Upcoming activities:
"The Great New Zealand Table Challenge"
http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/table-challenge.html
List of tables/door-knocking campaigns:
Rodney: Anna Mountain is back in the country and is about to weave some more of her magic, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/rodney.html.
North Shore: a lot of work is happening behind the scenes, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/northshore.html.
Manurewa: is about to fire, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/manurewa.html.
Pukekohe: locals are taking ownership, good stuff
Waiuku: about to fire as well
Hawkes Bay: venues have been confirmed, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/hawkesbay.html.
Feilding:
Christchurch: the tables are continuing and there are volunteers beginning to put up there hands, remember the table at the A&P Show, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/chch.html.
Catlins: some good ideas here, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/catlins.html.
Again all coordinators need volunteers, if you have a spare day it won't be wasted, it's for the future of your children.
Thursday, 8 November 2007
Wednesday, 7 November 2007
Deconstructing America
Dear All,
In case you haven't seen the YouTube videos "Deconstructing America" I would like to bring them to your attention.
The American society faces the same problems that we have had in Sweden since the beginning of the 1970's under Olof Palme and his social democrats and that you are seeing more and more of in New Zealand - the removal of parental authority, banning of critical lawyers, the child care industry etc.
See Deconstructing America Part 1
and Deconstructing America Part 2
Pleasant viewing!
Sincerely
Ruby
http://www.nkmr.org/english/
In case you haven't seen the YouTube videos "Deconstructing America" I would like to bring them to your attention.
The American society faces the same problems that we have had in Sweden since the beginning of the 1970's under Olof Palme and his social democrats and that you are seeing more and more of in New Zealand - the removal of parental authority, banning of critical lawyers, the child care industry etc.
See Deconstructing America Part 1
and Deconstructing America Part 2
Pleasant viewing!
Sincerely
Ruby
http://www.nkmr.org/english/
FI -304
7 November 2007 - Family Integrity #304 -- Unity for Liberty: all good news
Forwarded message for your information.
Craig Smith
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 9:44 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: Unity for Liberty: all good news
Hi All,
It's been a Great start to the Challenge, and the best news is that it is still building. There is a a lot of information so I am going to as brief as I can.
Firstly, we still would like to see more volunteers. If you have a free Saturday let us know so we can plan ahead. This will make it much easier for our hard working coordinators, remember *2500 people x 10 signatures per Saturday = 100,000* and then we can all have Christmas off.
The web site has been updated with and now has a Photo Gallery with tables from around the country, some good ideas, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/photos.html.
Here's a testimony from Renton, we'll be adding him to the gallery when we receive some photos.
Hi Guys,
Got about 80 signatures by myself this morning at a market in 2½ hours. They will be in the mail later.Found the best call to get attention was:"Stop parents being made criminals for correcting their kids. Sign the petitions."
Had two signs up which could be read at a distance with:
the wording of the two petition questions
the statement: 'Sign the petitions!'
the statement : 'Did you know? Parents are now criminals for correcting their kids.'
When a person came to the table I would point to the two questions and say: "Two petitions to sign."
If they asked what they were about, I would say: "Should a smack be a criminal offence? If you answer 'no', then sign.", and "Should the Government look for the REAL causes of violence in families?"
Renton
Not sure of the last Saturday count, the good news is that our petition page is the most popular exit page on the web site. This would indicate that the petition form is being downloaded.
Confirmed results:
Christchurch - 222 signatures in 7 hours - big thanks to our two new volunteers!!!
Howick - 420 signatures
Papakura - 400 signatures
Pukekoe - 170 signatures
Tauranga - 160 signatures
Porirua - 80 signatures
Hawkes Bay - 223 signatures
Remember that this does not include different individuals who I know have been collecting quietly. They are out there.
There's been a Signature Bomb, A lovely couple from Fielding have registered, they have 500 signatures that they are about to send in(this is over and above Saturdays count). There will be other signature bombs out there.
Our coordinator of the week goes to Natalie from the Catlins, (trivia, how many Aucklander's know the location of Catlins? Clue- it's on the other side of the Bombay).
U4L encourages all to get in behind her, she's a gem and you will enjoy her enthusiasm and has some good ideas. She has not got the population to work with like we have in Auckland, so every 10 signatures it's probably worth 100 of ours, and she is not deterred.
Upcoming activities:
Rodney: Anna Mountain is back in the country and is about to weave some more of her magic, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/rodney.html.
North Shore: a lot of work is happening behind the scenes, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/northshore.html.
Manurewa: is about to fire, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/manurewa.html.
Pukekohe: locals are taking ownership, good stuff
Waiuku: about to fire as well
Hawkes Bay: venues have been confirmed, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/hawkesbay.html.
Christchurch: the tables are continuing and there are volunteers beginning to put up there hands, remember the table at the A&P Show, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/chch.html.
Catlins: some good ideas here, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/catlins.html.
Again all coordinators need volunteers, if you have a spare day it won't be wasted, it's for the future of your children.
Thanks, there are some wonderful folk out there.
Craig Hill
021746113
http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz
Remember, "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing" (Edmund Burke 1729-1797)
Forwarded message for your information.
Craig Smith
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 9:44 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: Unity for Liberty: all good news
Hi All,
It's been a Great start to the Challenge, and the best news is that it is still building. There is a a lot of information so I am going to as brief as I can.
Firstly, we still would like to see more volunteers. If you have a free Saturday let us know so we can plan ahead. This will make it much easier for our hard working coordinators, remember *2500 people x 10 signatures per Saturday = 100,000* and then we can all have Christmas off.
The web site has been updated with and now has a Photo Gallery with tables from around the country, some good ideas, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/photos.html.
Here's a testimony from Renton, we'll be adding him to the gallery when we receive some photos.
Hi Guys,
Got about 80 signatures by myself this morning at a market in 2½ hours. They will be in the mail later.Found the best call to get attention was:"Stop parents being made criminals for correcting their kids. Sign the petitions."
Had two signs up which could be read at a distance with:
the wording of the two petition questions
the statement: 'Sign the petitions!'
the statement : 'Did you know? Parents are now criminals for correcting their kids.'
When a person came to the table I would point to the two questions and say: "Two petitions to sign."
If they asked what they were about, I would say: "Should a smack be a criminal offence? If you answer 'no', then sign.", and "Should the Government look for the REAL causes of violence in families?"
Renton
Not sure of the last Saturday count, the good news is that our petition page is the most popular exit page on the web site. This would indicate that the petition form is being downloaded.
Confirmed results:
Christchurch - 222 signatures in 7 hours - big thanks to our two new volunteers!!!
Howick - 420 signatures
Papakura - 400 signatures
Pukekoe - 170 signatures
Tauranga - 160 signatures
Porirua - 80 signatures
Hawkes Bay - 223 signatures
Remember that this does not include different individuals who I know have been collecting quietly. They are out there.
There's been a Signature Bomb, A lovely couple from Fielding have registered, they have 500 signatures that they are about to send in(this is over and above Saturdays count). There will be other signature bombs out there.
Our coordinator of the week goes to Natalie from the Catlins, (trivia, how many Aucklander's know the location of Catlins? Clue- it's on the other side of the Bombay).
U4L encourages all to get in behind her, she's a gem and you will enjoy her enthusiasm and has some good ideas. She has not got the population to work with like we have in Auckland, so every 10 signatures it's probably worth 100 of ours, and she is not deterred.
Upcoming activities:
Rodney: Anna Mountain is back in the country and is about to weave some more of her magic, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/rodney.html.
North Shore: a lot of work is happening behind the scenes, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/northshore.html.
Manurewa: is about to fire, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/manurewa.html.
Pukekohe: locals are taking ownership, good stuff
Waiuku: about to fire as well
Hawkes Bay: venues have been confirmed, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/hawkesbay.html.
Christchurch: the tables are continuing and there are volunteers beginning to put up there hands, remember the table at the A&P Show, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/chch.html.
Catlins: some good ideas here, please click here http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/locations/catlins.html.
Again all coordinators need volunteers, if you have a spare day it won't be wasted, it's for the future of your children.
Thanks, there are some wonderful folk out there.
Craig Hill
021746113
http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz
Remember, "All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing" (Edmund Burke 1729-1797)
Tuesday, 6 November 2007
FI - 303
6 November 2007 - Family Integrity #303 -- a return to caning
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article2800904.ece
African cane tames unruly British pupilsTristan McConnell, Accra
Scores of British school children are being sent away to take their GCSEs in Ghana, exchanging truancy and gang culture for traditional teaching and strong discipline, including the cane. “When I was in London I was bad basically,” said Abena, 16, from Hackney, east London, with braces on her teeth and a swagger in her step.
“I stopped going to school and in my head I was, like, thinking money, money, money.”
Dispatched to Africa, far from the world of gangs, theft and knife crime, she found herself at the Faith Montessori boarding school in Accra, Ghana’s capital, where the fees are £1,200 a year.
Most of the school’s expatriate children spend holidays with relatives or guardians in Ghana, returning to Britain once a year. During term time they live in dormitories 10 to a room.
For the parents it is a chance to save their children from the thuggery that has seen 21 teenagers shot or stabbed to death in London alone this year. Abena and three other British pupils at her school now believe they are receiving a rigorous education that was lacking in Britain.
“When your friends know that you’ve gone to Ghana they know that you’re going to get straightened up,” said Sienam, 17, from Edgware, north London, who has been at school in Accra for three years.
“I used to be really bad,” he said, muttering about gangs and the kind of playground violence that he has put behind him. “When my friends in London see that I’ve changed it wakes them up a little bit. I get respect but in a different way.”
