smack as part of good parental correction.

    As a mother of two young children, I resent the constant barrage that fully funded, power-packed organisations such as the Families Commission can constantly deliver from their lofty soap-boxes.

    One can be left wondering who represents mums like me who are focused on the task of raising good, law-abiding and positive contributors to society. Like many other mums, I know that I wish to parent within a sensible legal framework and we owe it to good parents to get this law right.

    The new flawed law has tried to link a smack on the bottom with child abuse of the worst kind and has put good parents in the same category as rotten parents who are a danger to their kids and to society.

    Not surprisingly, the child abuse rate has continued unabated, with 12 child abuse deaths in the 21 months since the law change – the same rate as before the change. The smacking laws were never about addressing the real issue of child abuse but to undermine and criminalise good parents.

    Contrary to Pryor’s comments, the new law did introduce a new criminal offence – smacks for the purpose of correction, no matter how light, are a crime.

    Police reports show four prosecutions in a six-month period for “minor acts of physical discipline” and report a 200 per cent increase in families being investigated – yet fewer than 5 per cent were serious enough to warrant prosecution.

    And there has been a huge 32 per cent increase in CYF’s notifications, but the cases warranting further investigation haven’t increased – in other words, valuable resources and time are taken away from the front line to deal with the real cases of abuse.

    Family First NZ has plenty of evidence on its website of families being investigated and traumatised for complaints of light smacking, including parents who are referred to CYF by so-called helping agencies when they are simply seeking help, and of children ringing CYF to complain about their parents – imagine what that is like for a family.

    Pryor asks families to seek help but in a culture of being labelled “lowest common denominator”, this will do nothing to support and foster good parenting.

    She says “there is no legal justification for the use of force to correct a child’s behaviour”, so why does “positive parenting” not include correction? As a mother I need to be able to teach my child right from wrong and it is an ongoing process to “correct” my child’s behaviour – society expects me to fulfil this role.

    We can all lament the daily cases in the media whereby individuals have not “corrected” their behaviour and have become a blight on society. Many parents would testify to aspects that are less than positive in the training of a child for the adult world.

    I am sure the child does not see “time out” in a positive light nor see grounding as positive. Parents are often seen in negative light when they proceed with knowing best what will work for their child.

    The role of parent is set apart from other relationships such as in the workplace or a sports team. Parents have the reserved responsibility to raise, train and shape the will and character of their child to maturity. Adults have already mastered that task – so the argument that Pryor puts forth about smacking another adult is null and void.

    It is important to progress through to a referendum in July. This issue continues to be a strong, unresolved matter for most parents. After all, this was a citizens’ initiated referendum and the democratic process needs to complete its cycle by asking the voting public, “should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence?”

    People who don’t like the question in the referendum simply don’t like the answer they come to.

    Organisations such as the Families Commission would better serve families when they consider the attitudes, needs and requirements of families rather than using their government-funded weight to impose a flawed ideology on to good, healthy, functioning families.

    * Sue Reid is a researcher and writer for Family First NZ.

  • Send a message that John Key simply can’t ignore

    Send a message that John Key simply can’t ignore

    Anti-Smacking Postal Referendum
    July 31 – August 21 2009

    In the first three weeks of August, NZ’ers will finally have a chance to have their say on Sue Bradford’s anti-smacking law.

    Since the Referendum was formally announced, there has been a media EXPLOSION
    * Campaign begins for referendum on child discipline – The Electoral Enrollment Centre begins a campaign on Monday to remind voters to check they are enrolled for a referendum on the anti-smacking law
    * Vote unlikely to bring law change – The Government is unlikely to change the anti-smacking law regardless of the result of the $9 million referendum, Prime Minister John Key says
    * MP’s slate smacking poll words – Because they don’t like the answer they come to, and the effect of the law they passed!
    * Leaders won’t vote in smacking poll – Neither Prime Minister John Key nor Labour leader Phil Goff will vote in the smacking referendum
    * Big two coy on smacking vote – A national referendum is re-igniting debate on the anti-smacking law two years on
    * Latest smacking poll – same result – Family First Media Release 17 June 09
    * PM attempting to shut down Referendum debate – Family First Media Release 16 June 09

    Now there is the chance to tell the politicians to change the anti-smacking law so that we have laws that acknowledge and value the important role of good parents – but also demand that the real causes of child abuse are targeted.

    Family First will be one of the groups speaking up and encouraging NZ’ers to vote NO!
    Our plan:
    * web-based and media-based
    * networking by email
    * media interviews
    * simply presenting the facts

    Our need?
    Simple really. We need your financial support .

    The ‘opposition’ has no difficulty with funding .
    Groups like Barnardos, Plunket, Parents Centre, Families Commission, Children’s Commissioner , and other government-funded organisations are well funded thanks to you – the taxpayer . And they’ve been busy running seminars, websites, sending out briefing sheets to MP’s, publishing newsletters, employing staff especially for this issue,  and sending out social workers far and wide pushing their message.

