Category: News Media/Press Releases

  • Media-Smack in the middle of hysteria

     http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/smack-in-the-middle-of-hysteria/2008/01/23/1201024992191.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2Smack in the middle of hysteria

    Miranda Devine
    January 24, 2008

    Illustration: Ed Aragon

    At the gym one day during the holidays a mother was struggling with a shrieking toddler. The child had worked himself into hysteria and the sounds of his distress gave new meaning to “piercing” for those of us caught in the maelstrom. In the shower at first I thought I was hearing a hurricane ripping off a steel roof. Apart from prompting a flash of admiration for such energy and stamina from so small a set of lungs, the sound was deeply disturbing.

    It continued for five or 10 minutes. All over the gym, from the pool to the women’s changing room, concerned gym-goers tiptoed towards the source of the sound to determine the cause of distress, retreating in embarrassment when they saw the mother, sitting passively in the face of such fury.

    She seemed calm, if hunkered down, not remonstrating with the child, in fact scarcely acknowledging his drama, just unemotionally absorbing the noise at close quarters. Perhaps she was deaf.

    On top of the incivility of subjecting others to the noise in a not particularly child-friendly establishment, her zen-like refusal to even try to dim the din was annoying.

    Everyone else was powerless to control the volume and was waiting for her to do her job, or at least to remove the child to a place where his noise would not be amplified by porcelain-tiled walls.

    What was her plan? Was she so exhausted by a difficult child that she could only cope by remaining silent? Or was she merely exercising a modern form of permissive parenting?

    It was obviously not what the child wanted – he needed a reaction to all his effort, though after a while he was beyond reason. It can’t have been what the mother wanted, and it sure wasn’t what anyone else in the gym wanted.

    People wanted to reach out and help the wretched woman and her poor child, but were at a loss.

    How do you tell a women her child needs a good smack?

    Remembering the bossy older women who used to exasperate my friends and me when our children were younger by offering unsolicited snarky advice about our tots’ perceived public misbehaviour, I hesitate before casting judgment on other mothers. We even started a joke support group, “Mothers Against Meanies” (MAM) to get the nosey-parkers to back off.

    But, seriously, what happened to discipline? Little in the history of parenting has ever proven as effective as a sharp rebuke or, dare I say it, a swift smack on the bottom that acts as an instant “reboot” of a naughty child.

    Some people will never agree with corporal punishment. But that doesn’t mean they can’t or shouldn’t control their kids; it’s just more complicated. For their own sake as much as for the children, not to mention the rest of society, they should at least try.

    In the ABC-TV program The Madness of Modern Families, on Tuesday night, a British father described meal-times in his child-led household: “There’s been times when we’ve cooked a healthy meal and plonked it down in front of the children and then seen them eat nothing and worry they’re going to wake up in the night, and think it’d be easier to cook them another meal now.”

    That’s not good parenting. It’s a recipe for monsters.

    This reluctance by well-meaning modern parents to enforce fair, firm, quickly administered discipline is creating havoc with the generation into which infamous Melbourne party planner Corey Delaney (aka Worthington) was born.

    The 16-year-old with the pierced nipple and trademark yellow sunglasses achieved international notoriety when he threw an out-of-control party while his parents were away, attracting 500 teenagers and the police riot squad.

    He doesn’t seem a bad kid, and was at least trying to sweep up the mess the next day when TV cameras descended. His refusal to be intimidated by A Current Affair’s school-marmish interviewer was commendable. It’s his ineffectual parents, Jo and Steve Delaney, who are the problem, with their posturing TV interviews, “open letter” to newspapers and utter inability to command their son’s respect.

    “He’s devastated,” Jo Delaney told one program while her son was on a rival channel boasting about “the best party ever”.

    Public opinion on the internet advocates a firmer approach. The website www.slapcorey.com, has an image of the spotty, barechested teen, and a hand you can click to administer the punishment. By yesterday afternoon almost 650,000 people had indulged.

    The Delaneys seem typical of a subset of laissez-faire baby-boomer parents who haven’t learned to say “No”.

    Data from a new NSW Government parent helpline shows a crisis in parental confidence, with 20 per cent of calls from parents tearing out their hair about how to discipline their unruly offspring. And a study last year from the Vanderbilt Medical Centre in Tennessee found a third of parents believe their discipline methods are “never” or only “sometimes effective”.

    Perhaps working parents try to outsource discipline and training of their children to nannies and other carers in the mistaken hope that family time will be calm. Perhaps step-parents are reluctant to mete out discipline, concerned the child will not recognise their authority.