According to Oswald Amoo-Gottfried, the school’s founder and director, the key to the success of pupils such as Sienam is the kind of discipline that has long since fallen out of fashion in Britain. “I believe in caning,” he declared. “I tell the parents: if you don’t want your child punished, then your child doesn’t belong here.”
His school is quiet, the atmosphere studious. The youngest children sit in neat sailor suits; older pupils wear blue shorts and white shirts, while the senior students dress in smart trousers and T-shirts emblazoned with the school badge.
In one classroom 30 pupils are arranged in rows of desks facing their male teacher and the white board. They remain silent until asked a question.
Amoo-Gottfried is a friendly faced disciplinarian who has seen more than 20 London children of African parentage pass through his school in the past five years.
“Children must be taught. You don’t sit down and discuss directions with a child – you tell them where to go,” he said. Children are beaten for misbehaving or failing to do home-work, but not for poor results.
Sienam admitted that he had been caned “many, many times” by his teachers in Ghana. “Any time you do something you know you shouldn’t do or step out of line, you get caned,” he said. The cane “works to some extent”, he conceded.
Isaac, 17, from Norwood, in southeast London, said he became involved in gangs and stealing before his parents sent him to Ghana. After four years at school in Accra he is softly spoken and articulate and hopes to sit international GCSEs at the end of this academic year before returning to Britain for A-levels.
When they first arrive the teen-agers are often “a lot wilder”, said Amoo-Gottfried, but with time and discipline they become “domesticated”. He puts the troubles of the British pupils down to a lack of good role models - a reason many West Indian families cite for sending their children to school back home.
“In London father has run off to work early in the morning, mother the same. So you find the children left to themselves and, as they say, the devil finds work for idle hands. Here they see professional people – lawyers, doctors – whereas in the UK most of the Ghanaians are blue-collar workers.”
The list of consistent A, B and C grades on a results sheet pinned to the notice board is a source of pride and several of Amoo-Gottfried’s former pupils are now at British universities.
Michelle Asante, 23, attended Archbishop Porter girls’ school in Takoradi, Ghana, and went on to complete a sociology degree at Sheffield University before going to drama school.
“The school I was attending in Plumstead [southeast London] wasn’t great and my mum felt I wasn’t being challenged. There was a lot of fighting,” said Asante, who is now an actress. “Education is so important in Ghana – people take it as their only means of escaping poverty. With education you can do anything, no matter how poor you are.”
The pupils at Faith Montessori agree discipline in Africa can be tough but also see their lives changing for the better. Abena and “the London boys”, which includes James, 16, from Edmon-ton Green, north London, also admit that while they are benefiting from a Ghanaian education, they miss home and look forward to going back to A-levels and university.The years of mischief are behind them, Isaac said: “What gets you respect over there is disgrace over here.”
Additional reporting: Sara Hashash
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article2800904.ece
African cane tames unruly British pupilsTristan McConnell, Accra
Scores of British school children are being sent away to take their GCSEs in Ghana, exchanging truancy and gang culture for traditional teaching and strong discipline, including the cane. “When I was in London I was bad basically,” said Abena, 16, from Hackney, east London, with braces on her teeth and a swagger in her step.
“I stopped going to school and in my head I was, like, thinking money, money, money.”
Dispatched to Africa, far from the world of gangs, theft and knife crime, she found herself at the Faith Montessori boarding school in Accra, Ghana’s capital, where the fees are £1,200 a year.
Most of the school’s expatriate children spend holidays with relatives or guardians in Ghana, returning to Britain once a year. During term time they live in dormitories 10 to a room.
For the parents it is a chance to save their children from the thuggery that has seen 21 teenagers shot or stabbed to death in London alone this year. Abena and three other British pupils at her school now believe they are receiving a rigorous education that was lacking in Britain.
“When your friends know that you’ve gone to Ghana they know that you’re going to get straightened up,” said Sienam, 17, from Edgware, north London, who has been at school in Accra for three years.
“I used to be really bad,” he said, muttering about gangs and the kind of playground violence that he has put behind him. “When my friends in London see that I’ve changed it wakes them up a little bit. I get respect but in a different way.”
According to Oswald Amoo-Gottfried, the school’s founder and director, the key to the success of pupils such as Sienam is the kind of discipline that has long since fallen out of fashion in Britain. “I believe in caning,” he declared. “I tell the parents: if you don’t want your child punished, then your child doesn’t belong here.”
His school is quiet, the atmosphere studious. The youngest children sit in neat sailor suits; older pupils wear blue shorts and white shirts, while the senior students dress in smart trousers and T-shirts emblazoned with the school badge.
In one classroom 30 pupils are arranged in rows of desks facing their male teacher and the white board. They remain silent until asked a question.
Amoo-Gottfried is a friendly faced disciplinarian who has seen more than 20 London children of African parentage pass through his school in the past five years.
“Children must be taught. You don’t sit down and discuss directions with a child – you tell them where to go,” he said. Children are beaten for misbehaving or failing to do home-work, but not for poor results.
Sienam admitted that he had been caned “many, many times” by his teachers in Ghana. “Any time you do something you know you shouldn’t do or step out of line, you get caned,” he said. The cane “works to some extent”, he conceded.
Isaac, 17, from Norwood, in southeast London, said he became involved in gangs and stealing before his parents sent him to Ghana. After four years at school in Accra he is softly spoken and articulate and hopes to sit international GCSEs at the end of this academic year before returning to Britain for A-levels.
When they first arrive the teen-agers are often “a lot wilder”, said Amoo-Gottfried, but with time and discipline they become “domesticated”. He puts the troubles of the British pupils down to a lack of good role models - a reason many West Indian families cite for sending their children to school back home.
“In London father has run off to work early in the morning, mother the same. So you find the children left to themselves and, as they say, the devil finds work for idle hands. Here they see professional people – lawyers, doctors – whereas in the UK most of the Ghanaians are blue-collar workers.”
The list of consistent A, B and C grades on a results sheet pinned to the notice board is a source of pride and several of Amoo-Gottfried’s former pupils are now at British universities.
Michelle Asante, 23, attended Archbishop Porter girls’ school in Takoradi, Ghana, and went on to complete a sociology degree at Sheffield University before going to drama school.
“The school I was attending in Plumstead [southeast London] wasn’t great and my mum felt I wasn’t being challenged. There was a lot of fighting,” said Asante, who is now an actress. “Education is so important in Ghana – people take it as their only means of escaping poverty. With education you can do anything, no matter how poor you are.”
The pupils at Faith Montessori agree discipline in Africa can be tough but also see their lives changing for the better. Abena and “the London boys”, which includes James, 16, from Edmon-ton Green, north London, also admit that while they are benefiting from a Ghanaian education, they miss home and look forward to going back to A-levels and university.The years of mischief are behind them, Isaac said: “What gets you respect over there is disgrace over here.”
Additional reporting: Sara Hashash
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
Friday, 2 November 2007
FI - 302
1 November 2007 - Family Integrity #302 -- U4L: well done Chuck & Tom
Greetings all,
If we all did collect a simple 10 signatures each week, what a difference it would make.
Regards,
Craig Smith
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:43 AM
To: Craig
Subject: U4L: well done Chuck & Tom
Hi All,
Hope you're having a fantastic week and enjoying the weather!
Here's the magic equation again,
2500 people x 10 signatures x 4 Saturdays of November = 100,000 and we're done.
Now the goal posts have moved closer...
It is now 2498 people x 10 signatures x 4 Saturdays of November
Two wonderful elderly gentlemen took to the streets of Papakura, at their table they collected 90 signatures in just 2 hours.
THEY WERE BOTH HOME FOR LUNCH
Where have all the true blue Kiwis gone? There are so few people who are prepared to commit some time to this important issue that it is not funny.
Well done Chuck and Tom, and whats even better is that they are both doing it again.
Chuck and Tom have just shown us all how easy it can be to collect signatures...
...it takes me back to when a young man made a very pertinent comment.
"IF I DON'T SIGN I CAN'T COMPLAIN"
My message to all recipients is
As both Chuck and Tom have discovered there is a HARVEST of signatures out there - and it isn't hard to get them, we just need the people.
I ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO CONTACT YOUR CLOSEST COORDINATORS AND JOIN THE FUN
List of tables/door-knocking campaigns:
NORTH ISLAND
Auckland:
Northshore http://unityforliberty.net.nz/northshore.html
Howick http://unityforliberty.net.nz/howick.html
Papakura http://unityforliberty.net.nz/papakura.html
Pukekoe
Manurewa
Waiuku
Tauranga http://unityforliberty.net.nz/tauranga.html
Hawke's Bay http://unityforliberty.net.nz/hawkesbay.html
Marton http://unityforliberty.net.nz/marton.html
Wellington http://unityforliberty.net.nz/wellington.html
SOUTH ISLAND
Christchurch http://unityforliberty.net.nz/chch.html
Catlins http://unityforliberty.net.nz/catlins.html
Please read this Hi from a couple of hard working GEMS
(Salt if the Earth)
Hi from Graeme and Jean
"Marton is holding a market day on 10th November from 9am to 1pm. We have booked a table to collect signatures. If there is anyone in our area please come and give us a hand. We have already collected over 1500 signatures but have not been actively collecting since the bill went through but would like to make another good effort. To contact us please email through craig@unityforliberty.net.nz."
"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
Kindest Regards,
Craig Hill
021746113
http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz
Greetings all,
If we all did collect a simple 10 signatures each week, what a difference it would make.
Regards,
Craig Smith
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:43 AM
To: Craig
Subject: U4L: well done Chuck & Tom
Hi All,
Hope you're having a fantastic week and enjoying the weather!
Here's the magic equation again,
2500 people x 10 signatures x 4 Saturdays of November = 100,000 and we're done.