    How do they really view kiwi parents?
    If you oppose the anti-smacking law as so many NZ’ers do, you’re demonised as ‘violent’, and a parent who supports ‘bashing’ and ‘assaulting’ children. These groups should hang their head in shame for labelling kiwi parents in such a way.
    * Former Children’s Commissioner Ian Hassell referred to opponents to the anti-smacking law as the ‘child-beating lobby ‘ LISTEN HERE

    * Sue Bradford referred to Family First as the pro-violence lobby

    * Barnardos spokeswoman Deborah Morris-Travers said in a Christchurch Press article today “.. Our views of children are perhaps a bit more modern and up to date compared to the other side of the debate …..”

    * but the classic quote of the week also comes from Barnardos when Morris-Travers denied the 300,000+ who signed the petition – and the poll after poll after poll that shows 80%+ opposing the law – and makes this statement about Family First
    LISTEN
    (By the way, this letter is being sent to you by email and will be posted on our website after I talk to my wife on my mobile !!!!)

    WOULD YOU CONSIDER INVESTING IN OUR voteNO CAMPAIGN?

    We will not get a single cent from the government in this Referendum – unlike the opposing argument.

    Every donation – large and small – will enable us to get the facts out there, and to promote the important role of parents, the welfare of children, and the real issues of child abuse.

    Thanks for your consideration. Together, we can bring some sanity to this debate and demand that the real causes of child abuse are confronted.

    Kind regards


    Bob McCoskrie
    National Director

    All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
    Edmund Burke
    Irish orator, philosopher, & politician (1729 – 1797)

    http://www.familyfirst.org.nz

  • NZ Correction Referendum: Vote Yes? No! ‘SATIRE’

    Renton Maclachlan conducts an in-depth and enlightening interview with Dennis Morris-Traveler, spokesperson for the Yes vote campaign.
    Please send this link to your friends, neighbours and relations:

    https://familyintegrity.org.nz/2009/953/

  • YACA Welcomes Latest Report from Children’s Commissioner

    YACA Welcomes Latest Report from Children’s Commissioner

    http://yaca.org.nz/?p=7

    Media Release
    6 June 2009

    Youth Against Child Abuse NZ is glad that the latest report from the office of the Children’s Commissioner gets to the heart of the child abuse epidemic in New Zealand.

    The report looks at assault against under 5yr olds in the light of recent findings, globally and within New Zealand. It aims to find ways to reduce the rates of abuse and neglect amongst this at-risk demographic.

    “Let’s take note of this report and take some serious action,” says YACA NZ spokesperson, Caleb Brown, “The research is there and it is very specific and clear. Now we must act on it”.

    The report highlighted that young babies were at most risk of abuse. The Children’s Commissioner, John Angus said that 45 children under 5yrs were seriously injured, with 5 being killed each year.

    “The vast majority of NZ youth acknowledge that a parent smacking their child for the purpose of correction is not the equivalent of child abuse. It’s time for us to wake up and focus on what are proven to be the real causes of child abuse in our country.”

    “The list of common causes is similar to the ones that UNICEF and CYF have provided us with, and includes drug and alcohol abuse, presence of a non-biological parent, family breakdown and poverty”, he said. “There is no need for further delay. Children are at risk, we know what the issues are, so let’s sort this out”.

    ENDS

    Click here to download Media Release

  • ‘Honest’ Report on Child Abuse Welcomed

    MEDIA RELEASE

    4 June 2009

    ‘Honest’ Report on Child Abuse Welcomed

    REPORT LABELLED AS ‘POLITICALLY INCORRECT’

    Family First NZ is welcoming a report from the Children’s Commissioner on child abuse released today, and says that it backs the call for a Royal Commission on child abuse.

    “The report entitled ‘Death and serious injury from assault of children aged under 5 years in Aotearoa New Zealand: A review of international literature and recent findings’ makes an honest assessment of the real causes of child abuse and reinforces the findings of previous UNICEF and CYF reports that we have quoted,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “The anti-smacking law was a smoke screen for dealing with the real, and much harder to deal with, causes of child abuse. It has meant that ‘normal’ families have been targeted because they’re easier to deal with, rather than the dysfunctional non-compliant families who need support and possibly intervention. This report identifies those causes and is so honest that it could almost be labeled politically incorrect.”

    Risk factors for child abuse in the report included:

    · ethnicity (including the high rate of abuse amongst Maori)

    · drug and alcohol abuse

    · mental illness

    · unsupported young mothers with little or no antenatal care

    · presence of a non-biological parent

    · family breakdown, severe conflict and ongoing domestic violence

    · poverty, instability and unemployment

    “The report also identifies that families are often brought to the attention of CYF and other agencies on repeat occasions and that this should sound ‘alarm bells’. It also calls for a multi-agency approach which Family First has consistently supported.”

    “While it acknowledges that home visitation programmes may reduce the likelihood of future maltreatment, their effectiveness depends on the relationship between the worker and the family. Unfortunately we have created an ‘adversarial’ approach which immediately puts families under suspicion and therefore on the defensive.”

