KEY POINTS:
The smacking debate has been the biggest ever feedback topic on our Your Views forums and here is the final selection for now of your views.
We will consider re-opening the debate when the bill reaches a further stage in parliament.
Our political bureau says smacking seems certain to be banned when MPs cast their final votes on the issue in three weeks' time.
New Zealand First MP Doug Woolerton confirmed he would back Green MP Sue Bradford's bill and would oppose an amendment which might have derailed it. His decision, plus confirmation from at least two National MPs that they will back Ms Bradford's bill, virtually ensures smacking will be forbidden.
Sarah
I have been reading the outrage of average people and parents with amusement and this is because so many people were jumping up and down for joy about the need for stronger dog laws and fearful for their children, the boot is now on the other foot. Now people are saying that they might be wrongly accused and face the threat of legal intervention. Now you know what poor dog owners have been saying for ages now.
Jane Irwin
I think Sue Bradfords bill is a good one. I have two preschoolers and God knows they drive me crazy at times, but I also know that smacking them for whatever reason is not an effective method of discipline. A smack, however small, sends kids a message that hitting is ok. It must be OK cause Mum and Dad do it right? Sue Bradford is on the right track. She is not out to criminilse parents who smack their kids for running onto the road, please, where do NZers get this ridiculous sense of paranoia from? She is trying to put right the fact that at the moment,it is legally an offence to use reasonable force against an adult, but not an offence to do the same thing to a child. Brave Sue Bradford, you have my vote.
Stuart Young
I think it is great that MPs have looked at the facts and not been swayed by the rabid misinformation going the rounds and have passed the so called "smacking bill". This bill does not ban smacking - it only means that if a parent is accused of assault of their children they cannot claim a defence of reasonable force used for correction. The idea that parents who merely smack their children will be charged with assault is ridiculous. Well done Sue Bradford.
Vicki
I cannot believe that NZ hates its children so much that it will not take any steps necessary to protect them. Dont you realise that the law needs to have the teeth to protect the little ones that are being seriously damaged by the ones supposed to care for them? At present, the law cannot prosecute parents who maim and kill their children - they are not interested in the parents who lovingly care for their children, they have enough to do. I feel saddened that we are sending such a strong message to the world that we want to continue to hurt our precious ones. Wake up all you do-gooders who want to protect parents rights to hit their children and take a good look at yourself, stop being so selfish and put someone else first for a change.
Marwan J
Say what you want but I know for a fact that when I deal with my sisters kids (i.e. give them a smack they dont like it) sure they may be 7 & 9 but I have stopped smacking them and I reason with them now, and they listen to me. Smacking should be made illegal. Well the bill is likely pass. Most of the comments here have been between smacking and bashing. I very much doubt you will be prosecuted in your own home if you lightly smack your kid. We all know what this law is designed to do, and that is to remove reasonable force from section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961. This will remove defence of parents who do bash kids and attribute it to reasonable force. I dont think we will be giving control to our kids, simply doing them a favour. Kids dont like to be smacked, so discipline them other ways.
Frank
I think the Bill is great! Well done Sue! With this bill all future Kiwi kids will have a carefree life of absolute bliss, not worried by what they do or how they act. They will also be in touch with their inner selves and wonderful activates like pilatus and yoga will be promoted. In time, barbaric pass-times like Rugby may be forgotten - because if there' i anywhere that people really get smacked its in rugby! The achievements of the mighty All Blacks will be demoted to storybooks, which everyone can read and enjoy while sipping on their green tea. Well, I think you have got a great thing going here, keep it up.
Todd
Great to see an issue about children is getting the attention of New Zealanders. Whether Sue Bradford etc. has got it right or not, this MP is getting us talking about children, like how we were raised? And how we raise our own? Statistically we are not looking too good, but my view is these statistics are in the main spoilt by a few. In todays environment it takes courage to get NZders excited or at least get their attention about more than business and sport. I think we should pull back from the media spin and hype on the Bill and see it for what it is – an attempt to protect our children, not just within the family unit but our NZ children. Do you not think that some NZ parents need to think twice before sorting kids out with a whack?