    Meanwhile the anti-smacking lobby is flexing its muscles, with the Australian Childhood Foundation pushing for a national law, following New Zealand, to prevent parents using corporal punishment. The Federal Government last year even gave them $2.5 million to fund a campaign warning parents not to smack.

    The idea is that banning smacking in the home reduces violence in society. But common sense and the facts say the opposite, that lax parenting leads to more aggressive children.

    The Norwegian bullying expert and psychology professor Dan Olweus has shown that “overly permissive parenting” actually creates bullies. No one wants to go back to an era in which children were seen and not heard, or belted when they were bad. There is plenty to admire about today’s parents, who are involved and interested in their children’s lives, and treat them with respect.

    But there is a sensible middle ground, in which a firm “No”, even the odd smack, or raised voice, does not make you a bad parent. At the very least, if permissive parents want to give their misbehaving children free rein, could they please do it in the privacy of their own homes. Preferably with soundproofing.

  • Anti-smacking law likely to come under more heavy fire this year

    The Gisborne Herald

    http://www.gisborneherald.co.nz/Default.aspx?s=3&s1=2&id=2924913200c34d588eb1b03c5ba41246Thursday, 24 January 2008

    By Iain Gillies

       

    Politicians look like being confronted, challenged and possibly embarrassed by the prospect of a referendum on the anti-smacking law later this year, almost certainly held in tandem with the next election.


    Opponents of the controversial legislation initiated by Green MP Sue Bradford are now close to the 300,000 signatures necessary to force a citizen’s initiated referenda.

    Almost 5000 signatures were obtained last weekend, including 1000 at the World Cup of Motorsport event at Taupo, 720 at a “blues, brews and barbecues” event in Hastings and other tallies from A&P Shows.

    The current total of almost 268,000 represents a gain of 43,000 in the past two months, suggesting no diminution of public feeling on the issue.

    Principal organiser Larry Baldock told The Gisborne Herald: “We’ve got to keep it moving, but we’re pretty confident we’ll be able to see this through to a referendum.”

    Two petitions are being canvassed with a deadline of February 28 to obtain the signatures of at least 10 percent of registered electors and present them to the Clerk of the House of Representatives.

    The first — “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand? — is in the name of Aucklander Sheryl Savill, a mother-of-two who works with Focus on the Family and whose husband is a policeman.

    The second, in Mr Baldock’s name, is “Should the Government give urgent priority to understanding and addressing the wider causes of family breakdown, family violence and child abuse in New Zealand?”

    As a former United Future MP Mr Baldock has been the public face of the campaign since the petitions began circulating a year ago, with strong support from volunteers, organised groups and churches.

    The terms for organising and conducting Citizen’s Initiated Referenda (CIR) are defined by legislation enacted by the Bolger administration in 1993, since when only two petitions have reached the point of forcing a plebiscite.

    Interesting stuff . . . but even a referendum result is not binding on the Government.

  • FI-341-U4L, attention please

    23 January 2008 – Family Integrity #341 — U4L, attention please
    From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
    Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:24 PM
    Subject: U4L, attention please

    Hi All,

    ATTENTION

    RGENT, URGENT, URGENT.

    By the end of the working week, we will achieved 270,000 signatures. This means the target of 300,000 sigs is not beyond reach. These signatures will be marched up the steps of Parliament on the 29th of February, “Our politicians will be kept honest”.

    TWO REQUESTS

    1) Keep up the work, as the deadline approaches we can not afford to become complacent. Now is the time for all to step up and be counted, our future generations depend on us making this happen.

    2) Send all petitions in as soon as possible, The count is based on received mail, please do not wait till the last week.

    I wish to take this moment to thank everyone for all their effort to date, well done.

    Our official count is 268,095 signatures, here is last week’s counts

    From Larry:

    Official count was 263,145
    Plus
    2050 from our trip to Taupo and Hastings
    300 Steve and Angela in Wairoa. (bad weather halved the crowd)
    1200 last week +500 this weekend from Craig
    500 Andy Christchurch
    400 Marion, Elspeth and team in Tauranga Friday Sat. (more than 1000 this week, and yes I am proud of them. The per capita winning city prize is looking within Tauranga’s sights now Andy J ! )

    This gives the grand total of 268,095. Now since this figure was released we have received notice from Renton, he collected 700 at the Golden Bay A&P Show, plus 239 from the South Auckland door knocking group, another 30 from a friend and 110 from the Papakura table today. These figures are not included in the grand total.

