KEY POINTS:
Emails continue to pour into the Online Herald on the smacking debate so here is more of the latest selection of your views.
In the latest development, 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.
Dean Hunt
How can the politicians be so removed from New Zealand public opinion? I have not spoken to a single person that actually agrees with or supports this bill. Maybe it is the circles I move in. I would like to see this bill put to real public scrutiny, not just parliamentary, as the two do not seem to hold a common view on this.
BLG
If I had not been smacked as a child I would be a reckless criminal today at the age 34. Without some physical discipline in my life who knows what I would have turned into, but I can tell you it wouldn't be nice. Sue Bradford is living in a dream world and thinks everyone can be controlled by emotional blackmail which is even worse than a short sharp shock. I hope she is reading these messages and wakes up before something bad happens to her.
Kent
We no longer live in a Democracy. No one has elected Sue Bradford. Not a single person in the public has voted for her. She got into parliament on the coat tails of her mates. She has done not one single thing to justify her place in parliament. She has no mandate from the people whatsoever to put forward any law to NZ. None at all. Yet here she is, pushing through a bill a huge majority of the people oppose. But that doesnt matter because no one voted for her anyway. The most galling aspect of this unelected politician pushing through a law opposed by almost every single adult, is the support from our elected officals. Our so called Representatives. Not a single one in the Labour part is voting according to the people they have been elected to represent. This is truly the downfall of democracy. Labour are kowtowing to minor parties and their ridiculous policies(thats why they are minor parties) all for the sake of grasping to their tenuous hold on power. We can thank MMP for this disgrace.
MarK
My younger brother has grown up in a smack free environment and he has become absolutely out of control as he is completely aware that there is no threat to him for anything that he may do wrong at any time. Many parents know that the threat of a smack is the only control they have over their children. Some people may be lucky enough to have well behaved children, for everyone else, removing the right to smack their own children is going to be a serious problem and children will very quickly learn that they have powers over their parents more so than the other way around. This is a serious problem that is going to create a population of serious problems.
Catriona
I strongly believe that smacking is wrong and causes children to ultimately behave worse. I was a child with then undiagnosed Aspergers Syndrome and was smacked and hit with hairbrushes and wooden spoons it has lead me to be anxious and fearful in adulthood. Parents can discipline their kids using withdrawal of privileges, time out, grounding etc.
Camelia
I support Mr Borrows amendment because it works more to stop disruptive and unruly behaviours from misbehaving children or teens. However parents must control their anger, and hands most of the time. Parents must think cool and firstly exercise communications with their children. Parents needs the government's support,to be engaged with counsellors or child psychologist, when matters get more tensed. Thank you.
Merv
I have no idea where did the government came to a conclusion to even consider to table this bill. It is preposterous, I remember on my way back from Los Angeles a few months ago. I have been in a drawn out business meeting and all I wanted was to go home to some peace and quiet. So I boarded the plane and a few rows in front of me was a couple with 2 young children, they must have been 5 and 7 years old and on the opposite aisle was a mom with 2 children as well, they must have been 4 and 9. The 5 and 7 year old started playing up and getting very frigidity. They moaned and groaned and complained about everything, they starting yelling and calling each other names and even started scolding their mum for booking such a long flight home. All the parents did was politely asked the kids to keep quiet and sit down otherwise when they get home they will be put into their rooms. Did it help?, least to say it carried on for the next 10 hours. On the other hand, the single mum with the 4 and 9 year old had her kids under total control. I caught the mum in the corner of my eye giving a gentle smack on the 9 year olds hand for pinching his sister. For the duration of the flight they were little angels, happily sitting there watching the in flight entertainment and sleeping and just occasionally fussing up but mum would slightly raise her voice with a threat to use the back of her hand and they promptly kept quiet. if the government thinks putting a ban on smacking will solve the problem then we might as well abolish the prison system and just sent the criminals to the naughty corner each time they commit a crime. A child must not learn discipline and consequences. As adults we know what is wrong and right and what is accepted and frown upon. A child has no recognition of what is wrong or right, if they dont learn it the hard way, they will learn it the wrong way.
