Deborah Morris-Travers on the cost of child abuse on TVNZ Breakfast

August 24, 2009

Deborah Morris-Travers appeared on TVNZ Breakfast this morning to discuss new research that child abuse costs New Zealand over $2 billion per year.

Watch the video.

Protocols review timely and appropriate

August 24, 2009

Prime Minister John Key’s announcement today of a review of referral protocols between the Police and the Child Youth and Family services is a positive step to entrenching the child discipline law as it now stands.

“The first aim of those protocols should be to ensure that struggling parents are encouraged to get good help,” says Deborah Morris-Travers, spokesperson for the Yes Vote coalition, which supports the law as it stands.

“The Government has shown considerable political courage in standing up for New Zealand children by reacting as it has to the result of the referendum.

“Member organisations of the Yes Vote coalition look forward to being invited to work with the Police/CYFS review, especially to the extent that referral protocols also apply to non-government family help agencies,” Ms Morris-Travers says.

Te Kahui Mana Ririki applauds parliamentary position on Child Discipline Law

August 24, 2009

Chair of Te Kahui Mana Ririki Dr Hone Kaa said today that he is delighted with the government’s response to the citizen’s initiated referendum on smacking.

“Prime Minister John Key has maintained his position – the current law is working well and at this stage he has no intention of changing it.

“I am delighted that New Zealand will retain a law which effectively makes the physical punishment of children illegal.”

“This is especially important for Maori because our child abuse rates are so high.

“We must continue to promote a policy of zero tolerance of violence towards our young ones.”

Maori participation in the referendum was low with around a third of Maori voters taking part. 11.2% of those Maori voters voted yes to the question “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand”, and 88.8% voted no.

“We have always argued that the question was misleading.

“The debate has really been about the rights of children to live in homes that are free from violence and that right has been upheld.”

Updated – John Key reiterates: No law change

August 24, 2009

The Herald reported John Key’s take on the referendum result today:

[John Key’s] own view was that the law was “working as it is now”.

But on Monday, he would take to the Cabinet “options which fall short of changing the law but will provide comfort for parents about this issue”.

Be staunch, John, the country’s children are depending on you.

Read the full article at the NZ Herald.

Update: TVNZ video report

Audio: John Angus and Katrina McLennan discuss the need to retain the Child Discipline Law

August 24, 2009

Children’s Commissioner John Angus and Family Court lawyer Katrina McLennan were intereviewed on Morning Report today.  Key points:

• The legislation is working well for children and parents
• We’re not seeing lots of parents being investigated and dragged before the courts
• The law has given assurance to children and says that violence against children is totally unacceptable, that they should be protected from assault the same as anyone else
• The law has given legitimacy and reinforced bystanders getting involved where they see a parent assaulting their child, as in the Jimmy Mason case
• The law will not end child abuse in NZ overnight, but it’s an important first step
• Allowing smacking sends a message that violence is acceptable
• The Police and Child Youth and Family are not unduly targeting parents

Katrina asks, is this about protecting children or protecting parents? Which is more important?

To us, the choice seems clear.

Listen to the Audio:

Tapu Misa: John Key must hold the line

August 24, 2009

In an opinion piece in today’s Herald, Tapu Misa says that despite the referendum result, John Key must hold the line:

If the purpose of the referendum was to stop good parents being criminalised for “light” smacking, we don’t have a problem. So far no parent has been prosecuted successfully for that. The law allows “inconsequential” physical force – such as a light smack – in several circumstances, including stopping a child harming themselves or others.

But it rightly rules out the kind of parental correction that began with smacking and led to James Whakaruru’s stepfather beating the 4-year-old to death for bedwetting.

That’s an extreme example. Some people don’t recognise child abuse unless it involves a maimed or dead baby, but those who work with children know that the abuse continuum is less clear-cut. Hundreds of damaged children never end up in the public eye.

Read the full article at the Herald.

Time for real action on child abuse

August 23, 2009

Whatever proposals the Cabinet considers this week, they must focus on the need for real action on New Zealand’s shameful levels of serious child abuse.

“It is time to stop squabbling about the right to smack children and get down to serious action to stop child abuse,” says the Yes Vote coalition spokesperson Deborah Morris-Travers.

“On this, there is no disagreement between Yes and No voters.