Now the goal posts have moved closer...
It is now 2498 people x 10 signatures x 4 Saturdays of November
Two wonderful elderly gentlemen took to the streets of Papakura, at their table they collected 90 signatures in just 2 hours.
THEY WERE BOTH HOME FOR LUNCH
Where have all the true blue Kiwis gone? There are so few people who are prepared to commit some time to this important issue that it is not funny.
Well done Chuck and Tom, and whats even better is that they are both doing it again.
Chuck and Tom have just shown us all how easy it can be to collect signatures...
...it takes me back to when a young man made a very pertinent comment.
"IF I DON'T SIGN I CAN'T COMPLAIN"
My message to all recipients is
As both Chuck and Tom have discovered there is a HARVEST of signatures out there - and it isn't hard to get them, we just need the people.
I ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO CONTACT YOUR CLOSEST COORDINATORS AND JOIN THE FUN
List of tables/door-knocking campaigns:
NORTH ISLAND
Auckland:
Northshore http://unityforliberty.net.nz/northshore.html
Howick http://unityforliberty.net.nz/howick.html
Papakura http://unityforliberty.net.nz/papakura.html
Pukekoe
Manurewa
Waiuku
Tauranga http://unityforliberty.net.nz/tauranga.html
Hawke's Bay http://unityforliberty.net.nz/hawkesbay.html
Marton http://unityforliberty.net.nz/marton.html
Wellington http://unityforliberty.net.nz/wellington.html
SOUTH ISLAND
Christchurch http://unityforliberty.net.nz/chch.html
Catlins http://unityforliberty.net.nz/catlins.html
Please read this Hi from a couple of hard working GEMS
(Salt if the Earth)
Hi from Graeme and Jean
"Marton is holding a market day on 10th November from 9am to 1pm. We have booked a table to collect signatures. If there is anyone in our area please come and give us a hand. We have already collected over 1500 signatures but have not been actively collecting since the bill went through but would like to make another good effort. To contact us please email through craig@unityforliberty.net.nz."
"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
Kindest Regards,
Craig Hill
021746113
http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz
Thursday, 1 November 2007
Blog
Great Blog from:
http://edwatch.blogspot.com/2007/11/new-zealand-school-incriminates-mother.html
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
http://edwatch.blogspot.com/2007/11/new-zealand-school-incriminates-mother.html
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
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
Media
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0710/S00389.htm
New Psychological Testing of Children is Abusive
Sunday, 28 October 2007, 1:38 pm
Press Release: Citizens Commission on Human Rights
Citizens Commission On Human Rights New Zealand Established in 1969 by the Church of Scientology to investigate and expose psychiatric violations of human rights
New Psychological Testing of Children is Abusive
The Citizens Commission on Human Rights are warning people about behavioural screening programmes for children and the use of drugs for learning disorders in an exhibition now on.
Commission director, Mr Steve Green is concerned about the new “b4 school checks” pilot programme currently being advertised by the Counties Manukau District Health Board because of their psychological screening component for four-year-olds.
“People are not aware that these psychological screening programmes are not based on medicine and the assessments often lead to treatment of fictitious mental disorders,” Mr Green said.
The Commission said that the psychological testing of four-year-old for behavioural problems to be used by the “b4 school check” programme is a five-minute checklist a parent fills out.
Such tests, the Commission claims, are unscientific as they claim that a small child who cannot stay still for long and who fidgets is abnormal.
The Goodman Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire is the one being used in the “b4 school check” for psychological and behavioural problems and its results can be wildly out with over 50% of children apparently abnormal, the Commission claims.
The Commission fully supports the actual health checks for the “b4 school checks” but says the psychological testing stigmatizes children with mental disorders that in reality do not exist.
“These labels stay with a person for ever and most people are not aware that mental disorders are voted into being by a panel of psychiatrists at a convention. There are no scientific or medical tests that support mental illness or disorders,” said Mr Green.
He also said that psychiatry has no test for normal behaviour and so the abnormal can be cultural and language differences which are not taken into account.
Ends
New Psychological Testing of Children is Abusive
Sunday, 28 October 2007, 1:38 pm
Press Release: Citizens Commission on Human Rights
Citizens Commission On Human Rights New Zealand Established in 1969 by the Church of Scientology to investigate and expose psychiatric violations of human rights
New Psychological Testing of Children is Abusive
The Citizens Commission on Human Rights are warning people about behavioural screening programmes for children and the use of drugs for learning disorders in an exhibition now on.
Commission director, Mr Steve Green is concerned about the new “b4 school checks” pilot programme currently being advertised by the Counties Manukau District Health Board because of their psychological screening component for four-year-olds.
“People are not aware that these psychological screening programmes are not based on medicine and the assessments often lead to treatment of fictitious mental disorders,” Mr Green said.
The Commission said that the psychological testing of four-year-old for behavioural problems to be used by the “b4 school check” programme is a five-minute checklist a parent fills out.
Such tests, the Commission claims, are unscientific as they claim that a small child who cannot stay still for long and who fidgets is abnormal.
The Goodman Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire is the one being used in the “b4 school check” for psychological and behavioural problems and its results can be wildly out with over 50% of children apparently abnormal, the Commission claims.
The Commission fully supports the actual health checks for the “b4 school checks” but says the psychological testing stigmatizes children with mental disorders that in reality do not exist.
“These labels stay with a person for ever and most people are not aware that mental disorders are voted into being by a panel of psychiatrists at a convention. There are no scientific or medical tests that support mental illness or disorders,” said Mr Green.
He also said that psychiatry has no test for normal behaviour and so the abnormal can be cultural and language differences which are not taken into account.
Ends
Media
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0710/S00389.htm
Children's Commissioner backs charter
Tuesday, 30 October 2007, 11:36 am
Press Release: Office of the Children's Commissioner
Children's Commissioner backs charter for children and young people in care
As a champion for the rights of every child and young person in New Zealand, Children's Commissioner Dr Cindy Kiro supports the charter for children and young people in care, launched by Child, Youth and Family (CYF) today.
"The development of this charter and its implementation plan shows Child, Youth and Family's commitment to ensuring that children and young peoples' rights are promoted and protected while they are in care.
"My office has heard directly from children and young people in care that they want a pamphlet on their rights and they want to know who to talk with if they have concerns or complaints.
"Four young people spoke at the Australasian Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect, hosted by my office in February last year (2006). When asked what children and young people in care need in order to blossom, they identified four important areas that required attention. These are: stigma, rights, resilience and stability.
"One of the speakers pointed out that the care system is there to protect them from others, not others from them.
"Being placed in care can be an extremely traumatic time for children and young people. I support them in their desire to have up-to-date information about their rights and about what to do if they are not happy with their situation. It is important that we listen when children and young people voice their opinions and that they can see the powerful effect they can have on policy and practice when they do.
"I believe it is important that all children and young people in New Zealand are aware that they have individual rights, as per the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC).
"I commend CYF on its implementation plan that allows for all children and young people to receive a copy of the charter as they come into care; for those already in care to have a meeting with their social worker to explain what the charter means to them; and for all caregivers to be made aware of the charter as well. I believe this process will be valuable in developing a relationship of trust that children and young people in care must have with their social worker.
"We are keen to see the charter work in tandem with a youth-friendly complaints process.
"We would also like to see the charter embodied in the legislation to give it even more strength to ensure children and young people in care enjoy good health, education, safety and adequate resources and opportunities to develop to their full potential."
ends
Children's Commissioner backs charter
Tuesday, 30 October 2007, 11:36 am
Press Release: Office of the Children's Commissioner
Children's Commissioner backs charter for children and young people in care
As a champion for the rights of every child and young person in New Zealand, Children's Commissioner Dr Cindy Kiro supports the charter for children and young people in care, launched by Child, Youth and Family (CYF) today.
"The development of this charter and its implementation plan shows Child, Youth and Family's commitment to ensuring that children and young peoples' rights are promoted and protected while they are in care.
"My office has heard directly from children and young people in care that they want a pamphlet on their rights and they want to know who to talk with if they have concerns or complaints.
"Four young people spoke at the Australasian Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect, hosted by my office in February last year (2006). When asked what children and young people in care need in order to blossom, they identified four important areas that required attention. These are: stigma, rights, resilience and stability.
"One of the speakers pointed out that the care system is there to protect them from others, not others from them.
"Being placed in care can be an extremely traumatic time for children and young people. I support them in their desire to have up-to-date information about their rights and about what to do if they are not happy with their situation. It is important that we listen when children and young people voice their opinions and that they can see the powerful effect they can have on policy and practice when they do.
"I believe it is important that all children and young people in New Zealand are aware that they have individual rights, as per the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC).
"I commend CYF on its implementation plan that allows for all children and young people to receive a copy of the charter as they come into care; for those already in care to have a meeting with their social worker to explain what the charter means to them; and for all caregivers to be made aware of the charter as well. I believe this process will be valuable in developing a relationship of trust that children and young people in care must have with their social worker.
"We are keen to see the charter work in tandem with a youth-friendly complaints process.
"We would also like to see the charter embodied in the legislation to give it even more strength to ensure children and young people in care enjoy good health, education, safety and adequate resources and opportunities to develop to their full potential."
ends
Monday, 29 October 2007
FI - 301
29 October 2007 - Family Integrity #301 -- Bloggers make salient points
Dear Friends,
Here are some insightful comments from bloggers about the mum who was FOR Bradford's bill and has now become a victim of the bill.
Regards,
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
From: http://nzconservative.blogspot.com/2007/10/it-has-started.html
New Zealand Conservative
Sunday, October 28, 2007
It has started
Front page of today's Sunday Star Times: School dobs mum to CYF for smacking son's hand. 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?
