|
Join Us
New form
|
News Media Reports
|
Family Integrity - Press Release - Family Integrity Calls For Dumping Of Bill
|
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0702/S00281.htm
Wednesday, 21 February 2007, 10:25 am
Press Release: Family Integrity
Press Release For Immediate Distribution
With the current Section 59 in place, correction of children is the only acceptable excuse for using force with children. But Green MP Sue Bradford now says that correction of children is the one thing she wants to see specifically forbidden. She is happy to justify parents using reasonable force to prevent bad behaviour, but not to correct it.
The repeal lobby's rhetoric has tried to make us believe it was the "reasonable force" they wanted to ban. Their real agenda has been revealed in the Select Committee's amended version of Section 59 which Bradford help to write. It is the correction of children they want to ban, not the use of reasonable force. In their minds parents may compel children to stop behaving in a certain way, but they must not compel children to behave in a certain way.
The repeal lobby's re-write of Section 59 tolerates parents using reasonable force to prevent their children from conforming to harmful, criminal, offensive and disruptive behaviours. But they will not tolerate parents using reasonable force to ensure their children conform to obedient, honest, righteous and respectful behaviours. An agenda that is more anti-parent, anti-family, in fact, one that is more foolish, illogical, non-sensical and counter to all that makes for a peaceful and orderly society would be hard to imagine.
Dump this ridiculous Bill to repeal Section 59 once and for all.
Ends
|
Lindsay Mitchell - Press Release - Removal of S59 Gross Failure to Tackle Child Abuse
|
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0702/S00293.htm
Wednesday, 21 February 2007, 3:56 pm
Press Release: Lindsay Mitchell
Media Release
Removal of S59 a Gross Failure to Tackle Child Abuse
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
"The removal of section 59 is covering up a gross failure to tackle the causes of child abuse," Lindsay Mitchell, welfare commentator said today.
"The first evidence I can find of government agencies acknowledging child abuse is from 1967. Child Welfare conducted a survey of the 210 confirmed cases that year. What they found was a strong association between illegitimacy and child abuse. Maori children were 6 times more likely to be victims."
"That's forty years ago and policy makers are still refusing to face this reality, wringing hands over unpartnered, teenage birth and claiming all these girls need is more support in bringing up their babies. The focus of that support has largely been financial thereby inadvertently exacerbating the problem. Pay girls to have and keep babies and that is what they will do, whether or not they are emotionally capable of parenting them."
"It snuck below the radar last week that the teenage birth rate had risen again. It has climbed for four consecutive years. The Maori rate is more than four times higher than NZ European."
"Rather than fiddling with section 59 we should be stopping welfare to teenagers, blitzing contraception use and encouraging adoption. Do we have any politicians brave enough to act on these ideas?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Excellent press release!
Removal of Section 59 will not stop child abuse. Instead, children and
their parents and families will be open to administrative, physical and mental
abuse. There are all too many tens of thousands of cases here in Sweden,
that boasts to be the first country in the world to abolish smacking
children.
Of course, it is absolutly terrible that some children are beaten to
death, stabbed or shot by their parents or step-parents but that doesn't give
parliament the right to forbid parents to smack their children when
words and admonition are ineffective to correct bad or even criminal
behaviour.
Children are also beaten to death, stabbed or shot by their foster
parents.
But then, they are in the "protective custody of the state" so those
cases are silenced.
The percentage of abused or rather ill-treated children is very small
compared to the percentage of children who never see the light of day
because the law permits their parents and medical staff to kill them
before they are born.
The child protection lobby usually try to brush off any references to
abortion statistics, but only 50 years ago two European women - the
mother and her abortionist - were sentenced to death because they caused the
death of an unborn child. WW2 was raging at the same time, killing millions of
people.
There is a total lacking of a sense of proportions. In Sweden there is a
saying "One sifts mosquitos, but swallow camels".
Ruby Harrold-Claesson
|
Family First - Press Release - Why We Oppose Anti-Smacking Bill
|
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0702/S00296.htm
7 More Good Reasons Why We Oppose Bradford’s Anti-Smacking Bill
From the group that's "whipping up hysteria" according to Sue Bradford - because we're presenting the Facts!!
