For Reading on your Computer:
What Does the Law Really Say?
Is Smacking the Same as Abuse?
Will Parents’ Authority Be Taken Away?
Will This Turn Parents into Criminals?
Questions….and Answers
When we changed websites these brochures were lost in the change. Sorry this was not picked up until now. We have been asked to put these back on our website. These brochures were written before Sue Bradford’s Section 59 Bill was pulled out of the Ballot.
What Does the Law Really Say?
Is Smacking the Same as Abuse?
Will Parents’ Authority Be Taken Away?
Will This Turn Parents into Criminals?
Questions….and Answers
When we changed websites these brochures were lost in the change. Sorry this was not picked up until now. We have been asked to put these back on our website. These brochures were written before Sue Bradford’s Section 59 Bill was pulled out of the Ballot.
July 29, 2008 by Denise Robertson, Western Mail
I’M TOLD there are moves in Parliament to bring in a Bill to outlaw smacking. If they succeed, I will again oppose it, which seems odd when I abhor smacking and long for a world in which every child is free from fear.
The reason for my objection is “mission-creep”, that insidious disease which overtakes too many pieces of legislation that at first seem sensible. In other words, give an idiot a law a sane man or woman would use sensibly and the idiot will abuse it.
Mission-creep has overtaken terrorism laws so that they are now used against ordinary citizens. Latest figures reveal that councils across Wales and England launched more than 10,000 spying missions last year to investigate possible petty offences.
Rules to curb paedophile activity have led to inexcusable situations like a mother from Aberfan being banned from riding in a taxi with her disabled child until she has a criminal record check.
If a smacking ban succeeds, forget assurances that it will be used with common sense. Before long some good mum or dad will be hauled into court because, in a moment of panic, they tapped little Johnny’s legs for running into the road. The case will probably be thrown out when the court sees the whole picture, but not before that family has been traumatised.
We already have laws to prevent the abuse of children – laws which are not used often enough in my opinion – but my fear of mission-creep if there is a total ban on smacking is very real.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0807/S00332.htm
More Evidence of Good Parents Victims of Anti-Smacking Law
Family First has published advertisements in the Sunday papers highlighting further cases of good parents being reported, investigated, persecuted, and even prosecuted as a result of the anti-smacking law.
“All NZ’ers want to tackle the issue of child abuse but the anti-smacking law, and the compromise brokered by John Key, has not brought about the desired result,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “Even the architect of the bill, Green MP Sue Bradford, has admitted that the bill was never intended to solve the problem of child abuse and child violence.”
Family First has documented evidence of a number of disturbing cases including:
* a father separated from his children for 6 months by CYF because of malicious claims by mother that he had smacked them – CYF eventually re-allowed access but only due to a strong supporter who knew the system
* a father prosecuted and convicted because of pushing the upper arm of his daughter 2-3 times and demanding she listen to her mother
* a father dragged through the court process only to turn up to the court case and the police to admit they had no evidence
* a stepfather who had to physically restrain the arms of his stepdaughter, being interrogated for 2 hours almost 7 months after the incident, and 6 months later still not knowing the outcome
* a CYFS Community Panel Board member telling Family First “I can say without a doubt, that in my time I have seen a small but a definite increase in ‘good’ parents being investigated by our CYFS case workers.”
Other cases are documented on our website http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/index.cfm/CASES
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 recent research).
ENDS
td{ font: normal 10pt arial}
|
This advertisement appeared in all national Sunday newspapers…
If you can’t see image, CLICK HERE Thanks for helping us defend good parents while demanding action on real child abuse |
 |
Hi everyone.
Recent comments reported in the media by John key have made it abundantly clear that National have no intention of repealing Sue Bradford’s anti-smacking law.
National’s call for the referendum to be held at the election so New Zealanders can have their say is meaningless if they are not prepared to listen and respond to the result of the referendum.
You will recall I said very clearly that if we want to see the law changed it is essential that the Kiwi party hold the balance of power after this election.
In less than 4 months New Zealand will hold a general election and we have much to do to prepare the Kiwi Party for a successful result.
The good news is that we have come along way in the five months since our registration with the Electoral Commission was finalised. Regional conferences have been held in eight cities and Kiwi Party committees have been established and are preparing for action in the coming months.