From: http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/bradford-attacking-the-friends-of-section-59-repeal/
Bradford Attacking the Friends of Section 59 Repeal
Oct 28th, 2007 by scrubone
Here's a woman who one would presume to be in the small minority of parents who supported the smacking ban law. She was clearly fooled by Sue Bradford saying things like this:
"My experience over the last two years of campaigning for the repeal of s59 of the Crimes Act has revealed to me personally that too many New Zealanders see children as being their property."
[the bill is]..."a necessary step in a complex process of weaning our society away from a culture of violence and abuse of our children."
..."we view children as second class citizens not deserving of the same rights and protections as adults."
"I reject absolutely the idea that parents have a God-given right to beat the evil out of their kids."
(Pretending the opposition to the bill was just religious extremism was a very common tactic. )
They [The Auckland District Law Society] suggest that, rather than outright repeal, the degree and nature of acceptable violence against children can be calibrated - e.g. by saying that it is okay to use force against three to twelve-year-olds and that there should be no 'striking above the shoulder'. I believe all children have the right to live in violence-free homes.
"My Bill to repeal Section 59 aims to remove the defence of reasonable force from parents who badly beat their children, often with weapons that leave permanent physical injury."
"Those who perpetrate the abuse and successfully apply section 59 as their defence remain unaccountable to our justice system."
That's a selection of quotes from this post.
Clearly, this woman would never have thought of herself as "seeing children as her property", or propagating a "culture of violence" or viewing her kids as "second class citizens". She never thought that she would be treated the same was as parents who "who badly beat their children, often with weapons that leave permanent physical injury".
No, she was and remains a good parent. She never imagined she would be placed in the above categories.
But now she has. She's been reduced to a state of fear, afraid of the Government using it's power to remove her children.
She was not afraid because she supported Sue Bradford, believed her statements, but discovered too late the nature of propaganda - whipping up hatred against a non-existent threat, to disguise the real effect. By doing this Sue managed to get get many victims of the law to support it.
But even worse, while opponents saw the curtain of state infiltration into families dropping and took proper precautions, this poor woman kept doing what good parents do, never thinking that someday she might be the target of the bill who's objectives she supported.
Just one of the more disgusting end results of the lies of Sue Bradford - reducing the enemies of child abuse to living in fear.
Dear Friends,
Here are some insightful comments from bloggers about the mum who was FOR Bradford's bill and has now become a victim of the bill.
Regards,
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
From: http://nzconservative.blogspot.com/2007/10/it-has-started.html
New Zealand Conservative
Sunday, October 28, 2007
It has started
Front page of today's Sunday Star Times: School dobs mum to CYF for smacking son's hand. 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?
From: http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/bradford-attacking-the-friends-of-section-59-repeal/
Bradford Attacking the Friends of Section 59 Repeal
Oct 28th, 2007 by scrubone
Here's a woman who one would presume to be in the small minority of parents who supported the smacking ban law. She was clearly fooled by Sue Bradford saying things like this:
"My experience over the last two years of campaigning for the repeal of s59 of the Crimes Act has revealed to me personally that too many New Zealanders see children as being their property."
[the bill is]..."a necessary step in a complex process of weaning our society away from a culture of violence and abuse of our children."
..."we view children as second class citizens not deserving of the same rights and protections as adults."
"I reject absolutely the idea that parents have a God-given right to beat the evil out of their kids."
(Pretending the opposition to the bill was just religious extremism was a very common tactic. )
They [The Auckland District Law Society] suggest that, rather than outright repeal, the degree and nature of acceptable violence against children can be calibrated - e.g. by saying that it is okay to use force against three to twelve-year-olds and that there should be no 'striking above the shoulder'. I believe all children have the right to live in violence-free homes.
"My Bill to repeal Section 59 aims to remove the defence of reasonable force from parents who badly beat their children, often with weapons that leave permanent physical injury."
"Those who perpetrate the abuse and successfully apply section 59 as their defence remain unaccountable to our justice system."
That's a selection of quotes from this post.
Clearly, this woman would never have thought of herself as "seeing children as her property", or propagating a "culture of violence" or viewing her kids as "second class citizens". She never thought that she would be treated the same was as parents who "who badly beat their children, often with weapons that leave permanent physical injury".
No, she was and remains a good parent. She never imagined she would be placed in the above categories.
But now she has. She's been reduced to a state of fear, afraid of the Government using it's power to remove her children.
She was not afraid because she supported Sue Bradford, believed her statements, but discovered too late the nature of propaganda - whipping up hatred against a non-existent threat, to disguise the real effect. By doing this Sue managed to get get many victims of the law to support it.
But even worse, while opponents saw the curtain of state infiltration into families dropping and took proper precautions, this poor woman kept doing what good parents do, never thinking that someday she might be the target of the bill who's objectives she supported.
Just one of the more disgusting end results of the lies of Sue Bradford - reducing the enemies of child abuse to living in fear.
FI - 300
29 October 2007 - Family Integrity #300 -- Letter from traumatised mum.
Dear Friends,
You've got to read this. It is the full letter from the Mum who was traumatised by CYFS and Police over smacking her child's hand. She was FOR Bradford's bill, and has now become a victim of it. She will, sadly, only be one of many, many more parents to be messed up by an increasingly interventionist state. The mum remains anonymous. I got this from "Big News" blog at http://big-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-traumatised-by-policy-and-cyfs.html.
Regards,
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
Family traumatised by police and CYFS after mum lightly smacked her son on the hand
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son's school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand. So she reported it to the Family First lobby who told the media What this story indicates is that anyone who gets reported to CYFS or police for light smacks on the hand will not only recieve unwanted CYFS or police attention, they`ll also get media attention as well.
This is what the woman told Family First. You read it here http://big-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-traumatised-by-policy-and-cyfs.html., first.
Dear Sir,
I would like to inform families of the potential repercussions of Sue Bradford's bill. I wish to do this by sharing with you our own family's traumatic experience, since this bill has been approved.
During recent school holidays, I arrived home around 5.30pm after a fun filled day with my children to notice a card left by Child Youth and Family, asking me to get in contact with them ASAP. There was no detail as to the reason. We received no official letter from CYF. After leaving six messages, over a period of four days, I was finally able to contact the Care and Protection officer.
The Care and Protection officer informed me that they had received a complaint from the school, and that under new policy they were obligated to follow it up. My child (hereinafter also referred to as X) had shown aggressive behavior towards another student. When questioned by the teacher as to why, X answered that they had been smacked that morning. The Care and Protection officer also explained that under new policy, teachers were required to report all smacking incidences directly to Child Youth and Family Services and that this was now just standard procedure.
The Care and Protection officer went on to ask me questions relating to X's behaviour, and whether they needed help in any way, eg medication, special needs etc. I replied, not that I was aware of - just a normal every day child having a bad day.
She also enquired about my family and when she was satisfied, she assured me that she would not take this any further and could I please ask the school to contact me directly if this sort of thing happened again.
Later when my husband and I questioned our child, X explained that they had thrown a ball and that it bounced and accidentally hit a class mate. X had woken up in a bad mood that particular day and was very reluctant and unhelpful at getting ready for school. I told X to hurry up - X was refusing and throwing a wobbly, so I ended up smacking X on the hand. I also gave X a bit of a push into the room to get my child moving (done in the heat of the moment). X responded by more yelling and giving me an evil look. It wasn't a good morning. (This sort of thing doesn't happen very often, but it does happen.)
I usually never let my children go to school angry with me, but that morning we were in a hurry. The teacher seemed to ask questions about X's behaviour and why X was behaving like this. The teacher seemed to ask leading questions like, how was it at home etc. X never told her what the issue was - only that they had been smacked that morning. Apparently the teacher said to X, I will see to that and then asked if there were any marks. X said no.
X is worried that they will be taken away, and it is really hard to get X to talk about it. X can also be a bit of a drama queen, and could have exaggerated to the teacher at the time (especially in X's frame of mind.) My husband did contact the school, to inquire why we weren't called earlier by the school and that this was just not good enough. He also communicated what the Care and Protection officer had said to us. The school responded that it was new procedure and were sympathetic, but offered us no apology.
This is the first incident of this kind we have had with the school. In the second incident (over 2 months later), I invited another family around for lunch one weekend. After lunch the fathers decided to take the children for a walk to the dairy and park. After they were gone about five minutes, two of my children came back and explained to me that they were goofing around, and that Dad had sent them home.
They continued to goof around outside on the trampoline. X got hurt in the rough and tumble, came inside in a huff. When asked what the matter was by our guest, X rudely replied, I don't want to talk to you. I kindly asked X to apologise and X walked outside. I followed and asked X to come back inside and apologise. X walked to the furthest side of the tramp, so that I could not reach X and refused to come back inside. My older child who was already on the tramp tried to wrestle X to the other side. There was a lot of yelling, laughing and screaming going on by everyone, as it had turned into a bit of a game. I tried to take control of X and pull the child off the tramp, while the child was shouting and resisting. I smacked X on the backside with the palm of my hand (X was lying on their stomach), pulled X towards me and asked X to control themselves. Finally X came inside and went to the bedroom. I told X to stay there until they apologised.
Within 20mins, there were three police officers at my door and they asked me to step outside. (had arrived with lights flashing). They had received a complaint from a neighbour about an incident concerning one of my children. They then asked to question X and at the same time questioned me separately about what had happened.
It dawned on me as I was relaying the events that I might be arrested, and asked the officer if that was indeed the case. She said possibly, but needed to speak with the other officer before she could tell me.
After questioning X, and getting the details of my guest, to my relief, they decided not to arrest me this time. The officer kindly informed me that since this bill that Sue Bradford had pushed through, that the police have to respond to all complaints concerning families with children. This was new policy and they have to cross their T's and dot their I's.