1. No decent research shows smack by a loving parent breeds violence
Otago University study 2006 – children who were smacked in a reasonable way had similar or slightly better outcomes in terms of aggression, substance abuse, adult convictions and school achievement than those who were not smacked at all.
Fergusson and Lynskey (Christchurch School of Medicine) – found no difference between no smacking and moderate physical punishment “ It is misleading to imply that occasional or mild physical punishment has long term adverse consequences”
2. UNICEF reports prove there is no link between smacking and child abuse
2003 UNICEF report on maltreatment deaths.
Of the five countries with the lowest child abuse death rates in the UNICEF report, four allow smacking !
Austria banned smacking in 1989 – is the 5th highest for child abuse death rates
2007 Report released last week : “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.”
The safest country for children is Netherlands – hasn’t banned smacking . Of the 10 top countries, 6 haven’t banned smacking.
The 2006 CYF report “Children at Increased Risk of Death from Maltreatment and Strategies for Prevention”
identified the factors which signaled greater risk for children including poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence and family breakdown. Statistics also showed that children living in households with an adult unrelated to them were almost 50 times as likely to die of an inflicted injury as those living with two biological parents!
Example: Just one of the real causes - Substance Abuse
UNICEF report 2003 - Child welfare professionals – 80% said “substance abuse causes or contributes to at least half of all cases of child maltreatment”
85% of States in US report substance abuse and poverty leading problems in families reported for abuse
Substance abuse triples risk for child maltreatment
3. Sweden experience is a warning to us
Child abuse increased 489% in 13 years following ban - Assaults by kids against kids increased 672%
2000 Swedish Govt report – “we see no tendency to a decrease in bullying at school or in leisure time during the last 20 years”
Sweden’s Foster Care rate is double NZ’s – twice as many kids being removed from their families
European Crime and Safety Safety – UN, Euro Commission – published this month - Sweden has one of the worst assault and sexual violence rates in EU
Lies.....
Around one child a month dies at the hands of a parent or caregiver in New Zealand. In Sweden, the average annual deaths attributable to child abuse for the past 30 years or so has been less than one every four years. - Document circulated on behalf of Barnadoes, Plunket, Save the Children, Children’s Commissioner and EPOCH last year
“The rate of child homicide & in Sweden is something like one every 4 years” - Sue Bradford on TVNZ’s Close Up 19 July 2006
• “Dr Kiro says people need to realise since Sweden banned physical punishment in 1976, only four children died in the following 20 years”
Children’s Commissioner speaks out against culture of violence – Press Release - Dr Cindy Kiro - 03/11/2004
The Truth
Morgan Johansson, Swedish public health minister, said (2006)
"Every year, eight to ten, sometimes as many as twelve children die in Sweden due to violence. This has been true for several years,"
4. Polls
Averaged out, polls show that 80% of us want to keep the status quo. Politicians need to listen to the people.
5. Police won’t prosecute
Domestic Violence Policy currently being enforced by Police strongly encourages arrest at the time and denies Police Diversion except where authorised by the District Commander. Diversions are rarely given for domestic violence matters. The Police Association admitted today (21 Feb) that they will have to investigate any complaint.
As noted by Cabinet, anyone may bring a prosecution for breach of criminal law e.g. lobby group could bring private prosecution against smack or removal to ‘time out’ – not determined by Police
6. Are the Greens serious about stopping child abuse?
2003: P (Methamphetamine) reclassified as a Class A drug – only the Greens opposed
2006: Opposed an increase to the Drinking Age
2005: Intentional Possession of Child Pornography (the worst of child abuse) –Only the Greens opposed the maximum penalty being 5 years – wanted it lower at 2 years
2007: Want to decriminalise Marijuana
SOFT ON THE REAL CAUSES OF CHILD ABUSE YET THEY WANT TO CRIMINALISE PARENTS WHO GIVE THEIR KIDS A SMACK
7. Smacking isn’t violence – it’s correction
Children are already protected from violence and assault through the Crimes Act
Smacking is in harmony with nature – pain teaches e.g a child teases a dog, they get a dog bite – a child touches the hot element, they get burnt – they take their hands off the handles of the bike – they crash!
Does this teach a child to be a violent person? NO!
A Reasonable smack from loving parent is great teaching tool
|