Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NEW ZEALAND: Smacking kids faces ban by 2005
The Dominion Post, Wellington, NEW ZEALAND ^ | October 7 2003 | Leah Haines

Posted on 10/06/2003 1:28:45 PM PDT by shaggy eel

The [New Zealand] government has given the clearest indication yet that smacking children will be against the law in two years.

Facing stinging international criticism of New Zealand's stance on corporal punishment, Social Development Minister Steve Maharey said the law which permits "reasonable force" by adults against their children would be gone in two years.

New Zealand has consistently been criticised by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child for not repealing Section 59 of the Crimes Act. This section lets adults use reasonable force as a defence against child assault, but is not available as a defence against adults hitting adults.

Again this week, the UN committee expressed its "deep concern" that New Zealand had yet to ban all forms of corporal punishment. That followed Prime Minister Helen Clark's recent public backing for a repeal of Section 59.

But recent opinion polls suggest that more than 70 per cent of adults still believe it is okay to smack children and Mr Maharey has said New Zealand is not yet ready for the law to be changed.

Instead, the Government has provided $10 million for a two-year anti-smacking public education campaign.

Mr Maharey said the Cabinet had agreed to revisit Section 59 before the campaign's end, by which time he believed both the public and Parliament would be ready to amend the law.

In an effort to affect public perception before then, Government ministers have begun changing the way they talk about the repeal of Section 59, insisting that it is not a smacking ban.

They say parents would not be criminalised for disciplining their children, but that adults would no longer be able to escape conviction on charges of child assault by pleading reasonable force.

Meanwhile, New Zealand First MP Brian Donnelly has written a private member's bill that bans hitting a child around the head or using implements to punish them.

And the Greens have drafted a new bill repealing Section 59 altogether, saying that allowing children to be smacked added to the culture of abuse in New Zealand.

Both member's bills would need to be drawn from a ballot held every second Wednesday before they could be debated.

ACT has also lashed out at the UN for espousing idealism "that is unrealistic in our world".

"If the UN wants to tell us what to do, then it should at least come to New Zealand and see things first-hand," Social Welfare spokeswoman Muriel Newman said.


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: discipline; newzealand
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: The Other Harry
A dog (whose intelligence I believe is that of an 18 month to 2 year old child)....has a memory of about 6 seconds (if I recall correctly.) I get sick of seing parents and dog owners who think they can discipline their baby/dog by having them COME to them, and then SMACK them...YOU are correct, you have to get them in the act. And, REWARD for GOOD behavior is the KEY, also....I rarely ever struck my son...he KNEW my WORD was good....too many parents today say "I'm gonna....." but never follow through.
41 posted on 10/06/2003 2:06:14 PM PDT by goodnesswins (Free People are NOT Equal; EQUAL People are NOT FREE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
What about that locked dark closet, with all those scary sounds? After a few hours, they're really calmed down....

,,, closets have pink overtones - too cruel. Quite possibly, that routine would be UN endorsed.

42 posted on 10/06/2003 2:06:18 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tai_Chung
The United States has ample laws that protect children.

We do not have any need to subject our parenting methods to the approval of Syria, India, Botswana, Libya, or China.

43 posted on 10/06/2003 2:07:32 PM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Article 37(a) Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age
I think this was one of the problems the US had with the convention.
44 posted on 10/06/2003 2:08:44 PM PDT by anguish (while science catches up.... mysticism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: anguish
,,, thanx.
45 posted on 10/06/2003 2:10:54 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: The Other Harry
You have to deliver the swat right when they are right in the process of doing the act you wish to discourage. It also does not need to be painful. Loud is good, however.

Reminds me of the greatest act of discipline I've ever winessed. I was tutoring a college classmate at her home, and her 3 kids (6, 8, and 10) wanted some attention from the stranger in the house. The minor interruptions continued for about 30 minutes until she'd finally had enough. The evil abusive overlord in her came streaming out, she turned on the shocked children and, in that authoritative voice, declared, "All RIGHT! That's ENOUGH! Now you kids GET in the living room, SIT on the couch and WATCH cartoons until I bring you your ice cream!" I sat in stunned silence, as the kids, defeated, dejected, and broken, sullenly waddled into the living room, never to peep again until their ice cream was delivered.

(Why couldn't MY parents have punished ME like that?!? Oh, yeah, that's right, we had set the couch on fire.)

New Zealand will be outlawing the practice of the emotionally crippling "cartoons-and-ice-cream abuse" any day now.