Maybe it should be called stop giving children the bash bill.
Jasmine
I believe we need to take this opportunity as a positive step towards realizing there are non-violent ways to bring up children. One of these alternatives is described in Jean Liedloff's book "The Continuum Concept", which I highly recommend reading. This is a powerful technique that has been lost in modern society, and shows there is absolutely no need for ever resorting to smacking a child. I do not buy into the issue that this is only a problem in Maori & Islander communities. I was raised in a Caucasian Christian home where a horsewhip was used for discipline & anger was vented. This emotionally damaged me, and I know I was not alone. Children absorb so much in these early years, we should know better & if not, we need to learn alternative ways.
Christopher
There is a need to differentiate between smacking and beating. Of course beating and extreme violence are hideous crimes but smacking and restraints are a natural form of reinforcing concepts of discipline with unruly children. New Zealand needs more discipline not less. Rather than spending so much money on this proposed bill and subsequent legislation I have to ask how it will be reinforced? The nation needs to think about compulsory national or military service for its young men and women as a remedy for the break down in social cohesion and responsibility amongst the younger generation. It is heart breaking to see the rise of unstable circumstances in which so many of our young people now live and dwell. The circle of despair needs to be broken and morality reinforced by removing benefits from those who are pregnant outside of marriage and from so called single parent families. The parents need to be made responsible for their children and named and shamed when they fail in their duties. However, a ban on smacking is a step too far. If we can promote safe driving and make drink driving unacceptable then so too should we make poor parenting unacceptable. An old Irish proverb states that Children are like flowers in a garden and need to be pruned to become fine specimens if neglected they become wild and useless.
May
I have an issue with parents hitting their children to try to teach them lessons. It is just not on. Just think about how that child would feel to be in an environment that they think that they can not escape from.
Kee Teo
Smacking kids with excessive force is illegal under current law. Why pass a law that will make parent feel that they have broken the law everytime they smack a kid with "reasonable force"?
Albert
I suggest that Sue Bradford cannot different between smacking (disciplining) and abusing (violence). Not sure why she is in parliament? I came from a family of 5 siblings and all of us had been caned by our parents. The result, none of us became criminals, all professionals with the exception of one who is a full-time housewife, and we all took care of our parents when they are ill - bring them to the doctor and daily visits at the hospital. Further, when I was at school, I have never seen a student gone up to the stage getting caned in front of the whole school more than once! If this Bill do at all go through, there should also be a clause - in the next 3 years, should youth crimes do go up, criminals getting younger, more kids skipping schools, etc, Sue Bradford and all those who voted for it should resign from parliament. As in the private sector, if the management make a major mistake, he/she gets the sack, and I do not see why it should be any different with the government. I think this is a very fair proposition; you are voted in and paid by the citizen to perform. I also strongly suggest that the government / politicians stopped majoring on the minor and minoring on the major.
CZ
There is a significant inconsistency with Sue Bradfords rationale for the bill. She denies that it is intended to criminalise smacking, but at the same time, the bill itself says that "the purpose of this Bill is to stop force … under the pretence of domestic discipline", and now, she believes that any force is not reasonable. Is smacking not a "force", or are we trying to outlaw smacking? Sue Bradford needs to make up her mind.
Jane
I dont believe the anti-smacking bill will stop people from abusing and beating their children. Those people are already breaking the law, so a law is no deterrent to them. And it is insulting to the majority of (decent) parents to be dictated to by the government on how to raise discipline their children. Other parents obviously do not have the skills and knowledge of alternative methods of discipline their children. I believe there needs to be more focus on educating parents on other forms of disciplining their children (along with other parenting skills). If the bill is passed, I believe that there will be cases of some parents resisting a light smack of their child, for fear of being made a criminal, then their anger and frustration levels rising and leading them to eventually do something a lot worse than a light smack. There is so much focus on making laws against such things but no thought to educating people how to handle situations.