Linda
I personally dont think this bill will achieve anything productive! Adults who hit/beat children with excessive force are not going to stop just because a bill comes in. Normal, responsible parents should have the right to discipline their children where necessary. I personally believe that corporal punishment should be bought back into schools. I am only 23, and as a ex student I can honestly say that I had no respect for adults. They couldn't really do anything to me. Why should I? Had there been a kick up the backside I may have thought twice about some of the nasty comments I returned to them when told to do something. Looking at the numbers of young criminals/offenders going through our system now surely shows that something serious needs to be put in place. I recently witnessed a 5 or 6 year old child hitting his mother in a supermarket. A passer by made a comment of "a good clip in the ear would stop that" and the mother, who was getting abused by her son replied with "I could never hit my boy" Honestly. Are you kidding! I dont think what is trying to be achieved will be achieved. If this is implemented then be ready for the youth of tomorrow to take over today -no doubt violently.
Ravi
It a sign of coming times, next it will be: illegal to stare and intimidate your child, illegal to make children walk to school and endanger their life; Illegal to force feed your children ; illegal to enforce your rules in your house. Let competent people like Sue Bradford decide what is acceptable.
In short, people handover your children to the government as soon as they get delivered. Even doctors who gives a light slap to new born to start breathing is violence which is too bad as new born just came into life.
Peter Barrett
Bradfords bill will turn good loving parents who are trying to instil values and bring up their children safety and with respect for others into criminals and child abusers for occasionally physically disciplining their children. Another example of social engineering control and another example of avoidance of personal responsibility. Where do I sign the petition?
Dream
It is totally irresponsible of the government to pass this bill. It is going to give the children of this country so much power that will go to their heads. They will be running wild with the parents unable to discipline them, and the children will turn around and tell their parents that the parents can't smack them. I feel this will result in more delinquency as the control is taken out of responsible parents hands to keep their children on the right track. It will contribute to increasing the crime rate. We already have children as young as 12 in the jail system charged with murder. What will this bill create? There has to be another way to prevent children from being severely abused. A smack on the hand or bottom should not be defined as abuse. A continuous beating is abuse, but not a short smack and just one. This is a ridiculous bill that should never have made it to parliament. I would be happy to sign any partition to support the prevention of this bill from becoming law.
Steve
I think this whole bill is absolutely ludicrous being pushed by tree hugging leftists. If parents lose the right discipline their children in a reasonable manner, then society will suffer a breakdwon in discipline and values. As a member of the "think blue line", I think we have enough common sense to know whats reasonable discipline and whats over the top. The law as it stands, is perfectly adequate and I would not support bringing anyone before the court for reasonable domestic disciplining.
Teresa
I am absolutely appalled by this government and it's liberal standards. I am a law abiding citzen who dearly loves my children.I desire them to be honourable young adults of good character and able to handle difficult situations in life without demanding society or anyone around them that they owe them something. With the anti smacking bill coming in to act it is teaching our children that they can manipulate there parents and have no proper boundaries to operate in. I am wholeheartedly against child abuse but I believe that a loving disciplined approach through smacking can be beneficial to the childs best interest. This government has undermined the people of this nation and has gone for their own agenda rather than the people.
Michael
I dont have kids (yet) so I am no expert, but I do know that kids need to be told the difference between right and wrong. I would think that mostly a stern voice would be sufficient, but the nature of the punishment must fit the nature of the crime, and this is an important thing to learn in the natural world, or which are a part. When a lion cub bites it's Mothers tail, it might get a strong growl. When it bites its Mothers face and causes serious pain its probably going to get a paw around the head so it can work out it has done something seriously wrong. I think its important for kids to learn these lessons in life, and I think we'd be hard pressed to find anyone that turned out horribly wrong because they got a smack on the bum.
Ollie
The sort of conscientious parent that would obey such an anti-smacking law is not the sort of person that would beat their child half to death!
