Great Blog from:
Thursday, November 01, 2007
New Zealand school incriminates mother for slapping son's hand
Post below lifted from NZ Conservative. See the original for links
There were several interesting aspects to this case:
1. The mother says her family feels traumatised after a visit from CYF and later (for a separate incident), by three policemen. The policemen questioned (interrogated?) her child separately. I wonder if that was without a third party witness? She feels she has been labeled a "child abuser" for a simple smack on the hand.
2. The mother was in favour of the changes to s59. Obviously, she bought the line that this law change was around stopping violent abusers from getting off serious abuse by a legal loophole. It wasn't.
3. She did not want to be named because she 'fears losing her children'. There were a few notable cases in Sweden where parents said they had been threatened with losing their children if they made any aspect of the case public. It is likely that those that will speak out are going to be in the minority. We can expect this theme of blackmailing parents by threatening to remove their children for unfavorable public attention will continue here.
4. We can see that it will not take much for people to 'dob in' parents for a minor smack, and this in turn will create the climate of fear. She was dobbed in by a school teacher when the child said he got a smack, and a neighbour. Had the child been 'educated' that a smack is a bad thing, so he thought he could use it to gain attention, or as an excuse, not realizing the implications?
5. Ruth Dyson, Associate Social Development Minister believes the CYF intervention was not a result of the law change, but 'reflected greater community sensitivity to child abuse'. Firstly, note how a smack on the hand, that leaves no mark, is equated to child abuse by Dyson. Also, reflect that the law change encourages zealots to report such infractions.
Over time, there will be an increase in cases where the punishment of removing children from basically good families will far outweigh the "crime" of physical discipline. Will we learn of these cases however? Will parents be forced to remain silent for fear of never getting their children back?
Update and related link: Dave at Big News has the Mother's side of the story in the form of a letter to Family First.
11:00PM - As usual, scrubone weighs in with a worthy post on this topic, by reminding us how hard Sue Bradford [of the NZ government] tried to sell us that this is all about the violent abusers, not a little smack
Here are two excellent blogs regarding the Wellington Family left traumatised by police and cyfs
These blogs also include the letter from the mother to Family First.
There is a great post over at nzconservative.blogspot. Make sure you read the comments too:
Jim Hopkins: Cindy "Big Mother" Kiro is watching
Jim Hopkins, Friday September 14, 2007
Commissioner Wants ALL Parents Checked - Children's Commissioner Cindy Kiro wants mandatory screening of every baby's home life in a bid to halve New Zealand's child murder rate. Under her proposal, parents and caregivers would nominate an authorised inspector for compulsory home visits. Parents who refused to participate would be referred to welfare authorities - News Item
It is with much pride that the Harold now presents a thrilling extract from George Allswell's provocative novel Big Mother Is Watching You:
"Attention all parents!" boomed the strident loudspeaker on top of the big grey Ministry of Love van cruising slowly along the quiet suburban street. "You must be good to your children!"
"I am!" fumed Cindy Smith, near deafened by the din outside.
"And that's an order!!" rasped the harsh metallic voice, apparently unconvinced by her protestations.
"I'd like to order you not to broadcast your stupid messages five minutes after I've finally got little Winston to sleep!" yelled Cindy, her anger lost on the fading voice as the Ministry's windowless vehicle turned into Kiro Lane.
"What's the point," she muttered, resigned to spending another 20 minutes soothing her fractious offspring.
Before she could lift him, there was an urgent knock on the door. Cindy flung it open to two very grey people in very grey, ill-fitting uniforms of a proletarian cut.
"We're from the Family Inspectorate," declared the larger of the duo, presenting a Ministry of Love Identity Badge. "I'm Inspector One and this is Inspector Other One."
"Your baby's crying," said Inspector Other One. "You haven't been ... ?"
"No!" Cindy protested. "I have not!!!"
As if on cue, young Winston's wails became, first a gurgle, then a contented coo. Cindy's relief was palpable.
"We'll suspend judgment on that," Inspector One purred menacingly. "But you have denied access to the approved agencies authorised to conduct mandatory visits for the purpose of assessing family progress, haven't you, Cindy?" She paused. "I presume you think your home's your own?"
"Yes, I do!"
"Well, it's not!!" snapped the second inspector. "So we're coming in. And don't try to stop us. We've got a court order."
"Who cares?" Cindy shrugged. "The police just ignore them!"