Katrina
Your poll question asked "Should parents have the right to smack their children for discipline" - the question should be Should children be afforded the same rights as adults against assault? Why would we not give our most precious resource, our children, the respect and protection they deserve. Parents and others seem to think the repeal is an infringement of their rights, it is more giving children the same rights as women who last century were able to be beaten by their husbands. Thank goodness for the courage and conviction of people like Sue Bradford and those who have supported the bill so far.
Michelle Tiatia
I am a 28-year-old mother of five children and am appalled at the anti-smacking bill. It seems ridiculous that the government should decide on how I should discipline my children. I am sure that most of those that voted tonight were "victims" of the odd smack or too, and needless to say, some of them, turned out alright. They, like myself (who was often disciplined in what would be termed abusive) are not violent perpetrators or murderers. If the government wants to make a change in the lives of the future generation, they should restrict regulations on what we allow on our TVs, what is played on the radio and put more money on keeping families together. It is the breakdown of families that is confusing and aggravating our youth. It is the music they hear that influences their mindsets to hate and gangbang. It is the sexual exploitation that they see on television every single day that is distorting their view of what relationships and sex is all about-the union of two people who love, care for and are committed to each other. Children need to learn consequences. These are not children that we are raising, but adults. They are the future leaders of our country and if they do not know that bad behaviour means bad, and often painful consequences, they will not be able to fully develop into mature, healthy adults who are able to sustain long-term relationships. Sure, I am saddened by the amount of children we see die at the hands of their parents; mortified even, that parents could do that to their offspring but a law is not going to stop them from committing that crime. That is already a crime and they do it anyway! Why does this government continue to make thoughtless decisions that go against what New Zealanders really want? It is us, and our children who have to reap the consequences. And that is worse than a smack on the bottom!
Jenna
I honestly can not believe that this smacking bill has reached the stage that it has. I am a 20-year-old university student who was smacked on occasion as a child and I am thankful that I was! Discipline is important and sometimes a smack is an effective teaching tool. Smacking is not the reason behind New Zealand's exceptionally high domestic violence rates. Do countries which have lower rates of domestic violence have specific laws banning parents from smacking their children? I think the New Zealand government needs to look at the bigger picture, this Smacking Bill is not the answer. It is a "quick fix bandaid" which will make New Zealand parents question themselves and their right to discipline and teach their children. It will not make the slightest difference for parents who do actually abuse their children. They won't care what the law says. The occasional smack is not abuse. Sue Bradford is living in a dream world if she thinks that this crusade of hers is going to make a positive difference to the lives of New Zealand children and their parents.
Matt Kemara
One thing the Govt should not over look is; they take away the rights from parents disciplining their children, yet they remain to have the rights to discipline any unruly member of society. Our children will grow up without the understanding that certain actions and choices will result with painful consequences. They will go out into the streets to protest for example, find themselves on the wrong side of the law and be physically punished by being battened, bitten by police dogs, dragged, & tassered, our kids will be unprepared for police brute force. Our kids get caught on the wrong side of the laws that Mum and Dad put in place, with some punishments being a smack. We as parents who sometimes smack our kids are actually preparing them for the real world. When Parents strikeout in anger, jealousy and rage they are an abuser and have broken the law. Police who strikeout in anger, jealousy and rage they are also an abuser of brutality and have broken the law. But both have within their means the right to discipline, we as parents have our unruly little ones to teach, discipline with love and hope they do not grow up to be unruly teenagers, and police who have to deal with unruly teenagers and adults do it by the strong hand of the law, not out of love! Well. we all know about that.
J Turner
Labour is losing the plot, trying to criminalise parents for lightly smacking their children which will enable CYPS/Government control of children is a step too far.
Evander
What the hell is this country coming to? We are so backward in our way of thinking it amazes me that these people were even voted into government in the first place! I may get arrested if I smack my child in public if my child continues kicking a strangers dog or even worse, trying to harm another child. Now what does Sue Bradford propose I do if I have a child who does not listen and continues to ignore everything I am saying and proceeds to put a fork in another persons eye. I will just tell little Billy not to do it again or else. Oh yeah, they can go to their room. Right?! Wrong!! Little Billy or Johnny wont learn from that so will continue to do it some poor kid at school as they know all they will get is a telling off and banishment to their room. Would that idiot who brought the race card into go and find a cave and live in it, child abuse is a colourless problem.
