Family Integrity

Category: News Media/Press Releases

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Human Rights Commission Acknowledges Uncertainty of Anti-Smacking Law

    MEDIA RELEASE

    26 May 2009

    Human Rights Commission Acknowledges Uncertainty of Anti-Smacking Law

    Family First NZ says that the Human Rights Commission has acknowledged the uncertainty of the anti-smacking law.

    In response to a formal complaint by Family First NZ that the anti-smacking law is vague and uncertain, the Human Rights Commission has acknowledged the potential uncertainty of the law but was not convinced that the earlier version of section 59 ‘provided any better guidance than the present legislation’.

    “This is despite agreeing with Family First that ‘individuals must be able to regulate their conduct with a reasonable degree of certainty as to the legal consequences of acting one way rather than another’, says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “They still prefer the amendment due mainly to its adherence to UN requirements.”

    “Recent research by Curia Marketing Research found widespread confusion about the effect of the law. 55% of the respondents said that smacking was always illegal, 31% said it wasn’t, and 14% didn’t know. A recent Families Commission report showed that immigrant families are confused by the anti-smacking law and see smacking as a viable option for correcting their children.”

    The Commission argues that parents who disagree with any prosecution can judicially review the police for a decision to prosecute.

    “But most parents would be completely unaware of this option, and would be skeptical that it was likely to offer any solution.”

    Parents have been given conflicting messages by the promoters of the law. Legal opinions have contradicted each other, and on top of that there is ‘police discretion’ but not CYF discretion to investigate. Parents have a right to a clear and precise law. This current law has created confusion. Good parents are being victimised and the real causes of child abuse ignored,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    “Parenting is not for cowards but this law is making it pretty scary.”

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Smacking Equated with Torture and Death Penalty

    MEDIA RELEASE

    20 May 2009

    Smacking Equated with Torture and Death Penalty

    Family First NZ says that the United Nations Committee on Torture has equated a kiwi parent using a smack for the purpose of correction as a form of torture, and compared the anti-smacking law to the abolition of the death penalty.

    “This report has been promoted by groups supporting the anti-smacking law including Plunket, Barnardos, the Families Commission and EPOCH and shows a view of parenting completely removed from reality,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “To link a parent who corrects a child using a smack with torture, the death penalty, and tasering of violent offenders is both breathtaking and insulting, and shows why these groups have failed to get the huge majority of NZ parents on side in this debate.”

    “They argue that the anti-smacking law has been introduced to meet the recommendations made by both the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and the UN Committee on Torture.”

    “This simply reinforces the overriding concern that the anti-smacking law had nothing to do with child abuse and was more to do with an ideologically flawed and UN-driven agenda.”

    “But 80% of NZ’ers knew that the anti-smacking law would have no affect on child abuse anyway,” says Bob McCoskrie. “It’s time we tackled the real causes.”

    Full report: http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/SNAA-7S49PY?OpenDocument

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Family First Welcomes Bill to Fix Smacking Law

    MEDIA RELEASE

    19 March 2009

    Family First Welcomes Bill to Fix Smacking Law

    Family First NZ is ‘stoked’ that ACT List MP John Boscawen has announced his intention to introduce a Private Members Bill to amend the anti-smacking law.

    “Our polling along with every other poll done over the past 3 years shows that approximately 80% of NZ’ers oppose this law – and for good reason,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “This flawed law has attempted to link a smack on the bottom with child abuse of the worst kind, and has put good parents raising law-abiding and responsible citizens in the same category as rotten parents who are a danger to their kids and to society in general.”

    “Not surprisingly, the child abuse rate has continued unabated with 12 child abuse deaths in the 21 months since the law was passed – the same rate as before the law was passed.”

    “Family First research has also shown that parents are hugely confused over the legal effect of the law. Parents have a right to know whether they are parenting within the law or not.”

    The 2007 UNICEF report on child wellbeing said “the likelihood of a child being injured or killed is associated with poverty, single-parenthood, low maternal education, low maternal age at birth, poor housing, weak family ties, and parental drug or alcohol abuse.”

