Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Smacking bill past 1st hurdle
Sue Bradford's anti-smacking bill has passed its first reading and has gone to select committee.
I am against this bill. I don't believe there is any link between a gentle smack disciplining your child and violence/abuse. As a dad of a 5yr old, I don't see it. It ain't there.
Lucyna of SirHumphrey's has covered the issue well as has Zen Tiger.
I am against this bill. I don't believe there is any link between a gentle smack disciplining your child and violence/abuse. As a dad of a 5yr old, I don't see it. It ain't there.
Lucyna of SirHumphrey's has covered the issue well as has Zen Tiger.
I know the criminal justice system having been a police officer and also having done some criminal defence work in my now occupation as a lawyer. As stated, I am also a dad. I feel adequately qualified to comment on both the legal and social aspects and can confidently say section 59 works well. Simply because there is the occasional erroneous case (if you believe the media that is) should not lead to such an overreactive law change.
My pick is that the bill will gather dust in the select committee unless Labour is re-elected with the Greens tagging along. If so, it could quite easily be part of coalition talk. That would be a shame. I won't go as far to say it would be disastrous. But I will say the whole thing is unnecessary.
Comments:
<< Home
My daughter reacts to it Jono, but the point is it doesn't work with every child. Some children need small 'attitude adjustments' which time out can't or won't achieve. Government is in effect taking away a parenting option.
Also, the steady erosion of laws is about giving the appearance they can outlaw violence - with regard to self defence, the line is be passive, be a victim.
With discipline, it is about exaggerating it so that good parents are made to feel like criminals for a disciplinary method that does actually work.
I do agree with Gooner - a smack is something that needs to be used sparingly. Different kids need different approaches and discipline is best not administered in anger - even time-outs, loss of privileges etc, so that the punishment can be consistent, considered and fair relative to the issue.
But I digress. The mixed messages on being passive, being victims, avoiding punishments that link actions to consequences, and learning responsibilities and boundaries are all being blurred.
I also resent the line that "experts" know how best to raise children, and parents don't. For the most part, a parents bond and love for their children will beat anything else you could hope to substitute. That underlying feeling of love and nurturing is what the child responds to, not a text book time-out.
For the small social demographs with abuse problems, they need different (coal face, before it happens) solutions, not removing s59 to argue about bruises after the fact.
Post a Comment
With discipline, it is about exaggerating it so that good parents are made to feel like criminals for a disciplinary method that does actually work.
I do agree with Gooner - a smack is something that needs to be used sparingly. Different kids need different approaches and discipline is best not administered in anger - even time-outs, loss of privileges etc, so that the punishment can be consistent, considered and fair relative to the issue.
But I digress. The mixed messages on being passive, being victims, avoiding punishments that link actions to consequences, and learning responsibilities and boundaries are all being blurred.
I also resent the line that "experts" know how best to raise children, and parents don't. For the most part, a parents bond and love for their children will beat anything else you could hope to substitute. That underlying feeling of love and nurturing is what the child responds to, not a text book time-out.
For the small social demographs with abuse problems, they need different (coal face, before it happens) solutions, not removing s59 to argue about bruises after the fact.
<< Home
