Family Integrity

Category: News Media/Press Releases

  • School Bullying Expected Outcome of Social Agenda

    MEDIA RELEASE 16 March 2009

    School Bullying Expected Outcome of Social Agenda

    Family First NZ says that concerns about school bullying are a simple result of the culture we have experimented with, which includes children’s rights, media standards, undermining the role of parents, and removing consequences.

    “Why are we surprised by bullying and violence in our schools when children are fed this material through the media constantly,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “Kids are bullying each other, kids are bullying teachers, kids are bullying parents. Bullying is not just a school problem, and it’s not just a youth problem.”

    “We cannot continue to feed the minds of our young people with the level of violence, sexual content and disrespect for authority that is prevalent in the media and our culture without it affecting the minds of some of our most impressionable and at-risk teenagers and children.”

    “But schools are suffering in particular because they are being forced by the Ministry of Education to put up with increasing levels of unacceptable behaviour and are being criticised for suspending these students.”

    “It is also significant that as schools have removed corporal punishment, schools have become more dangerous. School yard bullying by pupils on other pupils and staff is now the new form of ‘corporal punishment’ in schools.”

    “All of these young people have entered a system of education and society where discipline and responsibility are being replaced by the politically correct nonsense of children’s rights. Ironically, this has been pushed by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner who is now crying foul.”

    “The anti-smacking law has also undermined the role of parents, has failed to understand the special relationship and functioning of families, and has communicated to some children that they are now in the ‘driving seat’ and parents should be put in their place.”

    Sweden, one of the first countries to ban smacking in 1979 suffered a similar fate with assaults by kids increasing 672% in the 13 years following the ban. A recent UN report on European Crime and Safety found that Sweden had one of the worst assault and sexual violence rates in EU.

    “Student behaviour and bullying will continue to deteriorate for as long as we tell them that their rights are more important than their responsibilities, that proper parental authority is undermined by politicians and subject to the rights of their children, and that there will be no consequences of any significance or effectiveness for what they do,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Child Abuse Death Rate Is Killing Us

    MEDIA RELEASE

    11 March 2009

    Child Abuse Death Rate Is Killing Us

    Family First NZ says that the police announcement of a homicide investigation into the death of Taupo five-week-old Jayrhis Ian Te Koha Lock-Tata is a tragic reminder that the rate of child abuse deaths has continued at the same rate as before the flawed anti-smacking law and we are failing to identify and tackle the real causes.

    “While good families are being investigated and thrown under suspicion because of the extremist anti-smacking law, child abuse has continued at the same rate and the same old underlying issues of drug and alcohol abuse, family breakdown and dysfunction, the presence of non-biological adults in the house, low maternal age, poverty and single parenthood continue to be downplayed,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “Before Bradford’s anti-smacking law was passed, there were an average of 7 child abuse deaths per year since 2000. Since the anti-smacking law was passed 20 months ago, there has been 12 child abuse deaths.”

    The ‘roll of horror’ of child abuse deaths includes 2 year old Jhia Te Tua, 16 month old Sachin Dhani, 22-month-old Tyla-Maree Flynn, 3 year old Nia Glassie, Ten-month-old Jyniah Te Awa, Two-month-old Tahani Mahomed, 3 year old Dylan Rimoni, 7-year-old Duwayne Pailegutu, 16-month-old Riley Osborne, 3-year-old Cherish Tahuri-Wright, and now little Jayrhis.

    “NZ’ers are sick of our leaders ‘fluffing’ around the real issues of child abuse,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    Family First has a 5 point Action plan to tackle child abuse – www.stoptheabuse.org.nz

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • More new babies taken from mothers

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4864585a11.html

    More new babies taken from mothers

    Custody orders have doubled in five years

    By REBECCA PALMER – The Dominion Post | Monday, 02 March 2009

    Dozens of newborns are being taken from their mothers every year because of fears for their safety.

    Child, Youth and Family took 66 at-risk babies less than a month old into its care last year and 15 of them were taken the day they were born.

    In more than half of the cases, older brothers and sisters were already in care, figures provided to The Dominion Post under the Official Information Act show.

    The number of custody orders involving newborns has more than doubled in the past five years. In the 2003-04 year, 32 were taken into state care.