Anita
I think this bill is ludicrous. Who do these politicians think they are to take away the right to be able to discipline our own children. I have a 2 year old niece that absolutely has the run of her house because she gets no discipline from her parents because they don't believe by smacking her it does any good. In the meantime ,this child is allowed to bite, pinch, kick and scratch my 3 year old who wont retaliate for fear of getting reprimanded for it and he has been brought up not to hit girls anyway. This has caused many arguments between the 2 families but if I am present and this little imp bites my son I certainly smack her hands or bum if nobody else will do anything about it. Signs are already showing in this child that she is going to be a very nasty, selfish and aggressive young lady if its not knocked out of her now. I discipline my kids with a smack and they are always well behaved and a pleasure to take anywhere because they know right from wrong and that is through parental discipline not political hogwash saying that I cannot smack my children.
Richard James
I would not worry too much about this stupid law, I personally believe the first time a parent is put before a judge for smacking their child, the judge will throw the case out and have serious words for the law. Also, remember, Labour has only agreed to support this to its second reading, which they have done. And with all the screw ups in the labour camp the past few months, I dont think they would ignore the public on this. But then again, Helen is intent on doing what she wants, not what is best for the people and what the people want.
Vicki
I am incensed by some of the letters that condone hitting children as punishment for anything. Surely there is a better way to show children that we dont like what they are doing or that what they are doing is going to cause pain or damage? What about consistency, love, withdrawing privileges etc? I agree that children constantly push boundaries and parents need to be vigilant and I would suggest that smacking is a last resort that is all too often used as a lazy way of parenting. However, the debate should surely be about whether or not the law has the power to prosecute those that deliberately hurt their children, not to thwart all the self-righteous parents who can't be bothered or don't know how to use other methods. There are plenty of parenting groups out there that are only too happy to support you if you need it - look in the yellow pages.
Shane Reeves
New Zealanders need to send a strong message to parliament that enough is enough, the people rule this country not them, they merely represent us. If a parent does not know the difference between abuse and a disciplined smack then they are not fit to be a parent. We do not need laws in place dictating to parents of how to raise their children.
Antonia Feitz
Sue Bradford has uses the words, smacking and beating as interchangable. But they are not. That opponents of legitimate parental corporal punishment always resort to such a deceitful tactic demonstrates the weakness of their case. A deserved smack never hurt any child and probably taught some salutary lessons.
Katrina Allen
This is one of most unfairest things to ever come out of Parliament. This bill is not going to stop those parents to which this law is directed at/ no what its doing is lumping us all under the same category as those who go too far. These are the ones that are hidden behind closed doors and communities, not to mention, their families. These are the ones that the authorities need to target, not those of us who mildly discipline our children to make them better members of society. I think this bill reeks in all aspects.
Chris Nelson
I was smacked as a child yet I do not go around beating people up. I learnt what boundaries are and that certain action have reactions and that what I did was wrong .The people this bill is aimed at are going to beat there children anyway and are covered by other laws already in place. Children the have no boundaries set grow up thinking they can get away with anything so what happens in ten years time ,will our jails be filled with parents who disciplined their children and filled will young adults who thought what they were doing was ok , will our police time be spent chasing parents , ill disciplined youths and more courts tied up with this ,more money we have to pay. Politicians need to listen to the public this is another one like dropping the drinking age. Ask the police what has happened with this one.
Adele Jack
Where is the petition against the anti-smacking bill? I would love to sign it! My question is why does it take 300,000 people to make our MPs aware the NZ public disagrees with sixty or so individuals? And if 299,000 people sign the petition those individuals in parliament can happily ignore the thousands and thousands of people they represent in favour of whatever they feel like doing. It seems the government and the majority of MPs is intent on destroying the corner stone of a healthy society - the family unit (yet again). I would encourage all who recognise the anti-smacking bill to be harmful to regular families as it undoubtly is, to please act against it and write to our MPs. If hundreds of letters perhaps even thousands were to pour in then MPs would realise the huge mistake they may be about to make.
Karen
This whole debate about disciplining a child through a smack on the bottom / hand being abusive is an interesting one to follow. However, has the powers that be stopped for a single moment to contemplate that such discipline may be a lot less harmful to a child than what some verbal abuse amounts to. Parents who dont think twice about verbally bullying a child, public / private humiliation and intimidation or even swearing at their children. Those type of actions have a greater scarring effect on a child than has the occasional smack on the bottom or hand. It would be prudent to legislate for those instances too. Just a thought - use it, dont use it.
Vicki
What I would like to know is who is going to police this law if it gets through. Say for example a 7yr old reports to his teacher that his Mum smacked him and for whatever reason...the teacher passes this onto the headmaster. The headmaster informs the police. Its your childs word against yours. My 14yr old nephew tells me I cant kick his arse for being too lazy to mow his grandmothers lawns as I am threatening him, thats what he has been told by his school. This bill is political correctness gone mad. What will be next- verbal abuse? If you yell at your children you will be breaking the law. Sure no-one should be allowed to physically abuse their children, no argument there but if parents cant discipline their own children then who is going to?
Rachel
Firstly, I do not think smacking should be banned because, as people keep saying there is a much bigger difference from a punch with a fist than a smack. Define a smack please. Why should parents go to jail for small thing like a smack, when there is unbelievable, and terrible things happen to children in this country. I dont condone smacking, as there are other ways of dealing with behaviours in children than just smacking. I feel some parents need educating on how to discipline their children. Been a parent is really hard work. Been a parent myself and a single parent makes it harder. I am also a preschool teacher and that has really helped me with diciplining my son. Parents want to bring their children up best they no how, whatever circumstances they are in. I feel that smacking should be left as a last resort if all else fails. It is about knowing what to do. If you have tried everything else what do you do. Why cant there be a 0800 number that people can ring and talk to a professional, if nothing is working. Parents should be allowed to ask for help, many dont want too. Yes, I have smacked my child. After it, I felt the worst parent in the world. If there are certain boundaries but in place for children, then with the boundaries are consequences. I am not an expert either, but work everyday with children that will push the boundaries everyday wanting my attention and that can be up to 30 children. Please dont send parents to jail, there must be another way of sorting this out. Can someone write some information to parents about what to do, some ideas, some pointers. Its not fair on those that do everything for there children and are great parents.
Barbara
I think that this bill is so stupid and takes away out freedom as parents that don't go over board and beat up our children. Yes there are other methods for disciplining our children but sometimes those methods do not work. I have a four year old who thinks timeout is a joke and her behaviour got worse. I now give my child three warnings and a count to three before I even smack her. How is that betting her up I have give her plenty of time to stop doing what is wrong and yet she will still keep going. Giving them a smack on the bum with your hand is a way to let them know right there and then that what they are doing is wrong. I think this whole thing is wrong and that they government is now trying to turn us into a dictatorship as where we soon will not be able to do anything and children will run rampant and because we can not check there behaviour our youth crime rate will also go up. Government pull your head in and look at bigger issues this is not one of them.
Chris
I am an American who happened to wander across this article online, and I thought it couldnt hurt to share my views. I was both disciplined (by my mother) and abused (by my father and older sister) as a child. I can tell you that there is certainly a difference. In discipline, the person delivering the punishment is loving, and reminds you that you knew there would be consequences, and this will remind you to do better next time. Discipline rarely leaves a mark, and discipline fits the wrong done- it is not excessive. Abuse, on the other hand is not consistent. A large "punishment" is often delivered for a small offence, while larger offences go unnoticed. Abuse comes with phrases like "you're worthless, I should not have expected better of you", and leaves one feeling unloved. Not all abuse is physical- often people who think they are avoiding abuse will belittle children or scream at them in an effort impress upon them the wrong done- this can also be abuse, and there doesnt have to be any touching at all. Smacking is something done because we love our children, because we want them to be good children. Many people who are abusers never touch their children.