I wanted to get a good understanding of what she was saying, so I asked the officer, if this was the second visit here and the events were the same, except this time I didn't smack the backside but simply pulled the child off the tramp, would I still be arrested? She replied yes, because I still used physical force and that under the new law no parent is allowed to use any physical force, unless you are protecting your child. The police officers were very kind, but warned me of a possible arrest if this sort of thing happened again. And they left.
These events have traumatised my children, not to mention my husband and myself.
I understand the Police and Child Youth and Family Services were doing their jobs, and I commend them for it. But come on...this is going a bit far don't you think? My children have always had a healthy respect for the police, now sadly that has been altered. I am concerned for the welfare of this country if this sort of thing keeps happening to our families. Our children need security in our system, and shouldn't be fearful of being pulled away from their families.
We have since received a letter from a Foster Care agency contracted to CYF. They had been made aware of the police visiting us and have offered us their services. Their letter informed us that a social worker would call us in the near future. This was very nice of them, only I feel we would only be wasting their time. I am grateful it was this organisation, rather than CYF.
I really am grieved about where our country is heading. We as a family have been made only too aware, that if we tick anyone off for whatever reason, whether a neighbor, a shop keeper or teacher and they call the police, it is their word against ours. Now that we are in the system, it doesn't matter whether we are guilty or not. If the police officer doesn't like us for any reason, they have the power to separate our family. This is a horrible reality!
Again I would like to stress that we are an average NZ family. We have four children - sons and daughters, both teens and younger. We are all law abiding citizens, we don't drink, smoke or do drugs. We have always encouraged our children to respect authority and after this experience, have all been very traumatized.
An assault charge is no small matter. I have been involved in children's work for the last ten years, not to mention all the community work I have done with under privileged children over the years. (the real victims of child abuse.)
If I were to receive an "assault on a child" charge, I couldn't do these things, and I haven't even mentioned paid employment. This is an awful thought.
This new law seems to me, only to be creating insecurity for families that are genuinely trying their best to raise healthy, secure children, that are good law abiding citizens, and a lot of extra work for the organisations that are already over worked and under staffed.
We as parents need to be encouraged and supported by the government, not undermined and stripped of all authority.
Yours sincerely
Dear Friends,
You've got to read this. It is the full letter from the Mum who was traumatised by CYFS and Police over smacking her child's hand. She was FOR Bradford's bill, and has now become a victim of it. She will, sadly, only be one of many, many more parents to be messed up by an increasingly interventionist state. The mum remains anonymous. I got this from "Big News" blog at http://big-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-traumatised-by-policy-and-cyfs.html.
Regards,
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
Family traumatised by police and CYFS after mum lightly smacked her son on the hand
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son's school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand. So she reported it to the Family First lobby who told the media What this story indicates is that anyone who gets reported to CYFS or police for light smacks on the hand will not only recieve unwanted CYFS or police attention, they`ll also get media attention as well.
This is what the woman told Family First. You read it here http://big-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-traumatised-by-policy-and-cyfs.html., first.
Dear Sir,
I would like to inform families of the potential repercussions of Sue Bradford's bill. I wish to do this by sharing with you our own family's traumatic experience, since this bill has been approved.
During recent school holidays, I arrived home around 5.30pm after a fun filled day with my children to notice a card left by Child Youth and Family, asking me to get in contact with them ASAP. There was no detail as to the reason. We received no official letter from CYF. After leaving six messages, over a period of four days, I was finally able to contact the Care and Protection officer.
The Care and Protection officer informed me that they had received a complaint from the school, and that under new policy they were obligated to follow it up. My child (hereinafter also referred to as X) had shown aggressive behavior towards another student. When questioned by the teacher as to why, X answered that they had been smacked that morning. The Care and Protection officer also explained that under new policy, teachers were required to report all smacking incidences directly to Child Youth and Family Services and that this was now just standard procedure.
The Care and Protection officer went on to ask me questions relating to X's behaviour, and whether they needed help in any way, eg medication, special needs etc. I replied, not that I was aware of - just a normal every day child having a bad day.
She also enquired about my family and when she was satisfied, she assured me that she would not take this any further and could I please ask the school to contact me directly if this sort of thing happened again.
Later when my husband and I questioned our child, X explained that they had thrown a ball and that it bounced and accidentally hit a class mate. X had woken up in a bad mood that particular day and was very reluctant and unhelpful at getting ready for school. I told X to hurry up - X was refusing and throwing a wobbly, so I ended up smacking X on the hand. I also gave X a bit of a push into the room to get my child moving (done in the heat of the moment). X responded by more yelling and giving me an evil look. It wasn't a good morning. (This sort of thing doesn't happen very often, but it does happen.)
I usually never let my children go to school angry with me, but that morning we were in a hurry. The teacher seemed to ask questions about X's behaviour and why X was behaving like this. The teacher seemed to ask leading questions like, how was it at home etc. X never told her what the issue was - only that they had been smacked that morning. Apparently the teacher said to X, I will see to that and then asked if there were any marks. X said no.
X is worried that they will be taken away, and it is really hard to get X to talk about it. X can also be a bit of a drama queen, and could have exaggerated to the teacher at the time (especially in X's frame of mind.) My husband did contact the school, to inquire why we weren't called earlier by the school and that this was just not good enough. He also communicated what the Care and Protection officer had said to us. The school responded that it was new procedure and were sympathetic, but offered us no apology.
This is the first incident of this kind we have had with the school. In the second incident (over 2 months later), I invited another family around for lunch one weekend. After lunch the fathers decided to take the children for a walk to the dairy and park. After they were gone about five minutes, two of my children came back and explained to me that they were goofing around, and that Dad had sent them home.
They continued to goof around outside on the trampoline. X got hurt in the rough and tumble, came inside in a huff. When asked what the matter was by our guest, X rudely replied, I don't want to talk to you. I kindly asked X to apologise and X walked outside. I followed and asked X to come back inside and apologise. X walked to the furthest side of the tramp, so that I could not reach X and refused to come back inside. My older child who was already on the tramp tried to wrestle X to the other side. There was a lot of yelling, laughing and screaming going on by everyone, as it had turned into a bit of a game. I tried to take control of X and pull the child off the tramp, while the child was shouting and resisting. I smacked X on the backside with the palm of my hand (X was lying on their stomach), pulled X towards me and asked X to control themselves. Finally X came inside and went to the bedroom. I told X to stay there until they apologised.
Within 20mins, there were three police officers at my door and they asked me to step outside. (had arrived with lights flashing). They had received a complaint from a neighbour about an incident concerning one of my children. They then asked to question X and at the same time questioned me separately about what had happened.
It dawned on me as I was relaying the events that I might be arrested, and asked the officer if that was indeed the case. She said possibly, but needed to speak with the other officer before she could tell me.
After questioning X, and getting the details of my guest, to my relief, they decided not to arrest me this time. The officer kindly informed me that since this bill that Sue Bradford had pushed through, that the police have to respond to all complaints concerning families with children. This was new policy and they have to cross their T's and dot their I's.
I wanted to get a good understanding of what she was saying, so I asked the officer, if this was the second visit here and the events were the same, except this time I didn't smack the backside but simply pulled the child off the tramp, would I still be arrested? She replied yes, because I still used physical force and that under the new law no parent is allowed to use any physical force, unless you are protecting your child. The police officers were very kind, but warned me of a possible arrest if this sort of thing happened again. And they left.
These events have traumatised my children, not to mention my husband and myself.
I understand the Police and Child Youth and Family Services were doing their jobs, and I commend them for it. But come on...this is going a bit far don't you think? My children have always had a healthy respect for the police, now sadly that has been altered. I am concerned for the welfare of this country if this sort of thing keeps happening to our families. Our children need security in our system, and shouldn't be fearful of being pulled away from their families.
We have since received a letter from a Foster Care agency contracted to CYF. They had been made aware of the police visiting us and have offered us their services. Their letter informed us that a social worker would call us in the near future. This was very nice of them, only I feel we would only be wasting their time. I am grateful it was this organisation, rather than CYF.
I really am grieved about where our country is heading. We as a family have been made only too aware, that if we tick anyone off for whatever reason, whether a neighbor, a shop keeper or teacher and they call the police, it is their word against ours. Now that we are in the system, it doesn't matter whether we are guilty or not. If the police officer doesn't like us for any reason, they have the power to separate our family. This is a horrible reality!
Again I would like to stress that we are an average NZ family. We have four children - sons and daughters, both teens and younger. We are all law abiding citizens, we don't drink, smoke or do drugs. We have always encouraged our children to respect authority and after this experience, have all been very traumatized.
An assault charge is no small matter. I have been involved in children's work for the last ten years, not to mention all the community work I have done with under privileged children over the years. (the real victims of child abuse.)
If I were to receive an "assault on a child" charge, I couldn't do these things, and I haven't even mentioned paid employment. This is an awful thought.
This new law seems to me, only to be creating insecurity for families that are genuinely trying their best to raise healthy, secure children, that are good law abiding citizens, and a lot of extra work for the organisations that are already over worked and under staffed.
We as parents need to be encouraged and supported by the government, not undermined and stripped of all authority.
Yours sincerely
FI - 299
29 October 2007 - Family Integrity #299 -- Family First - Let's Finish What We Started!
LET'S FINISH WHAT WE STARTED
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/images/stop%20the%20abuse.jpg We all want to deal with our appalling rate of child abuse in New Zealand.
The government's response was to criminalise good parents who corrected their child with a light smack
and the child abuse continues....
Then they spent millions on media advertisements telling us what we already knew - that violence was not ok
and the child abuse continues....