    Those taken last year include the newborn daughter of convicted baby-killer Tania Witika, who gave birth in Christchurch. CYF obtained custody when it heard she was pregnant.

    The horrific death of Witika’s daughter Delcelia, 2, in 1991 was one of the worst child-abuse cases to go before New Zealand courts. She and her partner at the time were each sentenced to 16 years’ jail for Delcelia’s torture and death.

    The rise in newborn custody orders coincides with a doubling in care and protection notifications involving babies still in their mothers’ wombs. Last year Child, Youth and Family received 215 notifications from people worried about the welfare of unborn children, compared with 96 five years earlier.

    Nearly half the alerts came from health professionals. Police, family members, courts, schools and others also reported concerns.

    Social Development Ministry chief executive Peter Hughes said the agency had been working to create an environment in which abuse and neglect were not tolerated. “In recent years, we have made significant progress in raising awareness of family violence and this is reflected in the increase in the number of notifications.”

    He said no child was taken from its parents unless concerns were of “an extreme nature”. They could include history of family violence, mental health problems, addiction, neglect and previous abuse of children. “Removal of children at such a young age is the last resort.”

    Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro agreed improved awareness was a big factor behind the increased numbers. “It’s part of a bigger pattern of increasing notifications, particularly off the back of high-profile cases like Nia Glassie.” Nia, 3, died in Auckland’s Starship children’s hospital in 2007, after repeated abuse that included being tumbled in a clothes drier, spun on a clothesline and kicked in the head.

    Dr Kiro said the health sector had become more proactive in watching for signs of abuse and reporting them.

    She suspected most of the health notifications came from hospitals. Pregnant women who had been abusing alcohol or drugs were more likely to experience complications.

    The number of notifications involving unborn children was likely to keep growing, she said.

    Paediatric Society president Rosemary Marks, who works at Starship, said most, if not all, district health boards now had a family violence co-ordinator. “We have had a real emphasis on training health professionals to be aware and to ask people about family violence.”

    That meant there was an opportunity to help if a pregnant woman said her partner was abusing her. “We can intervene earlier and hopefully interrupt the cycle of violence.”

  • Fitzsimons to resign as Greens co-leader

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4856034a6160.html

    Fitzsimons to resign as Greens co-leader

    By ANTHONY HUBBARD – Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 22 February 2009

    Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons is about to announce her resignation from the post. She will stand down to allow a new co-leader time to make her mark before the 2011 election.

    The veteran Green, co-leader since 1995, is expected to serve out the parliamentary term as a list MP.

    The main candidates for her job, which under Green Party rules must be held by a woman, are MPs Sue Bradford and Metiria Turei. The new leader is likely to be announced at the party annual conference in June.

    Fitzsimons, who had earlier indicated she would probably retire at the next election, refused to comment yesterday. Co-leader Russel Norman also refused to discuss her future.

    Fitzsimons’ departure will leave a difficult problem for the party. She is a widely liked and admired politician, with appeal across the political spectrum.

    Neither Bradford nor Turei has similar appeal. Bradford, once a fiery Marxist radical, has softened her image, but her sponsorship of the anti-smacking bill drew much flak.

    Turei has the progressive appeal of being a Maori woman, but she may be seen as too radical to have wide appeal.

    It is not known if Catherine Delahunty, elected to parliament at last year’s general election, will be a candidate for the co-leadership. Her lack of parliamentary experience could count against her.

    It is understood that veteran Green MP Sue Kedgley is not seeking the post.

    Auckland University political scientist Raymond Miller said the resignation was a serious blow to the Greens. “Jeanette was a conservative and moderate figure who reassured people who might otherwise think of the Greens as an extremist party.”

  • Ads taken out for ‘anti-smacking’ repeal

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4841414a11.html

    Ads taken out for ‘anti-smacking’ repeal

    Sunday, 08 February 2009

    Lobby group Family First has placed advertisements in all three Sunday newspapers calling for the repeal of the “anti-smacking law”.

    The advertisement described four cases where parents were investigated by Child, Youth and Family following the repeal of Section 59 of the Crimes Act, which removed the defence of reasonable force for parents who physically punish their children.

    A late amendment to the law added the proviso that police had the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent where the offence was considered to be inconsequential.