46 posted on 10/06/2003 2:15:03 PM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Unfortunately, they will put this in place, but permit sex between consenting children and adults.
47 posted on 10/06/2003 2:27:30 PM PDT by NavyCaptain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annyokie
When soap didn't work she switched to Vinegar. That did the trick.
48 posted on 10/06/2003 2:28:57 PM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: NavyCaptain
,,, I'm sure you're right. It's like cutting bread until the loaf's gone - a slice at a time.
49 posted on 10/06/2003 2:31:59 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Brian Allen; Piquaboy; New Zealander; Neophyte; spitz
ping
50 posted on 10/06/2003 2:33:39 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Unfortunately, I probably am correct!
51 posted on 10/06/2003 2:40:11 PM PDT by NavyCaptain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: The Other Harry
It also does not need to be painful.

I agree with everything you said except that statement. When the swat is painful, the threat alone will usually suffice from that point on. My ex took your method, and spent lots of wasted time swatting our daughter over many years. I wanted to make a lasting impression, and three swats, causing a slightly reddened rear end, worked well enough that I never had to do it again, ever.

After that, sweet reason was almost always effective, and even threats were rarely needed. Mama's ineffectual but often administered swats were a waste of time.

52 posted on 10/06/2003 3:01:08 PM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel

53 posted on 10/06/2003 4:14:49 PM PDT by 4mycountry (magni nominis umbra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4mycountry
,,, some things deserve a smack...


54 posted on 10/06/2003 4:21:02 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: The Other Harry
A smack on the face, however, is never called for.

Disagree. I personally know of a slap to the face that worked wonders on a young daughter with a disrespectful mouth. The mouth never uttered similar language and no further slapping was ever necessary.

55 posted on 10/06/2003 5:01:12 PM PDT by NoControllingLegalAuthority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority
I do think hitting around the face and head is seen as child abuse in this country, check the definitions. And to deal with disrespect on the part of a kid by slapping them in the face, well, that seems to be something other than discipline. I have trouble understanding why parents, because of their relationship with a child, should feel free to do something that if any other adult did to one's child would be regarded as an assault. In my experience, a voice that caused the kids to stop and was strong, sure and meant I meant business worked every time. I was hit as a child and it did nothing for me but estrange me from the adults in my life. I knew it was wrong then, it put a distance between my father and me that never ended. I did not want him to touch me and never touched him again. This can be the result of hitting. And it wasn't beating, it only occurred a couple of times but the scars are deep and lifelong. Children can have very long memories.
56 posted on 10/06/2003 5:16:21 PM PDT by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
I'd like to slap government in the face...
57 posted on 10/06/2003 6:19:25 PM PDT by cyborg (kliek hier for maximum zottage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
I'd like to slap government in the face...

"But recent opinion polls suggest that more than 70 per cent of adults still believe it is okay to smack children"

,,, it looks like the voters will smack 'em in the face next election. This is one of a few issues they're screwing up, big time.

58 posted on 10/06/2003 6:28:22 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Monday 6 Oct 2003
Stephen Franks
Press Releases -- Crime & Justice
(view HTML version at: http://www.act.org.nz/item.jsp?id=24761 )

"When Attorney-General Margaret Wilson dumps our right of appeal to the Privy Council, to assert New Zealand's independence and maturity from colonialism, will she now set us free from the UN committee telling us we must increase the age of criminal responsibility?", ACT New Zealand Justice Spokesman Stephen Franks said today.

"New Zealanders are sick and tired of seeing so-called `children' get away with crimes of adult brutality."

"The last thing we need is foreigners - from countries with no respect for our traditions of freedom - telling decent parents how to raise their children."

"Will the Attorney-General and Prime Minister Helen Clark now show independence by rejecting the UN calls - or would that put the Prime Minister's hopes of an international job at risk?" Mr Franks said.

59 posted on 10/07/2003 7:37:11 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Monday 6 Oct 2003
Dr Muriel Newman
Press Releases -- Social Welfare
(view HTML version at: http://www.act.org.nz/item.jsp?id=24771 )

The UN call for the smacking of children to be outlawed in New Zealand shows just how out of touch with New Zealand society the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child actually is, ACT New Zealand Social Welfare Spokesman Dr Muriel Newman said today.

"This Committee sits in Geneva and writes reports on how countries should address their problems, but offers no realistic suggestions on how to implement these changes," Dr Newman said.

"For example, the report advocates banning `all corporal punishment against children', in order to lower our child abuse rate. Child abuse is already illegal, but abusers disregard the law - banning smacking will simply stop responsible parents disciplining their children, while the abusers continue to harm their children.

"We receive report after report - based on an idealism that is unrealistic in the real world - which criticise our handling of these issues, ignore the steps we have taken and offer no helpful solutions.

"It is time this Committee stepped out of its ivory tower. If the UN wants to tell us what to do, then it should at least come to New Zealand and see things firsthand - perhaps then it might come up with something practical," Dr Newman said.

60 posted on 10/07/2003 7:41:29 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson