Try telling Clockwork that. He thinks that section four is a directive.Originally Posted by MSTRS
Skyryder
Forum whore
Try telling Clockwork that. He thinks that section four is a directive.
Skyryder
Free Scott Watson.
Moped rider
Cut the bullshit and cite some cases
Child abuse was and is prosecuted under assault
8 times in the last 40 years, S.59 was used successfully i.e. a jury agreed that under the circumstances the parent's actions were reasonable
e.g. the riding crop - came to light because of the improvement in the boy's behaviour at school. Incident occurred after he tried to take the stepfather's head off with a baseball bat.
The "plank of wood" incident - a smack with a 12" wooden ruler - the type used in primary schools
For a list of those caregivers that have been cautioned or charged, FamilyFirst are keeping a tally on the website - it isn't a small list
L-Plate Rider
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), however, in an official policy statement (reaffirmed in 2004) states that "Corporal punishment is of limited effectiveness and has potentially deleterious side effects. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents be encouraged and assisted in the development of methods other than spanking for managing undesired behavior." In particular, the AAP believes that any corporal punishment methods other than open-hand spanking on the buttocks or extremities "are unacceptable" and "should never be used". The policy statement points out, summarizing several studies, that "The more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults, the more likely they are to spank their own children, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse, and the more marital conflict they experience as adults." Spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence when used with older children and adolescents."The American Psychological Association opposes the use of corporal punishment in schools, juvenile facilities, child care nurseries, and all other institutions, public or private, where children are cared for or educated (Conger, 1975). They state that corporal punishment is violent, unnecessary, may lower self-esteem, is likely to train children to use physical violence, and is liable to instill hostility and rage without reducing the undesired behavior.The Canadian Pediatrics Society policy on corporal punishment states "The Psychosocial Paediatrics Committee of the Canadian Paediatric Society has carefully reviewed the available research in the controversial area of disciplinary spanking (7-15)... The research that is available supports the position that spanking and other forms of physical punishment are associated with negative child outcomes. The Canadian Paediatric Society, therefore, recommends that physicians strongly discourage disciplinary spanking and all other forms of physical punishment"England's Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and Royal College of Psychiatrists have called for a complete ban on all corporal punishment, stating "We believe it is both wrong and impracticable to seek to define acceptable forms of corporal punishment of children. Such an exercise is unjust. Hitting children is a lesson in bad behaviour." and that "it is never appropriate to hit or beat children"The Australian Psychological Society holds that physical punishment of children should not be used as it has very limited capacity to deter unwanted behavior, does not teach alternative desirable behavior, often promotes further undesirable behaviors such as defiance and attachment to "delinquent" peer groups, encourages an acceptance of aggression and violence as acceptable responses to conflicts and problemsUNESCO states "During the Commission on Human Rights, UNESCO launched a new report entitled "Eliminating Corporal Punishment - The Way Forward to Constructive Child Discipline". The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has consistently recommended States Parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child to prohibit corporal punishment and other forms of violence against children in institutions, in schools, and in the homes...To discipline or punish through physical harm is clearly a violation of the most basic of human rights. Research on corporal punishment has found it to be counterproductive and relatively ineffective, as well as dangerous and harmful to physical, psychological and social well being. While many States have developed child protection laws and systems violence still continues to be inflicted upon children"but family first would never cherry pick studies or make shit up to further their nutty religous agenda right? its incredible to me how many otherwise intelligent people have been sucked in by the fundies on this issue, completely misrepresenting the law and even their own petition to slip it by the otherwise mostly secular population of NZ. look at their website, the list of stuff you reference devnull contains a grand total of 2 count em 2!! convictions, one of which was a guilty plea that almost certainly would have been dismissed if not pleaded out, several of the "harmless" cases referenced sure sound like abuse to me, smacking a kid on the back of the head? yeah sure sounds like a total overreaction. you dont hit a fucking child in the head, and if you do they should throw you in jail. this is the same scumbag org that thinks any household not consisting of a mother and father is wrong and should be legislated against and you think sue bradford is trying to tell you how to live?Many opponents of corporal punishment argue that any form of violence is by definition abusive. Psychological research indicates that corporal punishment causes the deterioration of trust bonds between parents and children. Children subjected to corporal punishment may grow resentful, shy, insecure, or violent. Adults who report having been slapped or spanked by their parents in childhood have been found to experience elevated rates of anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence and externalizing problems as adults. Some researchers believe that corporal punishment actually works against its objective (normally obedience), since children will not voluntarily obey an adult they do not trust. A child who is physically punished may have to be punished more often than a child who is not. Researcher Elizabeth Gershoff, Ph. D., in a 2002 meta-analytic study that combined 60 years of research on corporal punishment, found that the only positive outcome of corporal punishment was immediate compliance; however, corporal punishment was associated with less long-term compliance. Corporal punishment was linked with nine other negative outcomes, including increased rates of aggression, delinquency, mental health problems, problems in relationships with their parents, and likelihood of being physically abused.
L-Plate Rider
in cone-clusion, who do you all think we should listen to? the organisations made up of academics dedicated to research on child development, or a single religous organisation consisting of fundamentalists with no backing to their claims other than the damn bible?
The instructions are simple...
The two are as bad as each other
If I am having a particular issue (with anything - but let's say it's a troublesome child) then I may go ask a 'expert'. Otherwise, all the so-called academic experts can go fuck themselves. An entire generation or two took their instruction on child-rearing from Dr Spock....I rest my case.