    NOW I’M GOING TO HEED MY OWN ADVICE AND POST OURS IN.

    Below are some interesting registrations for everyones encouragement:

    I am an expat from Epsom electorate working in Brunei. Can i sign the petition and e-mail it to you or must it be in hard copy? AB.

    Greetings, I read your Website, and agree totally with the erroneous arrogance of present day politicians. Briefly, I also work overseas, so am limited with my time commitment in assisting. Just to give me that warm fuzzy feeling, I have expedited a Petition List, and will forward this to you when I have as many names as possible, plus forwarding the same to other Friends. I have 25 signatures already the first 2 hours, and will with certainly have more to follow. Thank you for making the first Move. Regards DL.

    Thank You All,

    Craig Hill
    021 746 113
    http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz

    All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing
    (Edmund Burke 1728-1797)

  • 95bFM Audio: Kim Choe

    95bFM Audio: Kim Choe – S.59 Foster Care Fallout

     

  • 95bFM Audio: An article in the New Zealand Herald yesterday claimed that foster parents are quitting because of the repeal of Section 59 of the Crimes Act. Alyssa Carberry, Chairperson of the South Auckland Caregivers Association, has misgivings about these claims, even though she was quoted in the article herself.
  • Media-Parent smacking ban is ruled out

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7194015.stm
    Parent smacking ban is ruled out

    Wales will not have the power to ban parents from smacking their children, the assembly government has been told.

    The UK government said new law-making powers for the assembly government to protect vulnerable children would not extend to a complete smacking ban.

    It said this would impinge on the criminal justice system, which is not devolved to Wales.

    The assembly government said it still had the right to ban smacking in childrens’ homes or by carers.

    This comes within the boundaries of ‘social welfare’, which the assembly government has control over.

    The Labour-Plaid coalition had asked for the right to legislate – known as a Legislative Competence Order (LCO) – on vulnerable children.

    But Welsh Secretary State Peter Hain has written to First Minister Rhodri Morgan to tell him the assembly government will not be able to introduce a blanket smacking ban, based on legal advice from the attorney-general.

    Some children’s charities had supported the prospect, saying a ban would clarify a confusing issue for parents.

    Deputy Health Minister Gwenda Thomas also told a committee of AMs that she was in favour of Wales having its own law.

    But Family and Youth Concern, which researches the effects of family breakdown, said it was wrong to pass laws on how parents should bring up children.

    Under the 2004 Children’s Act, which came into force in January 2005, mild smacking is allowed but any punishment which causes visible bruising, grazes, scratches, minor swellings or cuts can result in legal action.

    The assembly government said: “We have only just received correspondence from the secretary of state on this issue, and will want to consider carefully all of the points raised.”

  • Media- Anti-smacking worries push foster parents out

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10487849
    Anti-smacking worries push foster parents out
    By Simon Collins

    A South Auckland foster care group says a quarter of its foster parents have quit because of the “anti-smacking” law passed last year.

    South Auckland Caregivers Association chairwoman Allysa Carberry said the repeal of section 59 of the Crimes Act, which allowed caregivers to use reasonable force to “correct” children, had made a chronic shortage worse.

    “A quarter of our members have left because of section 59. I could rattle off about 10 in South Auckland. I know of many, many caregivers who have been longstanding caregivers but won’t do caregiving any more. It’s too dangerous.

    “These kids are really hard. They just don’t care who they hurt, and you need really special people to take them on. If you have a kid that is yelling and screaming at you, what are you supposed to do?”

    Child, Youth and Family Services has faced mounting problems finding foster parents in recent years, as the number of children in care has grown by 18 per cent in the past five years to 5049, while the number of single-income families with one parent available at home for caregiving has shrunk.

    However, other foster care groups said the smacking law was not a factor for their members.

    Both Carolyn Hill, who chairs the national Family and Foster Care Federation, and Foster Care Auckland chairman Byron Perkins said they had not heard of any caregiver leaving because of the law change.

    “People are leaving because they are dissatisfied with CYFS,” Mr Perkins said. “It comes down to the whole area of professionalism and payments because both couples have to go to work to earn the money to pay the mortgage.”

    A CYFS survey published in November found that 71 per cent of its mainly-female primary caregivers now work outside the home – 20 per cent fulltime and 51 per cent part-time. Although 80 per cent of its mainly-male secondary caregivers have paid work, most are low-paid. Only 46 per cent earn more than $35,000 a year.