PPJ
So some people struggle to know the difference between a smack and abuse, but others clearly do not know that time out does not include locking the child in the cupboard. Time out needs to be banned, this could be an amendment to the proposal or a new bill may need to be put forward. The police will have discretion (like some self defence cases recently) so there is no need to fear. I am normally a Labour supporter (and member) but this is at risk if they decide to put their full weight behind the third reading.
B Collins
Being a parent myself I am under no disillusion. No child at any age will ever be "perfect", they all need discipline.
BT
If Sue Bradfords only agenda was to criminalise abusers, her drafted bill only needs to be worded a little differently. So that if a parent causes their child to need even minor medical attention, then the parents should be charged with child abuse, if this was the case then I am sure the majority of New Zealanders would be in favour instead of the extremist minority who we have had to put up with meddling in our society since the advent of MMP. Sues bill only highlights how politicians no longer have to listen to the people, they just have to make deals with other politicians who have not been elected personally by the people to keep the power they hold over us and often use against those who dare to speak out against the kind of woolly thinking that now inhabits the offices of power in our country. It is quite obvious to anyone that this anti smacking legislation is at best a distraction and at worse a way of keeping the general public fearful and irrational, that is after all the best way to control a society that no longer has any respect or belief in its politicians or the electoral system that put them there, because lets face it, if not for MMP most of our politicians would be unelectable. Your bill is not going to prevent severely emotionally damaged and uneducated parents from abusing their children, because they do it in a fit of rage, without even thinking about the consequences to themselves, let alone the consequences to their children, who may not even have been born into the situation if the parents hadnt been encouraged by recent governments over the last 20 years to have children for all the wrong reasons. So take care everyone and remember New Zealand when the government is doing something to make you fear and therefore think irrationally, try to think about what they are really doing in the background that they dont want us to see or think about.
Martin Kietzmann
This is avoiding the real issue of child abuse by family members in a very small proportion of the population. These are criminal acts that will continue being perpetrated by these criminals who have no respect for authority and place no value on the lives of other beings. A new law will not make them more or less criminal. The proposed new law does, however, risk criminalizing those persons who chastise their children in an effort to teach them the boundaries set out by society. No loving parent (99 per cent of the population) beats their child so badly as to be deemed abusive. The suggestion is ludicrous! Of greater concern is the growing lack of discipline within the modern youth. Values are misplaced and the justice system is ineffective - a tragic combination. Government should try focusing on real issues - there are enough of them - but no-one has the courage to voice them, never mind actively trying to remedy them. They are far too concerned with being PC and political positioning. Is there anyone with real guts out there? Apparently not!
Todd
Great to see an issue about children is getting the attention of New Zealanders. Whether Sue Bradford etc. has got it right or not, this MP is getting us talking about children, like how we were raised? And how we raise our own? Statistically we are not looking too good, but my view is these statistics are in the main spoilt by a few. In todays environment it takes courage to get NZders excited or at least get their attention about more than business and sport. I think we should pull back from the media spin and hype on the Bill and see it for what it is – an attempt to protect our children, not just within the family unit but our NZ children. Do you not think that some NZ parents need to think twice before sorting kids out with a whack? Maybe it should be called stop giving children the bash bill.
Cindy
I refuse to be told how to discipline my child by a bunch of politicians. And are the politicians even listening to the public in this matter or are they just driving forward because they know when it passes we are stuck with it whether we like it or not? Sure remove the reasonable force line from the law so it can be no longer used as a defence for child beaters in court, but what happens when the law starts prosecuting parents who are only trying to do their best by their children? Do we really have to sit back and let strangers dictate how we bring up our children?
Pat Deady
Its not if you are for or against this bill. There is a lot more to it than that. Considering that between 70 to 90 per cent of New Zealanders are opposed to its passing, and that its a conscience vote f