    The cases referred to CYF included two where parents admitted smacking their children as a last resort and one where CYF investigated when her child told a friend’s mother he had been smacked.

    The fourth involved a child complainant who was found to have been angry with her mother for being grounded.

    “The tragedy is that families are seeking help in their role as parents but as soon as they acknowledge that they smack or have smacked, they are immediately being referred to CYF and their children are being removed,” Family First director Bob McCoskrie said.

    CYF eventually closed the investigation in all four cases, the advertisements say.

    A fifth example described a case where a woman was suspended by a community centre for what Family First says was a tap on the back of the hand.

    She was eventually reinstated after the employer dropped the case after her lawyer intervened.

    Mr McCoskrie called for the repeal of the law, saying it was penalising good parents while not tackling the real causes of child abuse.

    –NZPA

  • Nursed babies less prone to abuse

    http://www.theage.com.au/national/nursed-babies-less-prone-to-abuse-20090126-7q0e.html?page=-1

    Nursed babies less prone to abuse

    • Julia Medew
    • January 27, 2009

    WOMEN who do not breastfeed their infants are nearly four times more likely to neglect and abuse their child, a world-first study of Australian women has found.

    The analysis of about 6000 Queensland mothers and their children also discovered that the longer a woman breastfeeds, the less likely she is to neglect or hurt her child.

    To reach their findings, researchers from the University of Queensland linked data from Australia’s largest longitudinal study tracking mothers and their children with substantiated reports of maltreatment recorded by the state’s child protection authorities.

    They found that of the 1421 women who did not breastfeed their children in the group, 102 women — or 7.2 per cent — neglected or abused their child in some way.

    This was compared to 4.8 per cent of the 2584 women who breastfed their baby for less than four months and just 1.6 per cent of the 2616 women who breastfed their baby for more than four months.

    Maltreatment included neglect, emotional abuse, physical abuse and sexual assault. Neglect was the most common form identified in the study, but the prevalence of all types increased as the duration of breastfeeding decreased.

    When the researchers adjusted the statistics for 5890 cases to filter out the influence of other factors, they concluded that women who did not breastfeed were 3.8 times more likely to maltreat their child.

    For mothers who breastfed for less than four months, the risk was about 2.3 times that of women who breastfed for longer than four months.

    Lane Strathearn, author of the research due to be published in the journal Pediatrics next month, said the conclusions were bolstered by research linking breastfeeding to the release of oxytocin, a hormone proven to activate areas of the brain linked to maternal care and behaviour in animals.

    The physical bond created during breastfeeding, including eye contact, could also be a factor, he said.

    Dr Strathearn concluded that the promotion of breastfeeding could be a relatively simple and cost-effective way of strengthening the relationship between mothers and babies to prevent child neglect and abuse.

    “This overarching goal would be best accomplished by promoting parent education and long-term marital stability and by providing economic and social support for new mothers who choose to stay at home with their infants,” he said.

    Deputy Director of the Women’s and Children’s Health Research Institute in South Australia, Dr Maria Makrides, said people should not interpret the absence of breastfeeding or low rates as a direct cause of neglect and abuse. “I don’t necessarily think that by increasing the breastfeeding rate, we are going to wipe out neglect and abuse,” she said.

    Australian Breastfeeding Association president Querida David said the study was consistent with other research.

  • Cindy Kiro’s term ending!

    This is from Family First’s e-newsletter.