    Family First is calling on National to adopt this bill as a government bill, to acknowledge the important and valued role of good parents, and to then target resources and effort at 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

  • Amendment To Fix Broken Anti-Smacking Law

    Amendment To Fix Broken Anti-Smacking Law

    Immediate Release: Thursday March 19, 2009

    ACT New Zealand MP John Boscawen today announced that he will introduce a Private Member’s Bill to amend the controversial Anti-Smacking law inflicted on New Zealanders by Labour and the Greens in 2007.

    “My announcement coincides with yesterday’s release of a poll that shows widespread support for the law to be altered,” Mr Boscawen said.

    “This poll, commissioned by Family First NZ and conducted by Curia Market Research, surveyed the views of 1,000 everyday New Zealanders – 83 percent of whom felt the law should be changed, with a total 77 percent of respondents believing the law would not help reduce our child abuse rates.

    “While addressing the concerns of those who felt that the original section 59 of the Crimes Act was too vague, my amendment to the law will protect from criminalisation those parents who use a light smack for the purpose of correction.

    “The amendment will change the Act so that: it is no longer a crime for parents or guardians to use reasonable force to correct children; there are clear statutory limits on what constitutes reasonable force; parents and guardians have certainty about what the law permits; it is no longer reliant on police discretion for the law to be practical and workable.

    “In an attempt to curb child abuse, this law has simply criminalised law-abiding parents and removed their freedom to decide how best to raise their children – something that ACT has consistently opposed.

    “The Labour we know best’ Government is out and National is now in.  Perhaps we will now begin to see an end to the madness of the past nine years – where politicians saw fit to tell New Zealanders how to live their lives,” Mr Boscawen said.

    ENDS

    Media Contact: Shelley Mackey, Press Secretary, 04 817 6634 / 021 242 785.

  • FAMILY FIRST NZ – Massive support for law change

    Press Release from Family First NZ

    We thought you’d be interested in our (Family First NZ) latest Media Release. Feel free to forward it on to your local MP and others on your Contacts list.
    PS If you support the work and ‘voice’ of Family First NZ and would be willing to contribute towards the cost of this research, we would greatly appreciate it! DONATE HERE Thank you!

    Family First Media Release 18 March 2009

    83% Still Want


    Smacking


    Law Fixed – Poll


    Almost two years after the passing of the controversial anti-smacking law, more than 80% of NZ’ers still want the law changed and 77% say that the law won’t have any effect on our unacceptable child abuse rate.

    These are the key finding of research commissioned by Family First NZ, following on from similar research in 2007 and 2008. The Curia Market Research poll surveyed 1,000 people, and also found huge confusion over the legal effect of the law.

    83% said that the new law should be changed to state explicitly that parents who give their children a smack that is reasonable and for the purpose of correction are not breaking the law (85% in 2008, 82% in 2007).

    _________________________________________________________________
    KEY FINDINGS
    83% say the law should be changed – only 13% say to keep it as is
    77% says the law won’t help reduce the rate of child abuse in NZ
    Less than one third of respondents actually understand the law
    _________________________________________________________________

    “This is essentially the same question that will be put to NZ’ers in the Referendum at the end of July. The government can save $8 million of taxpayer funding towards the cost of running the Referendum during a recession, and amend the law now,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    Respondents were also asked whether the new law makes it always illegal for parents to give their children a light smack. 55% said yes, 31% said no, and 14% didn’t know.

    “This proves just how confusing the law is to parents and it is this confusion that is causing huge harm. Parents have been given conflicting messages by the promoters of the law, legal opinions have contradicted each other, and on top of that is police discretion but not CYF discretion to investigate.”

    “Parents have a right to know whether they are parenting within the law or not. This law has just created confusion and as a result, good parents are being victimised,” says Mr McCoskrie. “Meanwhile, the rate of child abuse continues. This flawed law must be fixed and the real causes of child abuse confronted.”

    The poll was conducted during the week beginning March 9, and has a margin of error of +/- 3.2%.

    ENDS

    www.familyfirst.org.nz | About us | Media Centre | Contact Us | Support Us