Family Integrity

Author: HEF Admin

  • Teachers can use force on kids – cop

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4682871a11.html

    Teachers can use force on kids – cop

    By LANE NICHOLS – The Dominion Post | Saturday, 06 September 2008

    Teachers should not be afraid to “man-handle” violent children if they pose immediate risks, even if it means leaving bruising, the top youth aid cop says.

    Serious sexual offenders as young as 12, who would be labelled paedophiles if they were adults, are preying on young victims, Inspector Chris Graveson says.

    Many have themselves been victims of sexual abuse, and youth violence has become significantly worse in the past five years.

    But many teachers are too cautious about using force in classrooms to protect children, despite being entitled to under the Crimes Act, he says.

    Though forcible restraint might leave bruising on a child – and women bruise more easily than men – it can be necessary if the child poses immediate danger.

    “If force is going to have to be used then that’s an actual risk of what can happen.

    “You hear people saying, ‘you can’t touch children. You can’t do this, you can’t do that’. [But] if a child’s being attacked, you’re duty-bound to intervene.”

    The children’s commissioner’s office rejected Mr Graveson’s comments. It was never appropriate to use enough force to cause bruising, office general manager Gordon McFadyen said.

    “This office would be very surprised if it was official police policy to encourage teachers to use a level of force that would leave bruises on primary school children.”

    Mr Graveson made the comments to primary school teachers in Wellington yesterday during an Educational Institute seminar on disruptive pupils.

    The union, which represents 49,000 members, is due to unveil new guidelines this month for dealing with disruptive or violent children.

    Nearly 7000 pupils were stood down or suspended for assaults last year.

    Mr Graveson said young people often grabbed things as weapons during standoffs.

    “They can cause serious harm to another child with one strike. They’re serious assaults we’re talking about.”

    He said the word “force” was police jargon for any physical contact or touching. It should only be used as a last resort and in the best interests of the child.

    Educational Institute president Frances Nelson agreed.

    “Most teachers will say there are times when they knew they actually had to restrain a child – otherwise that child or other children, or other adults, would get hurt.”

  • Investment in prevention to reduce intervention

    United Future news and views with Judy Turner MP

    \
    Straight talk…

    In the six years I have been in Parliament I have never been able to shake off a deep-seated disquiet about the way we approach child protection in New Zealand.

    I continue to have more questions than answers and remain convinced that those involved are very well intended.

    Our system is based on notifications being investigated and where abuse is substantiated there follows an intervention. Every year in New Zealand notifications go up by about 15% and of course the number of children taken in to care from substantiated cases is on the increase.

    The burden of such high levels of notifications and removals impact not only on the children and their families but also on the system which is trying to resource them. The work overload can result in high numbers of unallocated cases, hasty assessments, high staff turn over and workforce shortages, premature case closure, and inadequate monitoring of children in placement.

    Children taken in to care often experience multiple placements which pose risks to their mental health and emotional wellbeing. There is even emerging overseas research suggesting that children in foster care could be more damaged by being removed from their parents and being subject to multiple placements than had they remained with their families.

    I have had contact with lots of parents and caregivers seriously traumatised by investigations.

    This week I have read an interesting paper from Australia suggesting that if we want to reduce child abuse and neglect then there are some lessons to be learnt from the preventative approach of our Public Health System.

    The authors suggest that there needs to be primary, secondary and tertiary prevention initiatives that include:

    · Universal services for children and their families at the primary level

    · Targeted prevention services for identified vulnerable families at the secondary level

    · Tertiary interventions for children in need of protection.

    Investment in prevention to reduce intervention …. Sounds good to me!

    QUOTE:

    “ … universal prevention activities not only have the potential for preventing abuse and neglect; they also enhance child health and well-being overall by improving behaviour problems and school readiness”

    Triple P Parenting programme

  • Concern about Bias of Families Commission Confirmed

    MEDIA RELEASE

    August 2008

    Concern about Bias of Families Commission Confirmed

    Family First NZ says the appointment of the just-retired Chief Families Commissioner Rajen Prasad to the Labour party list confirms concerns that the Commission wasn’t independent enough to truly represent families.

    “We were always concerned that the Commission wasn’t independent enough to represent the voice of families on important issues, for example the anti-smacking law,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “Despite an overwhelming number of families opposed to the law change, the Families Commission blindly supported the legislation. The appointment of Rajen Prasad to the Labour party list suggests that the Commission was more concerned with listening to the government’s agenda than to the concerns of families.”

    Other perceived biases included

    · the shutting down of research by the Rotorua People’s Advocacy Centre which was funded by the Commission, and which highlighted the concerns of solo parents on the DPB. The research was muzzled by the government through the Ministry of Social Development and the Families Commission because they didn’t agree with its conclusions

    · the inability of the Commission to acknowledge and promote the benefits of marriage and importance of family structure, especially as it relates to domestic violence, child abuse, and poverty

    · silence on whether the government emphasis on early childhood education is in the best interests of very young children, and families in general

    “The plethora of Commissions that we have in NZ will only be of benefit when they are independent enough from the government of the day to represent the sector that they are supposed to without hidden agendas or future career opportunities.”

    “The concerns we expressed about the independence of the Families Commission, or lack of it, appear to have been confirmed,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie JP – National Director

    Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Test of Democracy In Parliament Today

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0808/S00346.htm

    MEDIA RELEASE

    27 August 2008

    Test of Democracy In Parliament Today

    Family First NZ says that there will be a test in Parliament today of whether NZ is a democracy that represents the voice of New Zealanders.