    To subscribe send an email to: admin@familyfirst.org.nz

    1. Cindy Kiro’s term ending!
    Herald on Sunday 25 January 2009
    Controversial Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro will finish her five-year term in April. The Ministry of Social Development has advertised the high-profile role, with an annual salary of $195,100 . Critics have accused Kiro as being a toothless figurehead, but she has defended her record as an independent voice for children. READ MORE
    Family First Comment : Cindy Kiro has been openly hostile towards Family First, and in fact to any people who may have a christian faith – no matter how qualified they are to speak up. Apart from completely misrepresenting the facts in the smacking debate and mispresenting Family First’s position, last February she attempted to discredit the 300,000+ NZ’ers who had signed the petitions on the anti-smacking law by saying that previous generations of parents didn’t parent as positively and were less qualified in knowing how to raise their children than parents of today !!
    We also would like to know why she was
    – silent after the pathetic sentence handed down to the caregivers of Ngatikauri Ngati who abused the little 3 year old to death
    – silent during the Trevor Mallard incident during the “It’s Never OK” Violence Campaign funded by the government.
    – silent when the prostitution report from South Auckland was released last year highlighting the number of young teenagers prostituting themselves
    – silent when Police refused to prosecute a 21 year old who got a 13 year old pregnant (after starting the relationship when she was 11)
    – silent over the recent cancelling of the sentence for a woman who pleaded guilty to infanticide
    – silent over the ultimate child abuse of abortion
    ….yet is more interested in the rights of children to be able to purchase spray cans of paint for the purposes of tagging, and wanting to monitor every child with a social worker as soon as they are born!!!

    The problem is not just with Dr Kiro but with the office itself.  Children’s interests are best served in the context of their own family . Government support for children must be through their families, not apart from families. Any office or structure which even appears to separate children from their parents and families will be destructive in the long run – no matter how well intentioned. Laws are already in place which protect children in seriously dysfunctional families.

    If the National government is serious about doing away with unecessary governmental spending , this would be a good place to start – rather than just cancelling a few conferences. So why are they advertising for a new Commissioner?????


    READ MORE “Parents deserve the right to raise their children.”

    This is from Family First’ e-newsletter.  To subscribe send an email to:

    admin@familyfirst.org.nz

  • Cradle to early grave

    The amending of Section 59 has not stopped this child abuse or child deaths.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4810044a11.html

    Cradle to early grave

    By LANE NICHOLS – The Dominion Post | Tuesday, 06 January 2009

    More than 350 children and young people whose safety or welfare had been brought to Child, Youth and Family’s attention have died since 2000.

    Children’s commissioner Cindy Kiro says many of the deaths were preventable.

    Some died from suicide, abuse, assaults by parents or caregivers, neglect and shootings. Most died from natural causes, medical complications or accidents, including vehicle crashes, fires, falls and drownings.

    Last year, Dr Kiro carried out a review of the deaths and she criticised CYF social workers for not focusing enough on at-risk children. The review found “gaps” in information provided to her office and triggered a new focus on neglect by parents and caregivers.

    Dr Kiro said she was frustrated by the significant number of preventable child deaths through violence, neglect, injury or suicide.

    Though CYF had dealt with some issues identified in her review, it needed to do more to protect high-risk children it was notified about. “I want to see more impetus and focus … because that’s where I think we can save the lives of a lot more children.

    “It’s immensely frustrating and it makes me feel sometimes angry that we can’t and don’t do more.”

    Figures in Dr Kiro’s 2008 annual report show her office was notified by CYF of 86 deaths last financial year alone a large increase on the previous year.

    A further 271 deaths were reported between 2000 and 2007.

    All the dead children were known to CYF through notifications of concern or suspected child abuse, though only a small number were in CYF custody.

    CYF is defending the figures, saying it investigated all child abuse notifications, but many warranted no further action.

    “We know about them, but it might just be a phone call that’s made about a kid who’s driving fast down the road,” a spokesman said.

    Numerous children referred to its care had pre-existing medical conditions.

    About 50 children have died since 2000 while in CYF care, four from violence or abuse.

    Social Development Minister Paula Bennett refused to comment on the numbers, saying only that any child’s death was tragic. She would work with Dr Kiro on child advocacy issues.

    Dr Kiro’s review last year criticised CYF social-worker practices, and found “significant issues around supervision and chronic neglect” by some parents and caregivers, especially in cot death cases.

    She said children notified to CYF were dying from the same causes as other children but were a higher-risk group. “So there’s going to be an increased proportion of them who will die from physical assault, injury or other violence categories.”

    Generally when children died through deliberate violence or neglect, most were aged under five, not known to CYF officials and from families with intergenerational abuse.

    The rate of child assault deaths had been falling since the mid-1990s.

    The number of reported cases of potential child abuse jumped from 40,939 notifications in 2004 to 89,461 last year.

    CYF said it was “symptomatic of an increase of public awareness and a growing intolerance of child abuse in society”.