"Are you Maori?" asked Inspector One.
"Then I don't think we'll have any problems," she hissed, striding into the house. "Check the nursery," Inspector One instructed her colleague. "You know what to look for."
Cindy waited until the inspector returned. "We've got a problem," the woman snapped, staring balefully as she re-entered the room. "The child has a Grade 7 cut on the left lower arm!"
"He's just learning to walk!" Cindy protested. "He tripped and scratched ... "
"Citizen 3124583 denies injuring infant," murmured Inspector One, noting the particulars in a large black book.
"I'm a good mother," Cindy pleaded. "I read stories to him. See! Thomas the Tuck Engine. It's a lovely story about how brave little Thomas helps the Fat Controllers take all the bad food out of schools!" She thrust it towards her interrogators. "See for yourself !"
"That won't be necessary," said Inspector One primly. "We don't accept books as proof of approved parenting!"
"Especially when a Citizen also possesses this!!" snarled Inspector Other One, brandishing a pamphlet found in the pile from whence Thomas had come.
Inspector One gasped as the offending document was waved under her nose.
"Why We Need Nuclear Power." The woman read the title with manifest distaste. "And you think this is suitable when you have a baby in the house?"
"It's not for him!!!" Cindy raged. "It's for me. I like to keep an open mind."
"Oh really, Citizen?" inquired the inspectors sardonically. "Well, the Great Leader doesn't. She likes to have a closed mind on the subject. She doesn't want nuclear power, the Party doesn't want nuclear power, so New Zealand won't get nuclear Power, Citizen!"
"Huh! Next time you see her, give her a knowledge wave from me!" Cindy mumbled.
"I said nuclear could be the new wave of low emission energy."
"But, Citizen, think of the risks!" urged Inspector Two. "As an approved parent, it is your official obligation to think of the risks!"
"There's risks with everything," Cindy replied. "That's no reason to blindly reject an idea! Look, its obviously risky for 15-year-olds to drive cars but the Leader allows that."
"Enough!!!" shouted Inspector One. "Citizen 3124583, I'm recommending you for immediate re-education as an unsuitable parental entity. Do not approach your child unless supervised and do not attempt to escape. We will be waiting outside until your re-educator arrives!" With that, the two grey figures clicked their heels and left.
Distraught, Cindy slumped into a chair. "When will people like the Children's Commissioner accept that the problem is largely caused by a welfare system which pays people to look after children but ignores how they're doing it? When will she admit it's the state that's failing, by neglecting the very children it professes to help? And when will she stop making ludicrous proposals for everybody else and start putting the Government's own house in order?"
"Don't hold your breath," came a little voice behind her. Cindy turned, astonished, to see Winston. With an inscrutable smile on his innocent face. Cindy couldn't decide whether to be thrilled he'd said his first words or chilled by his prescience.
"Out of the mouths of babes and ... " she whispered, but her message was swamped once again by the blasting loudspeaker on the Ministry van. "Attention all parents! Attention all parents ... "
Please read this blog:
Here is a great post on ronbosoldier - make sure you read the links as well, some are really interesting:
Hansard - 16 May 2007 - 3rd reading Section 59
Hansard - 16 May 2007 - 3rd reading Section 59
Hansard is now up for the 3rd reading:
or more specifically:
Child Abuse—Child, Youth and Family Discretion
Gordon Copeland— Resignation from United Future
Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill
Points of Order
Votes—Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill
Or this link with coloured photos of MPs:
PETER MORTLOCK at anti-Bradford's Bill rally at Parliament - 2 May 2007
Mike Weitenberg comments and prays at the above Rally - 2 May 2007
Bull Allen - Youtube
Bull Allen speaks at Rally at Parliament against Bradford’s anti-correction anti-parental authority bill - 2 May 2007
Jason, 11, speaks out
The Timaru Lady speaks out - herself
Leave our Homes alone, the music video
Section 59 Demonstration - 28 March 2007 - NZNats
28 March 2007 - The Wellington March against Bradford's Bill - as it was...
The Wellington March against Bradford's Bill - as it was...
All the speeches from the Wellington anti-Bradford Bill march.
1. 8:28 mins
2. 8:45 Mins
Larry Baldock instructing people about the Petition
Larry explaining the petition to a group in Wellington
Length: sec under 10 mins.
There are 3 different qualities available again, depending on an individuals download method.