Paul B
Dear Sue, What is next? An instant fine for raising your voice to your children in case you hurt their feelings, a prison term for making them tidy their bedroom? Potentially criminalising a large portion of the population is not the way to get them on board when you are too spineless to go after the real perpetrators of violence against others. From concurrent sentences to worthless moments of the probation service every occurrence has been swept under the carpet after an appropriate amount of comment from our leaders at which point nothing constructive is achieved. But if your aim is to look good in the eyes of the United Nations we are right on the money - pity the population of New Zealand is short changed.
Michael Ward
So there is to be a conscience vote from MPs to dictate how we are to raise our children. We all know there is only one way to sway an MPs conscience so I will say it first. Judith Tizard, you are my local MP. If you vote in favour of this foolish bill you will lose my vote. Lets see how many consciences are swayed once their voters dissipate.
Mark
Has the public been consulted regarding this law? I am disgusted that we live in a country where law can be introduced without the pre approval of our citizens!
Rehana
New Zealand it seems, is becoming a dictatorship type of country, where everyone gets told what, how, when & where to do anything. When a child is born, the parents bring them up, not the government. Why cant Sue concentrate on more hideous realities of our society instead of controlling the personal lives of families. Its true that discipline can be asserted without a smack, but in majority cases once in a while a smack is fine. What does she think?? Her anti smacking law will stop all the violent child abuse already prevalent in dysfunctional families? As it is children these days have less respect for parents because they are given so much freedom. Bring this law in and see how kids can manipulate or black mail parents. After all, a child is always considered to be truthful. Lets see how truthful they will be once they learn what this bill does.
David Munro
Smacking is wrong. Smacking doesnt work. Our kids deserve the same protection in law that you and I have. That's it. Reading the other posts make us look like a country full of smackaholics; please lets see more posts that support children as human beings.
May Finlay
So many letters regarding smacking say it never did them any harm so I will continue to smack my children. I beg to differ. At 84 years of age, I still remember vividly the smacking on the bottom which I could not bear anyone to touch for years the very worse place to smack children also being told to wait until your Father comes home I feel I was permanently scared with those threats the nervous tension waiting for the smacking I was to get has never left me.I also found it horrifying to see adults male and female standing over a small child ready to smack often the child quivering with fear. Every child is different some can cope with it others suffer. Going through all the letters I am proud of the fact that I learnt from my experience of being smacked and knew that I could never bring myself to smacking my two daughters. I have always admired the courage of Sue Bradford who has been prepared to stand up for many injustices I hope I see in my life time a change of attitude towards this cruelty to small vulnerable children.
Izaak
This whole issue is like saying because a couple of police officers misused batons that we are going to ban them. Just because a minority of parents go overboard with smacking, eg: hitting them with objects, or with a closed fist (which both are abuse not smacking anyway), does this mean responsible parents who are say, trying to teach their kids not to put things in electric sockets, or play near a hot stove should be penalised?
Paul
We should not need specific laws relating to smacking. There are existing laws that make any form of assault criminal. A person is entitled to that protection from the time they are born if not sooner.
The responsibility for children under 16 requires some physical restraint and sometimes physical control but never violence. Rather than having a law about smacking, the existing crimes act should suffice with additional law making parents responsible for under 16s and thereby granting some physical force as needed in carrying out that responsibility.
Karl
I think its high time some reality was injected into this discussion. Sue Bradfords bill is not about criminalising the smacking of children. Such an assertion is patently absurd. The bill simply removes a provision in the Crimes Act that basically sanctions serious assault of a child, using the excuse that it was in the name of discipline. Bradfords bill came about because of hundreds of documented cases of serious beatings of children where parents or guardians got off scot free because courts ruled that they used "reasonable force".
I also wonder what in some of the minds of the people who have written makes them think that they have a God given right to hit a small human being in the name of discipline. Hitting a child teaches them to fear their parents, and often the child doesn't even know why they have been hit. I was appalled one day to see a man publicly tan the hide of a girl of no more than two or three. You cannot tell me that this benefits such a small child. It took all my self-control not go give him an earful about the irreparable harm he was doing to this little person. What Bradfords bill seeks to do is protect our most vulnerable citizens, children, from serious abuse and assault. Such a move ought to be applauded. Some of the people who have written in seem to assume that the law already protects children from such treatment. Unfortunately, in a lot of cases, this is not borne out by the evidence Bradford has collected. It also removes a double standard in our society that has no place in our world today. Why is it that when an adult hits another adult, it is considered an assault, a criminal matter and ends up in court, yet when the same adult hits a child, it is considered discipline? I hope that when the time comes for me to start my own family, I can find other ways to discipline my children, without resorting to violence.