  • Another Child Abuse Death – Same Factors

    TRAGIC TOT: 16-month-old Riley Justin Osborne.

    MEDIA RELEASE

    28 December 2008

    Another Child Abuse Death – Same Factors

    Family First NZ says that the tragic child abuse death of 16-month old Northland boy Riley Osborne is more evidence of the key causes of child abuse which we are failing to acknowledge and tackle.

    “Report after report from both CYF and UNICEF and international research all confirm that children are most at risk where there is the presence of drug and alcohol abuse, family breakdown, the presence of non-biological adults in the house, low maternal age, poverty and single parenthood,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First.

    “This latest case shows a number of factors including drug and alcohol abuse, family breakdown, welfare dependency and low maternal age.”

    “We are missing actual child abuse because politicians and the Children’s Commissioner have confused the issue by treating parents who smack as child abusers, and told us that we should spend all our time and resources targeting them.”

    “Despite a 30% increase in CYF notifications in the last twelve months (yet a corresponding decrease in the number of cases requiring further action), the ‘roll of horror’ of child abuse deaths continues with cases including 2 year old Jhia Te Tua, 16 month old Sachin Dhani, 22-month-old Tyla-Maree Flynn, 3 year old Nia Glassie, Ten-month-old Jyniah Te Awa, Two-month-old Tahani Mahomed, 3 year old Dylan Rimoni, 7-year-old Duwayne Pailegutu, and now little Riley.”

    “The rate of child abuse deaths has continued unabated despite the passing of the anti-smacking law.”

    “Until we acknowledge drug abuse, our culture of alcohol abuse and the resulting harm, the role that family structure has on the safety of children, and the desparate need for better support and resources for new and especially young parents, we will never see progress in our battle against child abuse,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    “It’s time for the country to administer a ‘truth serum’ to the debate on child abuse rather than our ideologically flawed approach which has failed.”

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie – National Director

    Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Mum fearful of school fines

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/4803156a11.html

    By REBECCA TODD – The Press | Friday, 26 December 2008

    A Christchurch mother is angry at the prospect of having to pay heavy fines because she cannot get her son to go to school.

    Under new laws passed by the National-led Government, parents of truants can be fined $300 for the first offence and $3000 for subsequent offences.

    They can also be fined $3000 if they fail to enrol their child in school.

    In the past, parents could be fined $150 for the first offence and $400 for subsequent offences.

    Michelle Chalmers said her 14-year-old son had not been in school for much of this year, but she could not force him to attend.

    “We haven’t got any control, but we are being prosecuted,” she said.

    “How do you forcibly get them out of bed, into school and keep them there, and even if they are there, how do you make them learn? I just don’t understand what they want us to do.”

    Chalmers put much of her son’s problems down to lead poisoning from eating flakes of house paint as a baby. He was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) before starting school and has behavioural issues that have brought him close to expulsion.

    At 14, he was diagnosed as dyslexic, but Chalmers said it was too late by then to make him want to be in school and learn.

    “I was dropping him off, seeing him walk in and picking him up at the same place, only to find out later he had been bunking,” she said.

    The former Aranui High School student was no longer enrolled at any school, but Chalmers had not been threatened with prosecution despite her son’s prolonged absence.

    “There’s nothing I can do to stop it and it’s heartbreaking,” she said.

    “I know I’m not the only one out there.”

    Linwood College principal Rob Burrough said the move to heavier fines was positive, but cases needed to be looked at individually.

    “Part of it is parental issues and part is student problems, so I think a $3000 fine will have some impact, but there needs to be a multi-pronged approach,” he said.

    “Some parents have lost control of their children by their own admission, and so this is a burden for them.”

    Linwood has been trialling anti-truancy programme Rock On, in which the Ministry of Education, police, Child, Youth and Family and truancy services work with the school and parents to get students back in school.

    Canterbury police youth services co-ordinator Senior Sergeant John Robinson said police were working on their third prosecution this year for parents of truants.

    “We’ll never prosecute anyone if the child is the issue, only if the parent is the issue,” he said.

    Heavier fines sent a message to people that attending school was a priority.

    “No parent wants to be held out there having to front up before the court and told they are not a particularly good parent because they can’t get their kids to school,” Robinson said.