    Three-quarters said the foster care allowance of $124 to $174 a week per child depending on the child’s age did not cover all their costs such as transporting the children to school and other activities.

    Grandparents Raising Grandchildren convener Di Vivian said many grandparents were “frightened” by the new law, but she did not know of any who had given up caring for their grandchildren because of it.

    A CYFS spokeswoman said the repeal of section 59 made no difference to the service’s long-standing policy against any “physical discipline”.

    also look at:

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/01/a_quarter_of_south_auckland_foster_parents_quit.html

    and

    http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2008/01/anti-smacking-law-damaging-foster-care.html 

  • Dominion Post Editorial

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/dominionpost/4359329a26494.html

    Editorial: Labour’s lesson in innovation

    The Dominion Post | Thursday, 17 January 2008When Christchurch musician Jimmy Mason “flicked” his three-year-old son on the ear he thought he was giving him a lesson about road safety. Don’t ride your bike near the road when you’re told not to. What he was actually getting was a firsthand look at the Government’s anti-smacking legislation in operation, The Dominion Post writes.

    A nearby teacher took umbrage at his actions, an off-duty policewoman rang the office and, minutes later, Mr Mason found himself surrounded by six police officers.

    “They were going to arrest me and were trying to ascertain whether it was safe for the kids to go home with me,” he said. “It was pretty bizarre.”

    In time Mr Mason may discover, like many parents before him, that there are other, more effective ways to discipline his children and keep them safe.

    If the anti-smacking legislation, championed by Green MP Sue Bradford, hastens that process it will have served a useful purpose.

    But just as there is no such thing as a perfect child, there is no such thing as a perfect parent. Like children, parents get tired and irritable. Like children, parents occasionally do things they later regret.

    But nothing that Mr Mason did appears to warrant the attention of six police officers, at least five more than the ordinary citizen can expect to show an interest when reporting a theft, burglary or assault.

    Nor do his actions appear to warrant the warning that has now been placed on his record, though that could change as a result of a police review of discrepancies between Mr Mason’s story and those of witnesses.

    When the anti-smacking legislation was steered through Parliament last year, Ms Bradford and her Labour allies assured the public that the law change would not criminalise parents who administered a light smack to their children.

    Technically they are correct in Mr Mason’s case. He has not been charged. But he has been stigmatised, something that is likely to be of almost as much concern to the Government as it is to Mr Mason.

    Labour believes the initial furore over the anti-smacking legislation has died down now that it has been in place for more than six months.

    But publicity about such cases revives the damaging spectre of a nanny state interfering in the private affairs of citizens.

    When voters go to the polls later this year they will not recall that National voted for the legislation alongside Labour, the Greens and the Maori Party as a result of a last-minute deal with its leader John Key, but that it was Labour and its allies who pushed the bill through, just as it was Labour that took the lead in legalising prostitution, establishing civil unions, banning unhealthy food from school tuckshops and outlawing smoking in bars and restaurants.

    All are initiatives that fit with New Zealand’s tradition of pioneering social legislation, a tradition that began when New Zealand became the first country to give women the vote.

    But politicians with long careers in mind know there is only so much innovation the public is prepared to put up with.

    Labour could yet pay a price for going too far too fast.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Read Lindsay Mitchell’s comments on this editorial here:
    http://lindsaymitchell.blogspot.com/2008/01/myths-about-pion

  • Where is the support for good Parents?

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0801/S00090.htm


    http://www.thefamilyparty.org.nz

    Where is the support for good Parents raising their children?

    Most good parents would confirm that bringing up children in 2008 brings many challenges.

    “A comment by the Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro commending the public for intervening in a father’s discipline of his child is a worrying trend that concerns many good parents,” said the deputy leader of The Family Party, Paul Adams.

    “I agree all the facts are not known, however let’s put our self in the fathers shoes for a moment.” Adams continued.

    “Here is a father taking time out to take his two young sons on a biking outing, apparently a regular occurrence. This surely is to be commended. The younger son (2 years) has an accident beside the roadway and is hurt. The second son (3 years) does not understand the seriousness of the situation and the father being responsible for both of his sons, handles the situation in a manner he felt was appropriate for the safety of both boys.”

    Adams says,” The Children’s Commissioner is NOT the authority on child raising – parents are. These parents need all the help that they can get. The emerging trend that the state knows best for all children is a dangerous fallacy.”