WHY? Because they fail to identify or deal with the factors which lead to a greater chance of child abuse as identified in every UNICEF and CYF report - namely, family breakdown, drug and alcohol abuse, low maternal age at birth, poverty, poor housing, and single parenthood.
See our 5-point Action Plan at www.stoptheabuse.org.nz
http://www.stoptheabuse.org.nz
Help us make 'CHILD ABUSE' and 'FAMILY BREAKDOWN' an Election Issue in 2008
There is currently a petition which has over 200,000 signatures demanding that a Referendum be held on this issue.
If we can get the required 300,000 signatures, child abuse and family breakdown will become an election issue in 2008 and political parties will have to tell us how they are going to deal with our unacceptable rate of child abuse - solutions that are practical, achievable, and targeted at the real causes of child abuse. Then you can vote accordingly.
Please join us in November for
"The Great New Zealand Table Challenge"
Family First NZ is joining with a new group
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/images/make%20them%20listen%20family%20
first%20large%20jpeg.jpg
Unity for Liberty http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz and other groups in inviting all concerned New Zealanders across the country to 'take up arms' - that means pens, tables and petition forms!
When: The Month of November (Saturdays, if you can do more days even better)
Where: The length and breadth of New Zealand
Why: To achieve the 300,000 signatures for the Citizens Initiated
Referendum.
How: By being available in your own communities for NZ'ers to sign the petition. Ring up a local shop and ask to run a table outside their business
on a Saturday or for a few days. Perhaps a sports field - mid-week touch - flower shows - Expos - wherever there's a crowd (the possibilities are endless!)
SO WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR!
Start planning now. Grab family and friends - borrow a table, and print off a pile of petition forms http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/petition.html and you're all set to go.
Thank you for taking action on this important matter.
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/images/billy%20graham.jpg As Billy Graham said, "Our motto too often seems to be, 'Stay aloof. Don't get involved. Let somebody else stick his neck out.' In the face of all kinds of conditions screaming to be rectified, too many of us find ourselves afflicted with moral laryngitis."
Let's speak up - and demand that as a country, we tackle actual causes of child abuse with solutions that will work.
Kind regards
Bob McCoskrie
NATIONAL DIRECTOR
P.S. If everybody who received this email collected just 30 signatures on each petition we would reach our target. It's that easy!! So aim for 100 signatures to avoid any doubt!
LET'S FINISH WHAT WE STARTED
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/images/stop%20the%20abuse.jpg We all want to deal with our appalling rate of child abuse in New Zealand.
The government's response was to criminalise good parents who corrected their child with a light smack
and the child abuse continues....
Then they spent millions on media advertisements telling us what we already knew - that violence was not ok
and the child abuse continues....
WHY? Because they fail to identify or deal with the factors which lead to a greater chance of child abuse as identified in every UNICEF and CYF report - namely, family breakdown, drug and alcohol abuse, low maternal age at birth, poverty, poor housing, and single parenthood.
See our 5-point Action Plan at www.stoptheabuse.org.nz
http://www.stoptheabuse.org.nz
Help us make 'CHILD ABUSE' and 'FAMILY BREAKDOWN' an Election Issue in 2008
There is currently a petition which has over 200,000 signatures demanding that a Referendum be held on this issue.
If we can get the required 300,000 signatures, child abuse and family breakdown will become an election issue in 2008 and political parties will have to tell us how they are going to deal with our unacceptable rate of child abuse - solutions that are practical, achievable, and targeted at the real causes of child abuse. Then you can vote accordingly.
Please join us in November for
"The Great New Zealand Table Challenge"
Family First NZ is joining with a new group
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/images/make%20them%20listen%20family%20
first%20large%20jpeg.jpg
Unity for Liberty http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz and other groups in inviting all concerned New Zealanders across the country to 'take up arms' - that means pens, tables and petition forms!
When: The Month of November (Saturdays, if you can do more days even better)
Where: The length and breadth of New Zealand
Why: To achieve the 300,000 signatures for the Citizens Initiated
Referendum.
How: By being available in your own communities for NZ'ers to sign the petition. Ring up a local shop and ask to run a table outside their business
on a Saturday or for a few days. Perhaps a sports field - mid-week touch - flower shows - Expos - wherever there's a crowd (the possibilities are endless!)
SO WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR!
Start planning now. Grab family and friends - borrow a table, and print off a pile of petition forms http://www.unityforliberty.net.nz/petition.html and you're all set to go.
Thank you for taking action on this important matter.
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/images/billy%20graham.jpg As Billy Graham said, "Our motto too often seems to be, 'Stay aloof. Don't get involved. Let somebody else stick his neck out.' In the face of all kinds of conditions screaming to be rectified, too many of us find ourselves afflicted with moral laryngitis."
Let's speak up - and demand that as a country, we tackle actual causes of child abuse with solutions that will work.
Kind regards
Bob McCoskrie
NATIONAL DIRECTOR
P.S. If everybody who received this email collected just 30 signatures on each petition we would reach our target. It's that easy!! So aim for 100 signatures to avoid any doubt!
FI - 298
29 October 2007 - Family Integrity #298 -- School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
Greetings:
If you haven't already read the latest of how ordinary parents are being victiminsed by the re-write of Section 59, here is a wee excerpt plus link to the article. Below that is Swedish lawyer Ruby Harrold-Claesson's response.
Regards,
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Barbara Smith [mailto:Barbara@hef.org.nz]
Skickat: den 28 oktober 2007 04:10
Till: Ruby Harrold-Claesson;
Ämne: School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
By RUTH LAUGESEN - Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 28 October 2007
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son's school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand.
"I don't want to feel like a child abuser, and I don't want to be labelled as a child abuser because I smacked my son," she said. "It's brought a lot of trauma to our family unit and unnecessary stress."
Read more here:
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: Ruby Harrold-Claesson
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 5:03 AM
Subject: SV: School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
Dear All,
I'm not surprised at all. This is just the beginning. In Sweden we have 7000 reports of child abuse per year and that figure jumped 14 percent in February. Cases like this one was exactly what I warned NZ for when I visited in July of last year - I had the verdicts to prove it - but the law-makers refused to listen.
To quote from Family Integrity: if Section59 is repealed - or replaced... YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE. http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
Also, good quotation from the Stuff article:
"The mother said she had not previously been involved in Family First and had had some sympathy with Sue Bradford's anti-smacking bill, "not thinking that it would affect us on a personal level"." Let those who sympathised with Bradford feel the brunt of it. Who did she expect would be affected, other people's families? Isn't it typically psychopathic not to be able to empathize with others, but only to recognise one's own suffering?
By the way, was the govt. minister who was seen smacking his child ever prosecuted? I think he should have been prosecuted.
Have the NZ media picked up the article about the British govt. U-turn as yet? You know, one can always count on the British to have a common sense approach, which is totally lacking in Sweden and obviously also in NZ.
All the best to you and yours. Hope you all had a pleasant weekend.
Ruby
http://www.nkmr.org/english/
Greetings:
If you haven't already read the latest of how ordinary parents are being victiminsed by the re-write of Section 59, here is a wee excerpt plus link to the article. Below that is Swedish lawyer Ruby Harrold-Claesson's response.
Regards,
Craig Smith
National Director
Family Integrity
PO Box 9064
Palmerston North
New Zealand
Ph: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
Our Home....Our Castle
if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...
YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE.
http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Barbara Smith [mailto:Barbara@hef.org.nz]
Skickat: den 28 oktober 2007 04:10
Till: Ruby Harrold-Claesson;
Ämne: School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
By RUTH LAUGESEN - Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 28 October 2007
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son's school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand.
"I don't want to feel like a child abuser, and I don't want to be labelled as a child abuser because I smacked my son," she said. "It's brought a lot of trauma to our family unit and unnecessary stress."
Read more here:
http://familyintegrity.blogspot.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: Ruby Harrold-Claesson
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 5:03 AM
Subject: SV: School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
Dear All,
I'm not surprised at all. This is just the beginning. In Sweden we have 7000 reports of child abuse per year and that figure jumped 14 percent in February. Cases like this one was exactly what I warned NZ for when I visited in July of last year - I had the verdicts to prove it - but the law-makers refused to listen.
To quote from Family Integrity: if Section59 is repealed - or replaced... YOU CAN KISS YOUR CHILDREN GOODBYE. http://www.storesonline.com/members/846699/uploaded/Brochure_-_Kiss_Children_Goodbye_7.pdf
Also, good quotation from the Stuff article:
"The mother said she had not previously been involved in Family First and had had some sympathy with Sue Bradford's anti-smacking bill, "not thinking that it would affect us on a personal level"." Let those who sympathised with Bradford feel the brunt of it. Who did she expect would be affected, other people's families? Isn't it typically psychopathic not to be able to empathize with others, but only to recognise one's own suffering?
By the way, was the govt. minister who was seen smacking his child ever prosecuted? I think he should have been prosecuted.
Have the NZ media picked up the article about the British govt. U-turn as yet? You know, one can always count on the British to have a common sense approach, which is totally lacking in Sweden and obviously also in NZ.
All the best to you and yours. Hope you all had a pleasant weekend.
Ruby
http://www.nkmr.org/english/
Blog
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.
http://big-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-traumatised-by-policy-and-cyfs.html
http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/bradford-attacking-the-friends-of-section-59-repeal/
These blogs also include the letter from the mother to Family First.
http://big-news.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-traumatised-by-policy-and-cyfs.html
http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2007/10/28/bradford-attacking-the-friends-of-section-59-repeal/
Sunday, 28 October 2007
Media
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/1418227
Mother angered by anti-smacking law
Oct 28, 2007 9:48 AM
A mother is speaking out about her family's fear of being pulled apart thanks to the anti-smacking laws.