“We have the world’s worst child death by maltreatment rate, and the consequences of child maltreatment and are costing all New Zealanders $2 billion a year in social welfare, legal, prison system and other costs, let alone the community and social costs.”

That cost is the conclusion of an Infometrics report prepared for Every Child Counts, which counts many Yes vote supporter organisations among its members.

“The Prime Minister is to be applauded for sticking by the law as it stands, and for seeking non-legislative responses which can give people comfort on the issues that clearly concern many.

“We hope that the Government will now seize an opportunity to take serious action on the real problem that distresses us all: the huge cost to individuals, society, and the economy of child abuse.”

“Since before its passage in 2007, member organisations of the Yes Vote coalition have advocated active communication with the public about what the law means and how it is intended to operate to contribute to lowering child abuse rates in New Zealand.

“If such action is part of the Government response, we will support that wholeheartedly. Such an approach would hasten the change in social attitudes to physical punishment which is already occurring, and which is a fundamental part of stopping child abuse.

A wooden spoon for Larry Baldock

August 23, 2009

Smacking isn’t enough for Larry Baldock, the man who collected thousands of signatures for the referendum.

He wants to bring back the ruler and wooden spoon.  He was quoted in the Herald as saying,

“I’m not opposed to the wooden spoon or ruler because you can control things with that better than you can with an open hand.”

We’d like to thank Larry for showing his true colours.  And evidently Bob McCoskrie agrees with him. But where will it stop?

USA Religious Right funds Vote No

August 23, 2009

According to an article in The Herald headlined “US funding for ‘no’ vote”, one of the core groups behind the referendum and Vote No campaign has received over $1m in funding from a conservative American religious group.  Funding has increased recently to over $200,000 per year.

Focus on the Family’s US spokesman Gary Schneeberger said his organisation involved itself in political debate: “We absolutely do – and certainly in the United States we have advanced Biblical values in the public square, without question.”

Are we allowing foreign political interests to meddle in New Zealand’s electoral process?  If so that’s very scary!

Read the full article at the herald to learn more.

Dr Seuss referendum question clearly confused some people

August 23, 2009

John Key said in June that the referendum question could have been written by Dr Seuss.

Now, we’re used to hate mail here at The Yes Vote headquarters – we’ve received plenty over the last few months, and it’s not unexpected given the nature of the question that there are a at least a few hateful people in the in the ranks of the pro-smackers.

What was our surprise then, when we received the following item yesterday:

Name: Richard
Email: [address removed]
Website:

It is a very sad week when a little 3 year old dies in our country from abuse that may have started with ‘a little tap’ and at the same time we have people like your group supporting the notion the violence towards our most vulnerable is ok.  I don’t think you understand what good parenting is and as for one of your representatives saying to his little girl ‘daddy loves you’ as he abuses her – how sick is that.  Shame on you

Time: Sunday August 23, 2009 at 4:04 am
IP Address: 125.237.176.[deleted]

Sent by an unverified visitor to your site.

This poor fellow obviously got the wrong end of the stick.  Some people are very confused about what YES and what NO meant on the referendum question.

We tried to be kind to this well-intentioned individual, and responded as follows.

Richard,

You got it the wrong way around my friend … The YES Vote are the people who are against smacking!

Please take out your wrath on the VOTE NO people …

Undeterred, he responded:

Your response confirms for me that your organisation has got no idea about what you actually stand for and why the referendum was a waste of time.  By voting, anyone would have supported your contention that smaking is a part of good parenting – how sad.  By doing your homework and visiting hospitals etc, you’d see that the level of child abuse is appaling in this country and people who voted yes have been sucked into turning a blind eye to this and in effect supporting it’s continuation.  I’m pleased to say that I’m not one of these people!  I know heaps of people who are doing a great job of raising their kids without resorting to violence.

Thankfully, less than an hour later, he sent us the following apology:

Please accept my sincere apologies – I was so fired up I thought that I was emailing that lot wishing to over turn the current law – Baldock etc!!

I am sorry for directing my frustration at the wrong group.  I just can’t believe how naive people can be believing that smacking kids is ok.

I will do what you say.  All the best with your work – I wish you luck and again sincere apologies!!

Phew!  It just goes to show how devious and confusing the referendum wording was, and that good triumphs over evil in the end.  But we’re left wondering how many people were as confused as Richard when they voted.