    Independent MP Gordon Copeland is seeking the leave of the House for a debate on a motion that the House recommends to the Government that that anti-smacking referendum be held at the same time as the General Election. (Under section 22AA (5) of the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993, a Referendum can be scheduled for polling day if the “House of Representatives passes a resolution requiring the indicative referendum to be held on the polling day for the general election.” A postal vote can also close on Election day.)

    “That is an ordinary 50% majority vote in the House,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “We are therefore calling on all politicians to acknowledge the voice of 310,000 signatories to the petition and require that the Referendum be held at the most obvious and effective time of the upcoming election.”

    In a recent online poll by TVNZ, 81% of the 4624 voters said that the referendum should be held at the same time as the election.

    “The excuses presented in the Cabinet briefing paper simply don’t stack up,” says Mr McCoskrie. “The paper acknowledges that better organisation such as separate ballot boxes and colour coding would solve many of the problems experienced in 1999.”

    “It is also an insult to voters to suggest that voters would be confused by an extra question in the ballot box. Voters have been able to grasp the far more difficult MMP voting process,”

    Family First NZ is also disappointed that the Deputy Prime Minister Dr Michael Cullen yesterday refused to allow acknowledgement of the huge effort put in by organisers of the two petitions on this issue which obtained more than 600,000 signatures. (The second petition fell just short of the required numbers).

    “Democracy is defined as being where the people have a voice through their elected representatives. Today will be a test of whether we do live in a democracy,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie JP – National Director

    Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Christian comedian Charles Marshall Spanking bit 1

     

     

  • SUCCESS! NZ’ers Deliver Strong Message on Anti-Smacking Law

    SUCCESS!

    NZ’ers Deliver Strong Message on Anti-Smacking Law

    Family First Media Release 22 August 2008

    Family First NZ is welcoming the success of the petition demanding a Referendum on the flawed anti-smacking law.

    “To reach the required 285,000 signatures is difficult enough, but the final result shows that an extra 25,000 signatures have been attained. This is evidence of just how strong the opposition to this law is,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “The evidence is pouring in that good families are being both persecuted and also prosecuted with eight prosecutions for minor acts of physical discipline in a recent six month period.”

    “The rate of CYF notifications has sky-rocketed yet actual cases of child abuse found are remaining the same, and in some areas like the Waikato, actually falling.”

    “The anti-smacking law has failed miserably. You know a law is flawed when it fails to address the problem it was supposed to, and implicates good families in the process. Supporters of the law are trying to herald its success because they incorrectly claim nobody has been prosecuted. But we actually want a law that works and catches actual child abuse!”

    “The only reason the law was passed in the first place was because the two major parties were whipped to vote for it – which is a little ironic in itself, being an anti-smacking law,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    Family First NZ continues to call on the politicians to change the law so that non-abusive smacking is not a crime (as wanted by 85% of NZ’ers according to research), and to tackle the real causes of child abuse.

    ENDS

    www.familyfirst.org.nz

  • Petition succeeds- referendum to be held

    The Kiwi Party
    Press Release

    Kiwi Party Leader and CIR Petition organiser Larry Baldock welcomed the news today that the petition has been certified by the Clerk of the House of Representatives to have achieved sufficient signatures to force a referendum on the question, “should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”

    “This is great news and a huge victory,” said Mr Baldock.

    “It has been a long battle to assert the right of all New Zealanders to be heard on this controversial issue. Quite frankly in a democracy it should not require so much effort. I want to pay tribute to Sheryl Savill who was prepared to put her name to the petition, and the thousands of volunteers that have helped us collect over 390,000 signatures,” Mr Baldock said.

    The clerk of the house has declared that 310,000 signatures were certified as valid.

    This means there were over 25 000 more signatures than the 285 027 required by the CIR Act 1993 to force a referendum.

    “The referendum should be held at this year’s election. None of the reasons being given by the Prime Minister for delaying it make any sense at all, and are simply a tactic for her to try and avoid this being an election issue. She will not drown out the voice of the people and should realise there is no point further angering everyone by delaying the inevitable.

    “Justice delayed is justice denied, Prime Minister. 110 MPs should never have ignored 80% of the population in the first place, and the right thing to do now is to let every Kiwi have their say as quickly as possible.

    “The Kiwi Party have made it our number one priority to ensure that voice of the people in this referendum is respected. There is ample evidence that good mums and dads are now being prosecuted by this new law, while there is no evidence that it has led to any reduction in the real child abuse we are all concerned about,” said Mr Baldock.

    Ends

    Contact Larry Baldock
    021864833

    www.thekiwiparty.org.nz

  • Man to face trial over alleged ‘ear flicking’

    This is what someone said on an email discussion group:

    ‘So this is what it has come down to – a father charged with assault for flicking his kid’s ear!

    Meanwhile no-one is held responsible for the deaths of the Kahui twins.

    Is this the sort of country we want New Zealand to be?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10528277&ref=rss

    Man to face trial over alleged ‘ear flicking’

    2:44PM Thursday August 21, 2008

    The Smacking Debate

    The Christchurch man accused of assaulting his two young sons will face trial.

    In January, Jimmy Mason claimed he was harassed by the police when he was spotted publicly disciplining his four-year-old son.

    He claims he only flicked the boy’s ear and that witnesses, including a teacher and an off-duty police officer, overreacted.

    Mason was then charged with assaulting both his two sons, aged two and four.

    A short depositions hearing took place in the Christchurch District Court this morning at which all the evidence was presented in written form. The media was not permitted to access the evidence.

    Four witnesses will give evidence in Mason’s trial, for which a date is yet to be set.

    – NEWSTALK ZB