The woman, who wants to remain anonymous, has written a letter about her experiences to lobby group Family First.
She claims she was approached by CYF after her child's school dobbed her in for smacking.
The woman says a teacher had been questioning the child about their home life, after an incident involving a classmate.
Family First Director Bob McCoskrie says it's the kind of thing every parent fears from the anti smacking law, but says it's not the only time the woman's felt the effects of anti-smacking law.
He says she had previously given the boy a smack to get the boy off the trampoline and police arrived in 20 minutes saying a complaint had been laid.
McCoskrie says the incident was then referred to a foster care agency who contacted the woman.
He says no one wants to come to CYF's attention, and it's also a worry the school didn't talk to the parents first.
McCoskrie says the law needs to be clearer so families who really need help can get it.
Mother angered by anti-smacking law
Oct 28, 2007 9:48 AM
A mother is speaking out about her family's fear of being pulled apart thanks to the anti-smacking laws.
The woman, who wants to remain anonymous, has written a letter about her experiences to lobby group Family First.
She claims she was approached by CYF after her child's school dobbed her in for smacking.
The woman says a teacher had been questioning the child about their home life, after an incident involving a classmate.
Family First Director Bob McCoskrie says it's the kind of thing every parent fears from the anti smacking law, but says it's not the only time the woman's felt the effects of anti-smacking law.
He says she had previously given the boy a smack to get the boy off the trampoline and police arrived in 20 minutes saying a complaint had been laid.
McCoskrie says the incident was then referred to a foster care agency who contacted the woman.
He says no one wants to come to CYF's attention, and it's also a worry the school didn't talk to the parents first.
McCoskrie says the law needs to be clearer so families who really need help can get it.
Media
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4253352a10.html
School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
By RUTH LAUGESEN - Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 28 October 2007
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son's school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand.
"I don't want to feel like a child abuser, and I don't want to be labelled as a child abuser because I smacked my son," she said. "It's brought a lot of trauma to our family unit and unnecessary stress."
The woman, who did not wish to be named because she says she fears losing her children, says another smacking several months later resulted in a visit from police.
In the first incident, she came home one day in the July school holidays to find a card left by Child, Youth and Family asking her to contact a care and protection officer.
The officer told her the agency had received a complaint from the school after her son had hit another child with a ball. When asked why, the boy told the teacher he had been smacked that morning.
The mother of four said she had smacked him on the hand after he had "thrown a wobbly" instead of getting ready for school. The smack had left no mark.
She said hers was "just an average Kiwi family". Both parents worked, did not smoke or drink or "have any addictions". They smacked rarely, preferring to use time out. She said the care and protection officer had decided not to take the matter any further.
The school was unrepentant when her husband questioned its handling of the matter.
In the second incident, in September, three police officers arrived at her house after she smacked her child outside, and a neighbour complained. The police questioned her and the child separately before deciding not to take the matter any further.
A friend who was at the house at the time, Gabrielle Allen, said the arrival of police was astonishing and intimidating.
"My friend is loud, there's a lot of volume. She's just excitable. I think she's a great mum, and she really loves her children. She's consistent but she's not over the top with discipline at all."
The mother then contacted Family First, a lobby group that vociferously opposed smacking law changes passed in June. The organisation put her in touch with the Sunday Star-Times.
The mother said she had not previously been involved in Family First and had had some sympathy with Sue Bradford's anti-smacking bill, "not thinking that it would affect us on a personal level".
Family First spokesman Bob McCroskrie said parents now feared the law, and Child, Youth and Family.
A spokeswoman for Associate Social Development Minister Ruth Dyson said the minister did not believe the CYFs intervention was a result of the June law change, but reflected greater community sensitivity to child abuse.
The Education Ministry said schools had not been given any fresh instructions about reporting smacking since the legislation came in.
School dobs mum to CYF for hand smack
By RUTH LAUGESEN - Sunday Star Times | Sunday, 28 October 2007
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son's school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand.
"I don't want to feel like a child abuser, and I don't want to be labelled as a child abuser because I smacked my son," she said. "It's brought a lot of trauma to our family unit and unnecessary stress."
The woman, who did not wish to be named because she says she fears losing her children, says another smacking several months later resulted in a visit from police.
In the first incident, she came home one day in the July school holidays to find a card left by Child, Youth and Family asking her to contact a care and protection officer.
The officer told her the agency had received a complaint from the school after her son had hit another child with a ball. When asked why, the boy told the teacher he had been smacked that morning.
The mother of four said she had smacked him on the hand after he had "thrown a wobbly" instead of getting ready for school. The smack had left no mark.
She said hers was "just an average Kiwi family". Both parents worked, did not smoke or drink or "have any addictions". They smacked rarely, preferring to use time out. She said the care and protection officer had decided not to take the matter any further.
The school was unrepentant when her husband questioned its handling of the matter.
In the second incident, in September, three police officers arrived at her house after she smacked her child outside, and a neighbour complained. The police questioned her and the child separately before deciding not to take the matter any further.
A friend who was at the house at the time, Gabrielle Allen, said the arrival of police was astonishing and intimidating.
"My friend is loud, there's a lot of volume. She's just excitable. I think she's a great mum, and she really loves her children. She's consistent but she's not over the top with discipline at all."
The mother then contacted Family First, a lobby group that vociferously opposed smacking law changes passed in June. The organisation put her in touch with the Sunday Star-Times.
The mother said she had not previously been involved in Family First and had had some sympathy with Sue Bradford's anti-smacking bill, "not thinking that it would affect us on a personal level".
Family First spokesman Bob McCroskrie said parents now feared the law, and Child, Youth and Family.
A spokeswoman for Associate Social Development Minister Ruth Dyson said the minister did not believe the CYFs intervention was a result of the June law change, but reflected greater community sensitivity to child abuse.
The Education Ministry said schools had not been given any fresh instructions about reporting smacking since the legislation came in.
Friday, 26 October 2007
Media
Government u-turn as ministers tell parents they CAN smack their children
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=489636&in_page_id=1770
UK Report
25th October 2007
Smacking ok:
The government will not ban parents smacking their children
Ministers ruled out a complete ban on smacking today after a Government review found the majority of parents opposed such a move.
Children's Minister Kevin Brennan said the law would stay as it is after officials reviewed the way new rules were working.
Despite calls from many organisations for a ban, Mr Brennan said the evidence was that fewer parents now use smacking to discipline their children.
In a statement to MPs, he said: "Whilst many parents say they will not smack, a majority of parents say that smacking should not be banned outright.
"The Government will retain the law in its current form, in the absence of evidence it is not working satisfactorily."
Mr Brennan's announcement came after the Government conducted a review of the law, which changed in the 2004 Children's Act.
Section 58 of the Act removed the the defence of reasonable punishment from parents and adults acting "in loco parentis" who are charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm, wounding or grievous bodily harm, or cruelty to a child.
At the time, ministers promised to review the law to assess whether it was working.
Officials surveyed parents, children and examined other evidence for the review, which took place this summer.....
But he continued: "Many organisations however support legislation to ban smacking.
"The police have discretion to deal with cases as they consider appropriate, taking into account factors including the evidence available, the public interest and the best interests of the child.
"The law is clear and section 58 has improved protection for children.
"But there appears to be a lack of awareness across different audiences about the scope and application of the law.
"In response, the Government will retain the law in its current form, in the absence of evidence it is not working satisfactorily.
"We will also do more to help with positive parenting."
Shadow children's minister Tim Loughton said: "This is a clear victory for common-sense.
"Clearly, if any adult is responsible for abuse and violence towards a child they need to face the full rigour of the law.
"But there is a world of difference between that and criminalising loving parents that use chastisement as they see fit in the interest of their child........
For full article and comments go to:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=489636&in_page_id=1770
Comments (20)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=489636&in_page_id=1770
UK Report
25th October 2007
Smacking ok:
The government will not ban parents smacking their children
Ministers ruled out a complete ban on smacking today after a Government review found the majority of parents opposed such a move.
Children's Minister Kevin Brennan said the law would stay as it is after officials reviewed the way new rules were working.
Despite calls from many organisations for a ban, Mr Brennan said the evidence was that fewer parents now use smacking to discipline their children.
In a statement to MPs, he said: "Whilst many parents say they will not smack, a majority of parents say that smacking should not be banned outright.
"The Government will retain the law in its current form, in the absence of evidence it is not working satisfactorily."
Mr Brennan's announcement came after the Government conducted a review of the law, which changed in the 2004 Children's Act.
Section 58 of the Act removed the the defence of reasonable punishment from parents and adults acting "in loco parentis" who are charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm, wounding or grievous bodily harm, or cruelty to a child.
At the time, ministers promised to review the law to assess whether it was working.
Officials surveyed parents, children and examined other evidence for the review, which took place this summer.....
But he continued: "Many organisations however support legislation to ban smacking.
"The police have discretion to deal with cases as they consider appropriate, taking into account factors including the evidence available, the public interest and the best interests of the child.
"The law is clear and section 58 has improved protection for children.
"But there appears to be a lack of awareness across different audiences about the scope and application of the law.
"In response, the Government will retain the law in its current form, in the absence of evidence it is not working satisfactorily.
"We will also do more to help with positive parenting."
Shadow children's minister Tim Loughton said: "This is a clear victory for common-sense.
"Clearly, if any adult is responsible for abuse and violence towards a child they need to face the full rigour of the law.
"But there is a world of difference between that and criminalising loving parents that use chastisement as they see fit in the interest of their child........