The Party now has over 1000 members. At every meeting where we have the opportunity to present what the Kiwi Party stands for we find an almost 100% positive response from those who attend.
National Conference
In just over two weeks we will hold our Kiwi Party National conference in Auckland on Aug 9 at the Ellislie Racecourse.
We have an exciting line up of speakers from within the party and invited guests. You can register directly on line.
Nationwide Protest
We are discussing the potential for launching a campaign to protest the Prime Ministers disregard for democracy by not holding the referendum at the election. We are formulating plans and will advise you shortly. I am keen to hear from anyone who would be interested in helping organise a protest gathering in your city or town.
Warm regards,
Larry Baldock
Kiwi Party Leader.
|
|
||
Christine Kellett | June 30, 2008 – 11:59AM
Anti-smacking laws to punish Queensland parents who used “excessive force” to discipline their children could be too hard to prosecute, a lawyer has warned.
Moves by the Labor Party to toughen its stance on smacking were made at its state conference earlier this month, with suggestions the practice would eventually be outlawed.
But Brisbane lawyer Michael Bosscher, of criminal defence firm Ryan and Bosscher, said changes to the Criminal Code to make smacking illegal would be a legal minefield and would cause more problems than they solved.
He cited the example of New Zealand, where anti-smacking legislation had sparked a public backlash and had prompted calls for a referendum.
“It is amazing to think Queensland is considering going down this path when New Zealand is trying to reverse its decision,” Mr Bosscher said.
“Our laws already provide the option to prosecute parents who abuse their children.
The move comes after shocking cases of children being abandoned outside casinos and hotels in South East Queensland while their parents socialised hit the headlines earlier this year.
Mr Bosscher said said practical difficulties would arise when police, lawyers and the courts tried to prosecute parents who smacked.
“The real danger with new laws is how you interpret and enforce them and there is a risk of zealous authorities prosecuting parents for minor smacks that would traditionally be seen as just part of parenting.
“There’s this nanny state mentality here where the state government is imposing draconian laws upon families, in theory to protect children. However if you start prosecuting parents for smacking children, the potential to destroy families and therefore hurt children, is enormous.
“Anti-smacking laws would be a controversial issue to prosecute in the courts because one police officers definition of excessively hard smacking could be radically different from another officers view.
Mr Bosscher said Queensland laws currently allowed parents to use “reasonable force” to discipline their children.
“A change to the Criminal Code is not needed. The law already has provision to prosecute parents- or any person- who inflicts serious, grievous or bodily harm on a child,” he said.
“What they are really talking about is changing the law to brand parents as criminals. This is wrong and is not needed in Queensland.”
8 July 2008
Anti-Smacking Law Confirmed as Wasting Valuable CYF Time
Family First NZ says that the evidence is in that CYF’s limited resources are being wasted, with a ‘blow-out’ in CYF notifications but the levels of actual abuse not increasing, or at worst not being caught.
“This is perfect proof that the ideologically flawed anti-smacking law has resulted in unwarranted reports of good parents which is a waste of the limited resources of CYF,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.
Statistics released by CYF to the Nelson Mail reported today showed that the total number of notifications received by CYF had increased steadily over the last four financial years. However, the agency’s figures showed a significant drop in actual cases found to involve abuse or neglect.
And figures from CYF’s national 2007/08 Third Quarter report show a 32% increase in notifications over the previous 12 months but numbers requiring further action remaining the same.
“If the figures could be attributed to a rising intolerance to child abuse and domestic violence, we would be seeing an increasing rate of cases requiring further action – but we are not. That is simply because of a misguided law,” says Mr McCoskrie.
“CYF resources are being wasted because of a law that labels good parents as potential child abusers, and distracts CYF and Police from dealing with the real causes of child abuse and actual child abuse.”
“The police report released last month also confirmed that there had been a 300% increase in families being investigated yet less than 5% were serious enough to warrant prosecution. And the number of actual child assaults are now at almost the same rate as before the law change.”
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 recent research). Then CYF and Police will have the time and resources to focus on the ‘rotten parents’ who are abusing and killing their children.
ENDS
For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:
