Smacking Bill
Printed From: OHbaby!
Category: Fun Stuff
Forum Name: In the news
Forum Description: Have your say on hot pregnancy and parenting topics in the news!
URL: https://www.ohbaby.co.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8397
Printed Date: 18 December 2024 at 6:33am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.05 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Smacking Bill
Posted By: nuttymama
Subject: Smacking Bill
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 6:49am
|
I don't know how to do those link things
But I thought this was exactly what Sue Bradford said wasn't going to happen! Regular smackers may face charges By MARTIN KAY - The Dominion Post | Wednesday, 20 June 2007 Parents who regularly smack their children despite warnings face prosecution and referral to Child, Youth and Family under police guidelines on the controversial law banning physical punishment. Even parents found to have used "minor, trivial or inconsequential" force and not charged will have their details recorded by police family violence coordinators, under the guidelines sent to officers yesterday. The advice, from Police Commissioner Howard Broad, is a crucial element in the implementation of the law that abolishes the defence of reasonable force for parents who smack their children. The law comes into force on Friday. It was passed with overwhelming support after a last-minute deal between Labour and National brought a clause making it clear that police were not expected to prosecute "inconsequential" smacking. But though that is recognised in the guidelines, there is no definition of "inconsequential", with officers told it will ultimately be up to the courts to determine in test cases. The advice says that smacking not considered inconsequential by investigating officers may be prosecuted if it is "repetitive and frequent" and previous warnings or interventions have been ignored. Such incidents would constitute assault, and must be referred to child abuse investigators and CYFS. Parents who are investigated for smacking that is found to be too trivial to prosecute will have their details handed to family violence officers. Family First director Bob McCoskrie, who led a massive campaign against the law change, said the guidelines confirmed many of the fears raised by opponents. "Who's going to be the lucky test case parents who have to go through the hell of a prosecution? If the police are saying 'we're not sure', how in the heck are parents going to be certain that they're parenting within the law?" But Green MP Sue Bradford, who introduced the bill, said the guidelines gave police "some context" in which to make decisions. "Is it just once, is it very light, is it twice and very light, or is it twice and very heavy? It was never the intention that every occasion that someone ever lightly smacked would necessarily be prosecuted. I think that the police have walked that fine line here very well." The guidelines say hitting with a weapon or implement, strikes to the head and kicking should "generally" be prosecuted. In borderline smacking cases, police should consider the child's age, maturity, ability to reason, physical development, health and sex and the circumstances that led to the use of force. ------------- Abigail 06/01/2005 Jayden 21/11/2001 Micheal 03/04/1997 |
Replies:
Posted By: lizzle
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 6:56am
| well, you better start saving up now to visit me in jail! We don't smack the kids often, but Taine gets a smack on the hand fo constantly turning the tv volume up. |
Posted By: Leelee
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 8:01am
|
What if a child was sticking a knife in a plug hole, would the government pefer that the child get an electric shock or a smack on the hand (this is hyperthetically (sp))
My sister said she will ring the police to come and discipline her son which I think is a fair statement |
Posted By: busymum
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 8:19am
 This is exactly what the public didn't want to happen. They should have defined it - there's too much guesswork for everyone.-------------  |
Posted By: nuttymama
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 9:34am
|
I know, it's the same thing the bill is still left open to interpretation!
Who defines what's "inconsequential". It's crazy. Lizzle do you want to be cell mates?? I don't smack the kids very often at all but in times of danger I do on the odd occasion. ------------- Abigail 06/01/2005 Jayden 21/11/2001 Micheal 03/04/1997 |
Posted By: Bizzy
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 2:02pm
ok so those words dont even belong together... I dont know about you but i dont use force on my children and if you do then maybe you deserve to be prosecuted. ------------- http://www.myfitnesspal.com/weight-loss-ticker"> 
|
nuttymama wrote:Posted By: busymum
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 2:26pm
I disagree. It takes at least minor force to get Hannah to the time-out spot and that's even without smacking.  ------------- |
Posted By: nikkitheknitter
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 4:14pm
|
The advice says that smacking not considered inconsequential by investigating officers may be prosecuted if it is "repetitive and frequent" and previous warnings or interventions have been ignored.