Which is the precise clarification that should have been included in the law change that harridan forced throughThe American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), however, in an official policy statement (reaffirmed in 2004) states that "Corporal punishment is of limited effectiveness and has potentially deleterious side effects. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents be encouraged and assisted in the development of methods other than spanking for managing undesired behavior." In particular, the AAP believes that any corporal punishment methods other than open-hand spanking on the buttocks or extremities "are unacceptable" and "should never be used". The policy statement points out, summarizing several studies, that "The more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults, the more likely they are to spank their own children, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse, and the more marital conflict they experience as adults." Spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence when used with older children and adolescents."
Last edited by MSTRS; 26th August 2008 at 15:29.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
Moped rider
Well now puppylicker, we aren't talking about smacking kids in the head are we?
Lets start with Canada - antismacking championed by Joan Durrant, Associate Professor of Family Social Sciences at the University of Manitoba, who's attempts in Canada to pass this law was thrown out.
Her study of Sweden, on which she based her argument (the same one Bradford used), is flawed and has been widely condemned for its manipulation of statistics to reach a preconceived conclusion.
She stated that in 20 years, there had been no child abuse deaths in Sweden.
There had been 224
How about the US? Antismacking stance based on the work of Elizabeth Gershoff, Research Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, University of Michigan.
She produced a meta-study of other studies, and argued that all corporal punishment is bad. By placing kids that had been smacked in the same group as kids that had been severely abused, the numbers stacked up.
Millchamp (Otago Uni, 2006), split the groups out, and showed that those that had been smacked as a child i.e. boundaries enforced, performed better academically and socially. She also showed that real abuse gave rise to other issues, and they performed poorly later in life.
American Psychological Association also has some very good studies done by researchers like Larzalere, who have demonstrated the folly of the position of the Durrant's of the world.
British Journal of Social Work cites many European studies that show the same conclusion. (See Beckett, "Child Deaths in Sweden")
Why don't you stop being a dickhead and try doing something novel, like learning something about the subject?
Wearing Hi-Viz Black.
Chinese burns! This could be the answer.
No hitting or "tap on the bottom" required!
You have a good point there. It is surprising that the Looney Labourite Sect hasn't done away with the jury system, since their brand of dogma know's best and those pesky "we know better" juries fail to heed their calling.
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
The instructions are simple...
Yep. I tried, but you put it better than I.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
L-Plate Rider
err, yes actually we are, from your own "source"Well now puppylicker, we aren't talking about smacking kids in the head are we?
what a shocking situation, clearly this man cares deeply for his children and knows that not smacking his little girl in the head might hinder her development. whats a little brain damage matter in the quest for DISCIPLINEA 30-year-old Glen Innes father was charged by police for allegedly hitting his five-year-old daughter with an open hand on the back of the head and swinging a pair of jeans at his six-year-old daughter. He had to spend a day in the police cells and police opposed bail!
Moped rider
Don't give them ideas...
Chester Borrows amendment was a good one - not only was it sensible, it was good law. But we can't have common sense prevailing in NZ apparently
Moped rider
You really are quite clueless
That case was thrown out of court after the police declined to appear.
You weren't dropped on your head as a child, were you?
You're certainly giving that impression with some of your posts
L-Plate Rider
while im here, why dont we take a look at some of the other turrible situations this shocking travesty of justice has put innocent and caring parents in
1st case: a police officer visited a mother after a report was made that she pushed her child over, was found to be mistaken and no further action was taken
2nd case: a police officer spoke to a grandparent after she smacked her child in a shop, no further action was taken
3rd case: report made of child screaming a lot, police visited, found everything ok and no further acion was taken
4th case: school passed concern on to cypfs after child reported being smacked, no action was taken until another complaint was made and a police officer visited, then no further action was taken
5th case: child called police and made a false report, police visited and found all was well, no further action
6th case: mother smacked her child in public, complaint was made and police visited. no further action was taken.
7th case: police officer witnessed mother disciplining child, clearly misunderstood situation and no action was taken
cant be bothered with the rest but youre right devnull, what a huge list, and such injustices. how dare they prioritise the safety of children over minor potential embarrasment for a parent.
L-Plate Rider
completely irrelevant. you think the police should not respond to reports of a parent hitting a small child in the head?
L-Plate Rider
Their visit surprised me. It made me feel like a criminal. It made me question my parenting skills.the grandmother was shocked.She felt like a criminal and embarrassed by it allyou know what devnull, after reading the horrible effects of these investigations on the familyfirst website, i totally agree with you, this is unacceptable. how could the evil liberal gubbermint do this to us?!I have found the whole episode to be extremely distressing. I felt completely humiliated
The instructions are simple...
Those big, brave individuals doing the dobbing may just look the other way if some woman was being raped. "Not my business" - "She was asking for it".
Funny how "Not my business" translates into "I'll interfere in that parent's business"
We all know the sort of thing...small child screaming and kicking, general mayhem at the lolly display supermarket checkout. Embarassed and increasingly desperate parent gives the brat a smack on the bum. Interferring busybody jumps on the phone - 111. Police show up in force. Kid got the message - either don't play up or you'll get a smack...or...do what you like, if Mum 'gives you one' the cops will take her away and the nice lady at the supermarket will give you lollies.
Good one.
Last edited by MSTRS; 26th August 2008 at 16:08.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks