Key went further to say the government would be unlikely to change the law no matter what the outcome of the referendum.
Phil Goff agrees: “The question implies that if you vote ‘yes’ that you’re in favour of criminal sanctions being taken against reasonable parents actually nobody believes that.”
True enough, but that’s only one way to read the question. Tariana Turia and Russel Norman agree with us that a YES vote is the only way to indicate your clear support for the law. There is near universal agreement that the referendum is a waste of money, as the Child Discipline Law is working as intended.
Julie Lawrence and Anne Smith presented their interim findings from their research at Otago University today at the Families Commission’s Annual Research Seminar.
We’re pleased to be able to bring you a slideshow and audio of their talk.
Family discipline is a controversial topic which has been debated for centuries, and which is known to have a lifelong effect on the well being of children. This report provides a snapshot of the views, experiences and practices of a sample of 100 New Zealand families, in relation to the discipline of their preschool children.
Parents/caregivers were asked about what they believed about discipline, how they disciplined their children, and the type of support and stress that they experienced with parenting. The study also looked at the effect of child and family characteristics and context over time, on discipline. The study used a multi-method approach, involving semi-structured parent interviews, parent diaries of disciplinary events over three days in a two week period, and a standardised tool, the Parenting Daily Hassles scale. One hundred and seventeen caregivers comprised the national sample – 99 mothers, 18 fathers, one grandfather and two grandmothers. The findings include the following headings: beliefs about discipline; disciplinary practices; the influence of child and family characteristics, stresses, context and support. The findings suggest a more favourable picture of New Zealand parents’ disciplinary practice than previous research has, showing that the majority of parents took an authoritative (firm but warm) approach, and suggests that professionals who work with families could benefit from professional development programmes focusing on effective approaches to discipline.
Background:
Research shows disciplinary practices during childhood have lifelong consequences
Most previous research has focused on broad surveys and physical punishment – NZ parents favour relatively negative disciplinary techniques (Ritchie & Ritchie; Maxwell)
Need for better parent education and support in context of legal change in NZ
Little knowledge of the challenges parents face in using discipline in everyday contexts
Research questions:
What do New Zealand families with preschool age children believe about appropriate disciplinary practices for children?
What are the range and typical uses of discipline in New Zealand families?
How are family disciplinary practices influenced by context and events over time?
What type of support (if any) do families receive in their parenting with young children?
Summary of findings:
Majority of parents use authoritative or mixed approach (ie sometimes they are permissive)
Positive methods (rewards, praise and reasoning) more commonly used than negative methods (smacking or shouting). Timeout the most common punishment.
No enthusiasm for physical punishment.
Own experience of parenting important – but can be rejected.
Books and TV hugely important source of info and support.
Family and friends important supports but also early childhood teachers (other professionals less mentioned)
Kathryn Ryan interviews Prof Anne Smith, Murray Edridge, and Bob McCoskrie on Radio New Zealand’s Nine to Noon programme this morning.
Anne Smith is Professor Emeritus at Otago University’s College of Education, and discusses her research on child discipline that shows that less than 10% of parents feel that smacking is effective; she says that most of the parents involved in her study that smacked their children regretted it afterwards, and that the smacking had more to do with the parents’ state of mind, tiredness, etc than the child’s behaviour.
She also discusses parents’ reaction the current law. In her study, 47% supported the current Child Discipline Law, 27% were against it, with the rest undecided.
Prof Smith said that only a tiny minority of experts believe that smacking is effective, and that the present law is working well.
Murray Edridge (CEO Barnardos) and Bob McCoskrie (Family First) comment on the research and the referendum.
My grandfather was an alcoholic wife and child beater and my father beat me as a kid. I know first hand how it feels and I find the wording of this referendum absolutely absurd.
Even if an adult was wrongly accused under the current law, at least they have the protection of the NZ Justice system via the courts – as a young boy being thrashed my only protection was the hope that my Dad would run out of anger before he managed to seriously injure me. Sadly it’s not reasonable, good parents who kill their babies.
I shudder to think how these latent child killers in our society would interpret a NO result in the referendum.
The question assumes that smacking is part of good parental correction – which is an assumption that John and many other people dispute.
Vote YES if you favour smacking being a crime, you want to keep the law the way it is, you support a violence free society, but you find yourself in the company of Sue Bradford and the Nanny State, and those people who think they know how to bring up your children better than you do.
Vote No if you’d like to go back to the previous law where “reasonable force” is a defence against physically hitting children, and you find yourself in the company of the whackers and the bashers and the wacky right and all of those people.
John is voting YES because he believes, along with Pita Sharples, that there has to be a better way of bringing up your children than smacking them.
The official campaign has started to make it easy for people to take part in the Citizens Initiated Referendum on the question “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”.
The referendum runs from Friday 31 July until Friday 21 August, but to take part people need to be correctly enrolled.
“It’s important that people know now that a referendum is being held and how to take part,” says Robert Peden, Chief Electoral Officer. “This is the first Citizens Initiated Referendum to be held by postal vote, and only those correctly enrolled will receive their voting papers.”
From today (Monday June 15) every household will receive a notice in the mail from the Electoral Enrolment Centre encouraging people to check that they are enrolled to vote and that their details are up-to-date.
“We estimate around 36,000 people have become newly eligible to enrol since last year’s general election. In addition, there are many thousands of people who have moved house or flat and need to update their enrolment details,”says Murray Wicks, National Manager, Electoral Enrolment Centre.
“People needing to enrol or update their details should fill in an enrolment form. Enrolment forms are available from the elections website, by Freetexting your name and address to 3676, from any PostShop or by calling Freephone 0800 36 76 56,” says Mr Wicks.
Voting opens on Friday 31 July and closes on Friday 21 August. Referendum voting papers will be sent to voters in the mail. People should post their voting papers back no later than Thursday 20 August to be sure they are returned on time.
Voters need to tick yes or no on the referendum voting paper in response to the referendum question, and return the voting paper in the envelope provided.
More evidence is emerging that Kiwi parents are favouring positive parenting strategies for disciplining their children over smacking or hitting.
New Zealand is nearing the second anniversary of the law change that gave children the same legal protection against assault as adults.
New information on family discipline practices is being presented tomorrow (Tuesday June 16 2009) in Wellington at the Families Commission annual research seminar. The early findings are from the second report on a study of 100 families carried out by Otago University researchers Julie Lawrence and Anne Smith. The report, funded by the Commission, will be published in a few months.
Professor Smith said, “In our research four out of ten of the parents said that they occasionally smacked their children. However, less than one in ten felt it was effective.”
In contrast, timeout, which was the most commonly used disciplinary strategy was thought to be effective by four out of ten parents.
“Parents who had been brought up being whacked as children were often determined to do it differently and had moved away from smacking their own children.”
Professor Smith said the parents in the study were much less accepting or supportive of physical punishment than those in studies done ten and 20 years ago. These latest findings agreed with a 2008 survey done funded by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner.
Chief Commissioner of the Families Commission, Dr Jan Pryor, says the repeal of Section 59 sent a clear signal that hitting children was not acceptable and this study shows attitudes appear to be changing.
“Consistent parenting strategies which use rewards, distraction and consequences such as timeout are proven to be more effective at teaching children self discipline than physical punishment.
“The law is working well, parents are not being criminalised for trivial offences and there is growing understanding and use of positive parenting strategies,” she said.
National Radio ran a story on Morning Report today on the referendum, with guest spots by Deborah Morris-Travers, Sue Bradford, Larry Baldock, and Bob McCoskrie.
If you are going to use or distribute material from our campaign in any way, eg remixed or mashed up, please ensure that your actions are compliant with the relevant legislation, as the Yes Vote Coalition cannot take responsibility for actions beyond our control or knowledge.
The bottom line is that we want to play by the rules. We appreciate your support, but please act ethically, thoughtfully, and within the law.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