    “It is also significant that some of the research quoted comes from countries which have smacking bans. Once again, it reiterates that smacking bans simply don’t affect child abuse rates,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    “At last we are getting down to the nitty-gritty of the causes of child abuse and our unacceptable child abuse death rate.

    Report: http://www.occ.org.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/6345/OCC_Deathand_seriousinjury2009_040609.pdf

    What we’ve been saying for 3 years: www.stoptheabuse.org.nz

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • A very simple question

    A very simple question

    cross-posted from Big News, 14 April 2009 and   http://section59.blogspot.com/ 16 April

    Bill English was asked on Radio Live today whether a smack should be allowed as part of good parental correction. He was asked at least six times. Here’s the transcript. It’s a classic.

    Radio Live Breakfast Show – 14 April 09

    INTERVIEWER: The Labour Party seemed to have amended their position on Section 59, the smacking legislation. What do you think? Should a smack be allowed as part of a good – as good parental correction?
    BILL ENGLISH: Look, the Government’s position hasn’t changed since a compromise was done with the previous Labour Government. And the Prime Minister has said many times, as has the rest of the Government, that if there is evidence that law abiding parents are being wrong(ly)prosecuted inconsistent with the spirit of that law then we would look to change it. And has been – and there hasn’t yet been considerable enough evidence to warrant changing it.
    INTERVIEWER: Well, did you think – do you think a smack should be allowed as part of good parental correction?
    BILL ENGLISH: Well, look, I think the law, as it is, is the law of the land and needs to be enforced in a sensible way. And…
    INTERVIEWER: But do you think a smack should be allowed as part of good parental correction?
    BILL ENGLISH: I – I think the law, as it is, is the law of the land that should be enforced. If there is evidence that it is being enforced in instances where it’s – where it’s inappropriate because the event is
    trivial or [indistinct]…
    INTERVIEWER: No, no. Sorry, Minister, I just wanted to know whether you could answer that, that should – do you think a smack should be allowed as part of good parental correction?
    BILL ENGLISH: Look, it’s a matter of complying with the law of the land.
    INTERVIEWER: Right, it’s a simple question, isn’t it?
    BILL ENGLISH: It’s like asking whether the speed limit should be – whether you should drive at 120 kilometres an hour. The law – the law…
    INTERVIEWER: Well, clearly you shouldn’t.
    BILL ENGLISH: That’s right. Well, the law – the law, as it stands, is the law that should be enforced.
    INTERVIEWER: Do you – do you think a smack should be allowed as part of good parental
    correction? It’s simple yes or no, isn’t it?
    Bill ENGLISH: Well, look, the law takes a stance about smacking and it gives the police some discretion about how they use their capacity to prosecute. If there is evidence that they are prosecuting people inappropriately, then that current government would look at changing the law.

    So this is the position of Bill English. Laws should be enforced. The smacking law should be complied with. A smack as part of good parental correction is against the law. There is no evidence that, quote, “law abiding parents are being wrong(ly) prosecuted”, unquote, for breaking the law when lightly smacking their kids.

    What Radio Live should have asked is this: If “law abiding parents” can smack their kids for corrective purposes, how can law abiding parents be wrongly prosecuted, given correction is explicitly a crime?

  • Cabinet Minister’s Smacking Law Comments Welcomed

    MEDIA RELEASE

    1 June 2009

    Cabinet Minister’s Smacking Law Comments Welcomed

    Family First NZ is welcoming comments made by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett in a radio interview over the weekend.

    When a caller to the programme on Newstalk ZB asked the Minister whether she thought a smack as part of good parental correction should be a criminal offence in NZ, the Minister responded ‘No I don’t, I believe that actually good parenting should be left to do that in their different ways in their different homes and I don’t have an interest in going into people’s homes and telling them how to parent’.

    “This is a welcome change to the previous message that parents have received from politicians that ‘we know best how to raise your kids’,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “Ms Bennett is also willing to acknowledge the difference between a smack as part of good parental correction, and child abuse. She went on to say ‘I’ve got the hat on of being hugely hugely concerned with serious abuse – now I think they’re very different things so do understand I’m not saying that section 59 was ever going to stop that…’. She also admitted that she would never have introduced an anti-smacking bill.”

    Paula Bennett now joins Labour leader Phil Goff as having indicated that a smack as part of good parental correction should not be a crime in NZ, as the law currently stands. This is the question being asked in the upcoming Referendum on the anti-smacking law.

    The Minister also acknowledged the level of daily concern from parents regarding the law and its impact on their parenting and the attitude of children.

    “If the politicians believe that the law as it currently stands is wrong, they should save the country $10m on a Referendum and amend the law now,” says Mr McCoskrie. “They can simply adopt the private members bill put forward by ACT MP John Boscawen, and then heed the calls for a Royal Commission to target the real causes of child abuse.”

    ENDS


    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42