Alan Light
Jim Hopkins has said it all in his Friday opinion. This debate is not about childrens welfare. It is about a battle of philosophical approach and a minority trying to impose their moral vacuum on the rest of the country. There is an agenda at work here that has nothing to do with the welfare of our children but is designed to undermine social structures and traditional values. Rather than actually addressing the causes of family violence these social engineers are simply indulging in a wallpapering exercise that is undermining parents whose responsibility it is to train and correct their children in appropriate and effective ways.
Marlene Gillingham
I am mortified that Sue Bradford has the audacity to imply that I am a criminal for giving my four children a tap on their clad bottoms when they had crossed the acceptable behaviour line. Surely she is confused between abuse and caring loving discipline. Time out or a tap should be a parents choice. Do we still live in a democracy? Maybe her time on the street protesting has clouded her awareness of the average caring parent who, by-the-way, pays her wages. Her bill needs to be dumped. The money spent on this fiasco would have been better utilised in health, education, the police or creating job opportunities. This is political grandstanding at its worst.
Clive
Children & young people must be taught where the cut off point is for bad or unacceptable behaviour. When a child constantly misbehaves tell it that it is bad often enough and it will believe that it is bad and will grow up to be bad. Give a short sharp smack when it crosses the line it will learn that it has crossed the line for acceptable behaviour and not develop a complex.The majority of societies problems are caused by lack of discipline and respect for others. This bill will only weaken further the ability of decent parents to discipline their children and will not stop the child beaters.
Frans
Next election this government is gone, easy as that.
John Budge
I stop my 4 year old running across the road, explain the consequences to him, give him a light smack to reinforce this, then end up in court, appearing after an 18 year old has been given PD for assault while under the influence of metamphetamine ? What a complete nonsense. This stupid involvement of government in the private lives of New Zealanders is mind boggling, ranks up with giving 18 year olds the rights to buy alcopop. Huge police and court resources tied up. I can not see that many middle class pakeha being convicted. This law will undoubtedly affect certain members of our communities more than others. It will not stop the bashing of a child by a drunk and/or stoned adult. What will Sue Bradford say when the next New Zealand child is killed by an adult, after her law is passed ?
Dee
I am fed up with interference in our personal lives, and will not be voting for any party in favour of the Bradford Bill. She should be concentrating on those that are beating maiming and killing our children, not everyday parents caring for their children with loving discipline. I encourage everyone to join me in emailing or writing to Parliament to tell them so.
Alan Radford
Sue Bradfords bill does definitely further undermine parents and families. It also criminalises parents who use smacking in any way. Even in the most justified cases, parents are likely to be paralysed by doubt and fear, instead of taking timely decisive action. This Government has made many anti-family anti-parent policy statements and enacted similar legislation. In this climate, where parents are usurped by the state, it is unjust to hold any parent responsible for how any child turns out. Dont let me hear "Where were the parents?" whenever the news is about a youth gone wrong. There is no sincerity or consistency when it comes to application of policy or law. In cases where children are kept safe by dad, the children are ignored by child abuse agencies. With no refuge available to fathers, any Dad who flees with children for their safety sake is zealously hunted down as a "kidnapper", not so mums even if they are the abuser. Naturally I disagree that New Zealand is a fit place to raise children. I say, one law for all. Violence is violence no matter what the gender of the offender. Who would I vote for. Not this government thats for sure. Actually I would prefer to leave New Zealand permanently. NZ is an undemocratic pompous prejudiced hypocritical disgrace.