For full article and comments go to:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=489636&in_page_id=1770
Comments (20)
Thursday, 25 October 2007
Media
http://www.sr.se/cgi-bin/international/nyhetssidor/artikel.asp?nyheter=1&programid=2054&Artikel=1673347
More Swedish Parents Smack Their Children
The number of Swedish parents admitting to hitting their children is growing, despite smacking being illegal here.
In a new study by Karlstad University 2.3% of parents say they physically punish their children, that’s more than double the figures from the last study from the year 2000.
Over 23% of parents say that they have shaken or pushed their children at some time over the past year. Staffan Janson, who was in charge of the study, says that he thinks that recent media coverage of parents needing to set boundaries for their kids has meant that some parents have gone too far.
More Swedish Parents Smack Their Children
The number of Swedish parents admitting to hitting their children is growing, despite smacking being illegal here.
In a new study by Karlstad University 2.3% of parents say they physically punish their children, that’s more than double the figures from the last study from the year 2000.
Over 23% of parents say that they have shaken or pushed their children at some time over the past year. Staffan Janson, who was in charge of the study, says that he thinks that recent media coverage of parents needing to set boundaries for their kids has meant that some parents have gone too far.
FI - 297
24 October 2007 - Family Integrity #297 -- U4L, table challenge update
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 6:28 PM
To: Craig
Subject: U4L, table challenge update
Hi All,
Very encouraged with the progress and the preparation thats happening around the country.
How Important are the TABLES? answer "VERY"
From the tables we manned to date, we are hearing many different stories and situations, and there has also been a few sad CYFS stories. If you hear any SAD CYFS stories please take details and forward these contacts to Family First.
The tables also remind the public, I have lost count of the number of people who have gone out of their way to encourage us to continue and are also encouraged that not all NZer's are being apathetic.
There is one special lady in Howick, Barbara from Precepts, we met her at one of our tables, unfortunately Saturday tables are very hard for her to support, from our last Howick table we had a number of the public respond saying that "I have already signed, it was Barbara from Precepts ." Well done Barbara.
I attended a meeting of about eight men in Howick to explain the purpose of "Unity for Liberty", two of the men had first hand contact with our tables, people do notice.
Recent collections over the past week include a very successful campaign in Hawkes Bay at the A & P show, they collected 1246 signatures in three days. If there is anyone in the Hawks Bay area who would like to assist in any further campaigns please email our coordinaters at hawkesbay@unityforliberty.net.nz
In South Auckland we had tables in Papakura and Howick, these tables collected 1495 signatures over 5 days .(including Targa Day in Papakura)
Some more Great New Zealand Table Challenge activities, if I have missed your initiative please e-mail me details, Thanks.
Starting from the: North Shore, one Church homegroup are planning a table for the last Two weeks of November
West Auckland, theres going to be a bit of action here, yet to be confirmed
Howick, there should be at least two tables over the four weeks
Mangere, again there is a bit of action here, final plans to be confirmed
Manurewa, in the process of gearing up a mid week table and Saturday doorknocking
Papakura, have one table running mid week when volunteers are available, also a great place for Saturday doorknocking
Pukekohe, gearing up a table for the main street for all 4 Saturdays
Christchurch, there should be five tables running here and looking for doorknocking teams, for further information please email chch@unityforliberty.net.nz
Also a table at the A&P Show.
Invercargill we have a recent registration who will be promoting the collection of signatures through several companies, good initiative.
If you'd like to help with one of the above groups, please email area contact or myself at craig@unityforliberty.net.nz
Here's the equation: 2500 people x 10 signatures per Saturday of November = 100,000 signatures.
Any queries please feel free to contact me
Craig Hill
021746113
www.unityforliberty.net.nz
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing" (Edmund Burke 1729-1797)
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 6:28 PM
To: Craig
Subject: U4L, table challenge update
Hi All,
Very encouraged with the progress and the preparation thats happening around the country.
How Important are the TABLES? answer "VERY"
From the tables we manned to date, we are hearing many different stories and situations, and there has also been a few sad CYFS stories. If you hear any SAD CYFS stories please take details and forward these contacts to Family First.
The tables also remind the public, I have lost count of the number of people who have gone out of their way to encourage us to continue and are also encouraged that not all NZer's are being apathetic.
There is one special lady in Howick, Barbara from Precepts, we met her at one of our tables, unfortunately Saturday tables are very hard for her to support, from our last Howick table we had a number of the public respond saying that "I have already signed, it was Barbara from Precepts ." Well done Barbara.
I attended a meeting of about eight men in Howick to explain the purpose of "Unity for Liberty", two of the men had first hand contact with our tables, people do notice.
Recent collections over the past week include a very successful campaign in Hawkes Bay at the A & P show, they collected 1246 signatures in three days. If there is anyone in the Hawks Bay area who would like to assist in any further campaigns please email our coordinaters at hawkesbay@unityforliberty.net.nz
In South Auckland we had tables in Papakura and Howick, these tables collected 1495 signatures over 5 days .(including Targa Day in Papakura)
Some more Great New Zealand Table Challenge activities, if I have missed your initiative please e-mail me details, Thanks.
Starting from the: North Shore, one Church homegroup are planning a table for the last Two weeks of November
West Auckland, theres going to be a bit of action here, yet to be confirmed
Howick, there should be at least two tables over the four weeks
Mangere, again there is a bit of action here, final plans to be confirmed
Manurewa, in the process of gearing up a mid week table and Saturday doorknocking
Papakura, have one table running mid week when volunteers are available, also a great place for Saturday doorknocking
Pukekohe, gearing up a table for the main street for all 4 Saturdays
Christchurch, there should be five tables running here and looking for doorknocking teams, for further information please email chch@unityforliberty.net.nz
Also a table at the A&P Show.
Invercargill we have a recent registration who will be promoting the collection of signatures through several companies, good initiative.
If you'd like to help with one of the above groups, please email area contact or myself at craig@unityforliberty.net.nz
Here's the equation: 2500 people x 10 signatures per Saturday of November = 100,000 signatures.
Any queries please feel free to contact me
Craig Hill
021746113
www.unityforliberty.net.nz
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing" (Edmund Burke 1729-1797)
FI - 296
24 October 2007 - Family Integrity #296 -- Ode to Section 59 Petition
The sky is blue, the sun is hot,
Two redheads wait in a shady spot,
In front of them a table stands,
A trusty, stable Bunnings brand.
To a pole and fence signs are taped,
The content of which make people gape,
'What's this about?' a person asks,
'A stupid law has just been passed.'
'Under this law, if you smack your child,
(They don't care if his behavior's wild),
Into your house civil servants will come,
Beating upon their proverbial drum.
'"You smacked your child,' is what they'll say,
We're sorry, we must take your child away,
Because, (and we're certain that you'll agree)
For your child, State care is a necessity."
And that's exactly what they'll do,
Your child will enter a State run zoo,
If you dare to use your parental right,
Your child will be in a miserable plight.
So help us today, and sign the petition,
Make an end to Sue Bradford's ambition,
If you don't do it now it could be too late,
To save our kids from a horrible fate.
by Lydia
The sky is blue, the sun is hot,
Two redheads wait in a shady spot,
In front of them a table stands,
A trusty, stable Bunnings brand.
To a pole and fence signs are taped,
The content of which make people gape,
'What's this about?' a person asks,
'A stupid law has just been passed.'
'Under this law, if you smack your child,
(They don't care if his behavior's wild),
Into your house civil servants will come,
Beating upon their proverbial drum.
'"You smacked your child,' is what they'll say,
We're sorry, we must take your child away,
Because, (and we're certain that you'll agree)
For your child, State care is a necessity."
And that's exactly what they'll do,
Your child will enter a State run zoo,
If you dare to use your parental right,
Your child will be in a miserable plight.
So help us today, and sign the petition,
Make an end to Sue Bradford's ambition,
If you don't do it now it could be too late,
To save our kids from a horrible fate.
by Lydia
Media
MEDIA RELEASE
25 October 2007
Mallard Supported Anti-Smacking Bill – Should Resign
Family First is calling on Labour MP Trevor Mallard to resign as a result of assaulting another MP.
“Not only has he set an atrocious example to our young people, but in May he voted for Sue Bradford’s bill to ban reasonable parental correction,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.
“Mr Mallard has seen fit to criminalise good parents who use a light smack for the purpose of correction, yet has assaulted another MP. No reasonable force. Not for the purpose of correction. Simply a lack of control and discipline.”
“Mr Mallard can suggest that there were extenuating circumstances, but this same defence is not available to parents. Police discretion should not be available in an extreme case like this,” says Mr McCoskrie. “There was absolutely nothing reasonable in what he did.”
In the interests of maintaining the integrity and standard of political leadership, Mr Mallard should accept the standards imposed on all other New Zealand’s and resign.
ENDS
For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:
Bob McCoskrie JP - National Director
Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42
25 October 2007
Mallard Supported Anti-Smacking Bill – Should Resign
Family First is calling on Labour MP Trevor Mallard to resign as a result of assaulting another MP.
“Not only has he set an atrocious example to our young people, but in May he voted for Sue Bradford’s bill to ban reasonable parental correction,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.
“Mr Mallard has seen fit to criminalise good parents who use a light smack for the purpose of correction, yet has assaulted another MP. No reasonable force. Not for the purpose of correction. Simply a lack of control and discipline.”
“Mr Mallard can suggest that there were extenuating circumstances, but this same defence is not available to parents. Police discretion should not be available in an extreme case like this,” says Mr McCoskrie. “There was absolutely nothing reasonable in what he did.”
In the interests of maintaining the integrity and standard of political leadership, Mr Mallard should accept the standards imposed on all other New Zealand’s and resign.
ENDS
For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:
Bob McCoskrie JP - National Director
Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