    The Family Party has been actively door knocking in the Mangere electorate. A major concern is this anti-smacking law, which was opposed by many New Zealanders but forced through by the current Government.

    “There is genuine fear and uncertainty amongst parents who have used traditional methods of corrective discipline such as smacking. Based on what I’ve seen, these are decent, law-abiding parents who know the difference between a smack and abuse. Nevertheless, there is a sense of disempowerment because parents fear being criminalised if they hold on to their traditional values and methods of discipline.

    “The reality is we either encourage parents to discipline their children while they are young, or sadly, as in the case of too many New Zealanders the state will discipline them when they are older. Personally I prefer loving parental correction, rather than this over the top anti parent legislation we currently have to deal with.”

  • Media – Father warned

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4354765a10.html
    Father warned for disciplining boy, 3

    By PHIL HAMILTON – The Press | Monday, 14 January 2008

    A Christchurch father is fuming after he received a police warning for hitting a child after he flicked his son’s ear in public as a reprimand.

    Professional musician Jimmy Mason flicked the ear of his son, Seth, at the Bridge of Remembrance just before Christmas after the three-year-old disobeyed his instructions while riding his new bike.

    The toddler took off down a ramp and was followed by his brother, Zach, two, who was also on a new bike. Seth made the tight corner but Zach did not, and injured his eye.

    “Seth just wanted to go on riding. He didn’t realise the seriousness of it with the youngest one slipping in and out of consciousness,” Mason said.

    “So I turned to Seth and flicked him on the ear and told him to shut up while we fixed up the young one,” Mason said.

    A nearby teacher took umbrage, an off-duty policewoman rang the incident in and in minutes later Mason was surrounded by six police officers.

    “They were going to arrest me and were trying to ascertain whether it was safe for the kids to go home with me,” he said.

    “It was pretty bizarre to tell you the truth.”

    Mason said he took his sons biking every day and they needed to obey his instructions to the letter in order to stay safe.

    “When I say ‘stop’ to the kids they have got to stop,” he said. “I said to the cops that I need to impress upon him (Seth) what he did was wrong and I need to impress it on him straight away and asked them how they suggested I do it.

    “They didn’t know and I said to them, ‘Well, you’ve just told me what I did was wrong so you must know what is right’.”

    In the end, Mason was not charged but he was told that a warning would go on his record for hitting his child.

    “It needs to be on record that I disciplined him for something he deserved, not that I’m a child beater.

    “There’s an irony there that they can spray, Taser or shoot me but I can’t flick my son in the ear to stop him getting run over at an intersection.”

    He was considering legal action to have the warning removed from his record.

    He felt sorry for the police having to administer the amended child-discipline law which came into force in June last year.

    Inspector Rick Jury said he could not discuss individual cases but the law gave the police some discretion.

    “It says every parent is justified in using force if it’s reasonable in the circumstances,” he said. One of the specific clauses allowing some force was for the purposes of preventing or minimising harm, and the legislation allowed police to make a determination over whether it was “inconsequential” and not in the public interest to prosecute.

    Family First national director Bob McCoskrie said cases like this showed the law was an ass.

    “It just seems totally over the top,” he said. “That’s the problem with this law, it’s lost the common-sense element. It’s a feel-good law change but has done nothing to protect kids who are actually being abused.”

    A police spokeswoman said a review since the amendment found that between June and September last year police were called to three smacking incidents and 12 minor acts of physical discipline. The 15 cases were determined to be “inconsequential” and not worth prosecuting, although nine warnings were issued.

  • NEW ZEALAND BANS SPANKING

    http://groups.google.com/group/Bible-Prophecy-News/browse_thread/thread/8af861abe72cb932/48bb426efea41893?hl=en&q=%22Section+59%22#48bb426efea41893

    NEW ZEALAND BANS SPANKING

    This year three more countries banned spanking of children. In May New Zealand became the first English-speaking country to ban the practice. Over the past two months Uruguay and Venezuela have followed suit. New Zealand’s Crimes Amendment Act of 2007 abrogates section 59 of the Crimes Act of 1961 which allowed the “use of force” for correction of children. Activists such as Save the Children have fought to ban corporal punishment for decades. There are now 22 nations that ban spanking by law. Sweden was the first in 1979. Other nations are Austria, Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Norway, Portugal, Romania, the Netherlands, and Ukraine. Humanists are fighting throughout the world to ban this practice, and the United Nations is pushing this agenda. It is a direct attack on God’s Word which exhorts parents, “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him” (Proverbs 22:15).