Geepers... don't get too up in arms about all this. Even if it is left up to the police - do you think they are all unreasonable??? I certainly don't. (Edited for spelling and minor change after reading more carefully) |
Posted By: nikkitheknitter
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 4:17pm
| http://www.stuff.co.nz/4102167a10.html - This crazy woman is the type of stuff that they are going to be dealing with! |
Posted By: nikkitheknitter
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 4:21pm
|
Arghhhh you left off the end of the article
Here is the rest - National's leader, John Key, said today his party would keep a close watch on developments. "The critical test of this legislation was always going to be the way it was administered," he said. "But I am confident the police will administer the law with the appropriate judgment and discretion required." Mr Key said a National-led government would change the law if it was not working. "The overwhelming majority of New Zealanders do not want to see good parents criminalised for an 'inconsequential' smack. That's what National signed up to, and that's still the case." |
Posted By: Paws
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 5:30pm
Yeah I'm sure there will be some common sense... ------------- http://lilypie.com"> 
|
Posted By: busymum
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 8:00pm
|
Gosh Nikki that's pretty crazy. Doesn't sound like NZ does it? ------------- |
Posted By: nikkitheknitter
Date Posted: 20 June 2007 at 8:16pm
| I know... I just don't understand how! I mean, kids drive me nuts, but not enough to do anything like that! |
Posted By: nuttymama
Date Posted: 21 June 2007 at 7:14am
Ouch  Gant. There is a big difference to tapping your child on the hand and what some of these people are doing!
Example : We live by a very busy road I had just had my toe cut open at the hospital the night before and stitched back up. Miss Two Just as we got up to our gate pulls away from me and runs down the drive towards the road laughing. When I do catch up with her two metres away from the road she is still laughing. So I hold her hand and tell her that was extremely naughty and smack her hand to drive to point home. I don't often smack so she realises what she has done is a major. She grizzles and says sorry we have a hug and walk back up the drive and enjoy the rest of the day. There was no point bringing her inside and putting her in time out as she would have forgotten what she had done. And since then she has never pulled away from me. I would rather have a child grizzle for a few seconds over a smack to the hand than scrape her off the road! There is no right or wrong as far as I am concerned with light correctional smacking. There are pros and cons, those that do smack are told you are wrong and being abusive, Those that don't have been accused of raising brats that don't know how to behave. The way I see it every child is different and should be treated as such. It's a topic no one is ever going to agree on and is personal choice, and neither side should be casting judgments on the other. The point is the choice has been taken away from parents and that's not right. I'm sure the police will use commonsense but that aside they have the letter of the law to follow and it will come down to the courts having to decide. As was stated that in it's self will tear families apart. The general idea was good in removing "reasonable force" but the system is very much open to abuse, Think pissed teenager, waring separated parents. They may not be charged but they do face the possibility of being put on the register! ------------- Abigail 06/01/2005 Jayden 21/11/2001 Micheal 03/04/1997 |
Posted By: nuttymama
Date Posted: 21 June 2007 at 7:17am
This wasn't on Stuff where I got the article off sorry  .
I just read the article you had a link to and WOW. That's so horrible!! ------------- Abigail 06/01/2005 Jayden 21/11/2001 Micheal 03/04/1997 |
Posted By: Leelee
Date Posted: 21 June 2007 at 8:13am
| I just read that article, OMG how could anyone possibly to that, that is just awful, those poor children they or any child doesnt deserve that |
Posted By: Glow
Date Posted: 21 June 2007 at 8:28am
Whoa there really is a fair few sick people out there.. Re: Article of The Crazy women & other recent related News
 ------------- Mummy of Two Boys B: 2004 K: 2007 |
Posted By: Bizzy
Date Posted: 21 June 2007 at 9:26am
well see thats not force either.... ------------- http://www.myfitnesspal.com/weight-loss-ticker">
|
Posted By: MyMinis
Date Posted: 24 June 2007 at 8:42pm
|
Im all for catching the parents who beat their children, but not for parents who occasionally light smack their children to be prosecuted, cause I can see it happening.
I give HAleigh the odd light smack esp when timeout isnt suitable, like in the supermarket the other day she booted me a fair one on my bump and it hurt real bad, I asked her to stop and she kept laughing, so i smacked her on the hand, since I was on my own, getting her to timeout wasnt an option while waiting in a cue with a trolley full of groceries. She doesnt go into timeout often or get a samck often at all as shes not really a bad kid and is easily stopped lately. but at times i think a light smack is the only way to stop the bad behaviour. I would like to see the actual guidlines to this rather than what the medias telling us as its all confusing as to whats classed as reasonable force etc etc. The whole things been changed that many times according to what Ive picked up on the news. ------------- http://lilypie.com"> 
http://lilypie.com"> 
http://tweetytweety85.bebo.com - bebo |
Posted By: miss
Date Posted: 24 June 2007 at 11:02pm
|
The guidelines say hitting with a weapon or implement, strikes to the head and kicking should "generally" be prosecuted. In borderline smacking cases, police should consider the child's age, maturity, ability to reason, physical development, health and sex and the circumstances that led to the use of force.
That is the crux of the matter. I think the fact they are considering what is behind a borderline smack is really importnat - did you smack the child to prevent it sticking fingers in the plug? Ignore. Did you smack the child because it wet it's pants and it is only little? Don't ignore. There was always going to be a period of settling into things, but how about we give it a chance before jumping to wild conclusionss about how things may or may ot be interpreted. -------------  
|