Don't smack your kids...

[Latte]

Yes, that law reads (to me) that you can smack a kid to prevent the bad behaviour continuing, but you cant smack them as a consequence to their action (correction).

Steal from mums purse, get a smack when you're caught..... by that law written it would breach part 2), and it would only be police discretion stopping any charges.

[mashman]

and here is the big problem with the new law

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

Absolutely, especially when you take into account (3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1) . I would have thought ALL of the below were for correction purposes? You are correcting "inappropriate" behaviour?

(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of—
(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or
(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or
(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

[Number One]

CYFS is a fucking joke.

Personal experience. Son was abused by one of my family members. CYFS 'rang me' and asked if I was going to keep him away from said family member...I replied 'FUCK YES!' they said that's great - we are satisfied that the child is safe...WTF? REALLY???


What if we were actually also abusing him...seems that's probably ok...they weren't even slightly interested in checking us out properly NOR did we get any bloody help from them...useless fuckers.

As for smacking your kids...in 7 years I have done it twice...open handed slap on his dressed bum. He laughed at me...I can somewhat understand how a desperate parent without the maturity and wherewithall might go too far to try to get 'a message across' when the red fog is up BUT both those occasions were more about my frustration and loss of control than actually making him understand the error of his ways....withdrawing playstation privelages is WAY more effective.

[Indoo]

So how many good parents have been arrested and criminalised for giving their children a reasonable smack in the circumstances. It's been a few years now, must be hundreds if not thousands of them out there according to what Family First and co were telling us it would result in?

[Coldrider]

So how many good parents have been arrested and criminalised for giving their children a reasonable smack in the circumstances. It's been a few years now, must be hundreds if not thousands of them out there according to what Family First and co were telling us it would result in?

Way less than the amount of children who have been since killed by abuse, which was what this law was intended to stop. Left yourself wide open to that one.

Parental corrective smacking and child abuse are separate activities, so the law will never work.

[Mully]

we dont smack our kids, i get the next door neighbour to do it

My old boss said that you should pay the older ones to smack the younger ones around. Then it's just sibling bullying....

man are you gonna be disappointed............i rang cyfs one day a few years ago to try and get them to intervene when my daughter went off the rails there for a bit.

Really? Shit.

I wonder what they would have done if you had said (in writing, so the weasels couldn't deny it) that you were abandoning your parental rights and moving her shit onto the lawn. They'd better come get her before the dodgy old man up the road gets her.

So how many good parents have been arrested and criminalised for giving their children a reasonable smack in the circumstances. It's been a few years now, must be hundreds if not thousands of them out there according to what Family First and co were telling us it would result in?

AFAIK, none have been prosecuted. But I think they Police have had to spend time investigating whenever they get a complaint (from the do-gooder camp). Add the $11 million or whatever it was to the cost of the damn law amendment and it's a pretty expensive folly for Bradford.

[Scuba_Steve]

AFAIK, none have been prosecuted. But I think they Police have had to spend time investigating whenever they get a complaint (from the do-gooder camp). Add the $11 million or whatever it was to the cost of the damn law amendment and it's a pretty expensive folly for Bradford.

Remember with all the time wasted on the speed scam the cops ain't the best at investigating the cases in the 1st place.

Hundreds of abused children could still be living with their abusers after revelations a mountain of uninvestigated cases in Wairarapa is just the tip of the iceberg.
The Dominion Post understands the number of backlogged sex and physical abuse cases could be as high as 600 throughout the Wellington police district, and includes a case involving allegations against a Newlands teacher who is still teaching.

And this is just the Wellington region, I'm sure we can all make a decent educated guess at a nation wide total.

[Flip]

AFAIK, none have been prosecuted. But I think they Police have had to spend time investigating whenever they get a complaint (from the do-gooder camp). Add the $11 million or whatever it was to the cost of the damn law amendment and it's a pretty expensive folly for Bradford.

It's being paid for with some of the collected speed camera money.

[mashman]

So how many good parents have been arrested and criminalised for giving their children a reasonable smack in the circumstances. It's been a few years now, must be hundreds if not thousands of them out there according to what Family First and co were telling us it would result in?

Last time I looked, about 18 months ago, there were 29 cases where a parent had been removed from their families, "incorrectly"... even when the kid owned up .

[Smifffy]

Quick - let's get the laws changed to remove the rquirement to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The judiciary are required to use judgment to interpret the wording of the law and then apply it to best serve society.

This is where we have been let down, so now maybe upon reflection it was a good thing that Sue Bradford did, in removing the judge's ability to make judgments on that point, since they are obviously so poor at it.

I still think it would have been better to give the judges a smack tho.

[Indoo]

Way less than the amount of children who have been since killed by abuse, which was what this law was intended to stop.

Where did anyone claim that this was going to stop children being murdered? Winston has already explained pretty clearly the reasons for the change.

Last time I looked, about 18 months ago, there were 29 cases where a parent had been removed from their families

Your not talking about the cases that Family First publicised where they only presented the 'offenders' version of events and the actual circumstances were found to be markedly different?

[mashman]

Your not talking about the cases that Family First publicised where they only presented the 'offenders' version of events and the actual circumstances were found to be markedly different?

They are the ones I'm talking about. I stand corrected if you know something that wasn't published... but the "descriptions" didn't look like the offender's version only.

[Indoo]

There was an article published that went over the actual details of each case and the reality was alot different from what Family Firsts propaganda let on. Afaik none of them actually involved 'good' parents being prosecuted for a reasonable smack. I can't stand Bradford or people like her, but the change in itself imo was needed.

[mashman]

I don't doubt there's more to it in a few of the cases... but the laws and their changes are useless where they contradict each other. How can you say it's ok to "smack" for prevention, but not for correction? Oi, your shoe laces are undone, "smack" you could trip over and hurt yourself... Perfectly reasonable I would have thought, given the law that's in place...

I'm more than happy with Mully's definition. Open hand smack on the arse, arms, hand or leg... for everything else, put it through the system...

[shrub]

Once again this topic arises...and once again I'll say, 'arrest me'.

I'm going to smack my kids if they so deserve it.

I will not abuse my children but when they get sick of my nagging and don't take kindly to my yelling, then I'll give the little darlings a slap to say, I've had enough.

I too, hate the sound of my screeching so, in order to keep them happy, I'll slap their left thigh, it's the closest to my right hand...though sometimes an ear may get in the way.

I love my children, they are dear to me and to NOT SMACK them is to dishonour them.

But what about women?

I too hate the sound of their screeching, and I love my partner and she's dear to me, so is not smacking her dishonouring her?

Seriously, it sounds like you might need to look at how you parent your children. It sounds like you nag and yell at them a lot and when you find that doesn't work, you hit them. I've raised kids to young adults, and they've turned into honest, law abiding and hard working kids making something of their lives. I didn't nag them and only yelled when it was really serious, and I hit my daughter once, and I am still ashamed of that as I see it as weakness on my part.

A question I'm interested in, is what will you do when hitting them doesn't work the way yelling doesn't? Hit them harder? Use a stick? Put them under a hot tap? I knew a Christian couple who were fervent supporters of smacking, but their kids become acclimatised to it they found a new and effective tool - making their kids eat chilli. You could try that when smacking loses it's effectiveness.