This one in particular is for instructing people about the petition. This could save Larry speaking at a thousand meetings!!!
The Petition against Bradford's bill explained FAST BB
The Petition against Bradford's bill explained SLOW BB
The Petition against Bradford's bill explained 56K DIALUP
All the best
to your arm.
A couple of new videos on YouTube.com. Please send to all on your mailing list to get the word out. Thanks.
A new video has Larry Baldock explaining where we are with the petition against Bradford's Bill at the moment. The clip comes in three versions, fast and slow Broadband, and dialup 56k. See links below.
Petition against Bradfords Bill Larry Baldock Fast BB
Petition against Bradfords Bill Larry Baldock SLOW BB
Petition against Bradfords Bill Larry Baldock DIALUP 56K
ALSO...ALSO...from another source:
'Liar Liar' - Helen Clark lying through her teeth saying she is against banning smacking!
Thanks - and all strength to your arm.
Former Commissioner of Police on Bradfords Bill FAST BB
Former Commissioner of Police on Bradfords Bill SLOW BB
Former Commissioner of Police on Bradfords Bill 56K DIALUP
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - The Timaru Lady - 1 of 2
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - The Timaru Lady - 2 of 2
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - 1 of 5
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - 2 of 5
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - 3 of 5
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - 4 of 5
Criminalising Parents NZ Style - 5 of 5
Contains graphic images - need to be over 18 to view.
Criminalising Parents 56kbps - THE TIMARU LADY 1 of 2
Criminalising Parents 56kbps - THE TIMARU LADY 2 of 2
BRADFORD'S INTENTIONS AND THE COURTS - 56kbps
TWO SUCCESSIVE POLICE COMMISSIONERS HAVE AFFIRMED THAT, SHOULD SECTION 59 BE REPEALED, WHAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED TO BE REASONABLE FORCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CORRECTION, EG. SMACKING, WILL BE CONSIDERED ASSAULT BEFORE THE LAW, AND HENCE, OPEN TO PROSECUTION. Click on link below to see their responses:
BOB MCCOSKRIE'S INTERVIEW OF RUBY ON SHINE TV (for broadband) - 27min.
BOB MCCOSKRIE'S INTERVIEW OF RUBY ON SHINE TV (for dial up) - 27min.
THIS LINK WILL ENABLE YOU TO HEAR RUBY'S PUBLIC TALK GIVEN IN AUCKLAND ON MONDAY 31 JULY 2006 - 2hrs 8min
To hear the FORUM with Craig Smith, Sue Bradford and Peter Dunne, as broadcast on RADIO NZ's SPIRITUAL OUTLOOK PROGRAMME, click here, and then click the programme for 17 September 2006 - 24mins 33secs
Marc My Words: The NZ Family R.I.P. - Marc Alexander
Exposing the Real Culprit - Dr. Muriel Newman
1st reading to repeal Section 59 of the Crimes Act.
Wednesday 27 July 2005
65 MPs for
54 MPs against
Support for 1st reading:
The Maori Party
Two of NZ First's 13 MPs
Section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961 currently permits parents to administer moderate corporal punishment to correct their children's misbehaviour. Various groups contend that corporal punishment should be abolished. It is, they charge, ineffective, if not harmful. They invoke the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in support. Rex Ahdar and James Allan argue that the abolitionists' case is decidedly weak. The arguments for banning corporal punishment are philosophically suspect, linguistically strained and not supported by the rather limited research evidence. The authors conclude that the present law on parental smacking should remain.
*Faculty of Law, University of Otago.
re. Taking Smacking Seriously: The Case for Retaining the Legality of Parental Smacking in New Zealand
- Rex Ahdar & James Allan*
(Quote taken from this website - http://nzlawreview.auckland.ac.nz/01part1.html)
Family Integrity National Director Craig Smith addresses the issues surrounding the proposed repeal of Section 59 of the Crimes Act at a meeting on the North Shore, Friday 5 August 2005. This takes awhile to download. With slow jetstream it takes about 20 minutes, will take longer without jetsteam.
Proposed New Zealand Smacking Ban Arrogant and Clumsy
MYTHS IN THE SMACKING DEBATE
New Zealand Survey on Public Attitudes Towards the Physical Discipline of Children
Taking Smacking Seriously
Should New Zealand Ban Smacking?
Lawyer John Hancock's summary of Section 59 cases
The Parental Use of Physical Discipline in New Zealand
Email this page to a friend