Peter Anders
I am appalled at the Sue Bradford Bill now before the House. I went to a private boarding school when I was six years old and then went to a boarding school for my secondary education. The private boarding schools method of punishment was a cane from a palm tree and left bruising on our buttocks for up to two weeks.I do not resent this and am certainly a better person for the punishments meted out to me. I still know the difference from right and wrong and have never had a conviction entered against me. My secondary education punishment was either a bamboo cane or a sand shoe either across the backside or across the head. After all this so called abuse I would not vote for this bill. In my opinion this bill will change the physical abuse into mental abuse which i believe is worse.I am not surprised that the jails are full of prisoners who have no respect for anyone and if they cant get their own way use violence as a means of getting it. I also believe that politicians should not be legislating to tell people how to disipline their children.This to me is breaching our human rights. Lets get real and abolish this madness and start getting New Zealand back on track.
Jeanette
The Children and Young Persons Act eroded control of children under the law. Children under 14 who break the law do not face any real consequence. This bill will do the same for parents, it will erode control. I flicked my childrens hands when they were toddlers and put their fingers into danger areas, I smacked their nappy covered bottoms when they wandered away in the supermarket, ran across the parking lot or opened the gate and left the property, as preschoolers they got a smack on their hand. I dont abuse my children, now they are 5 and 10, they know I am capable of smacking their hands, they don't like the idea and it gives them pause for thought when contemplating breaking rules. This law will not stop abusive parents. Abusive parents already break the law dont they?
Rachel
I strongly agree with all of the sentiments against Sue Bradfords proposed new anti-smacking law. The only thing I ask is how our judicial and family services systems will cope with all the new cases against parents that this law change will surely generate. CYFS are already reportedly struggling with their huge caseloads of (genuine) child abuse cases let alone following up reports of parents that choose to discipline their children in a reasonable manner. Wont this new law change effectively dilute the chances of the real child abuse offenders being reported/caught and convicted? - especially when our courts are already so heavily congested (with P related convictions etc).
Veronica
I have four children, and yes I have used smacking as a very last resort. The last time my 16.5yr daughter got smacked was at 14, two on the hand with a ruler. Before that, was at 5yrs old for cutting the whole front of her beautiful curly hair. She is now a deputy head girl. Speak to any of my childrens teachers and they will confirm that my children are a pleasure to teach. Why, because it is my duty as a parent to teach my children respect, love and discipline. We can discuss issues with ease and allow them to voice their concerns, but when they have done something really wrong, I do not hesitate to use smacking as a last resort, and they know and understand it. My grandmother always says, better to keep your lawn green and luscious by removing the weeds, if you dont it will grow wild and uncontrollable and when that happens to your children I have no doubt the government will come down on you harder than a smack put you in time-out for a few years, lock the door and throw away the key. The lunacy of this bill will turn all of us into criminals.
Tracy
I read a article not so long ago about gangs and parents need to take more interest in their children. I do not really smack my kids, but belidve that a good smack now and then does no harm, and it should be left up to the parent discretion. The government should be careful of the backlash here - you want parents to be actively involved in rearing their young but not allowing parents to discipline their kids. If a youth comes to court on a gang related charge and the parent is asked about discipline - the parent could say You made it a criminal offence to discipline my child so you raise him. Government needs to be sensible. Just one more thing - candidates who dont have kids should not be passing any bills and laws if you havent had the privilege or hardship of raising one.
Jo
We currently expect the government to take all responsibility for our children being fed, learning to read, being fit and healthy, and being productive citizens. If our children miss out on these then it's society's fault. However when the government tries to intervene in how we discipline our children, wow what a furore! There has been a suggestion that it's illegal to hit our animals, so why are we able to hit our children. Excuse me? How many puppy owners taught their puppies not to use the inside as a toilet by reasoning with them? The suggestion has also been made that this bill was introduced because it is similar to the archaic law that says a husband had a right to correct his wife. Its not a husband's job to discipline a wife - its her own job. However it's both their jobs to raise their children - the children just dont have the brain development to know what's right, sensible and careful. The father or mother who smacks their child is not abusing the child. The father or mother who uses jug cords or the like to hit their child in the name of discipline then gets away "reasonable force" is the real cause of this bill. Define "reasonable force" and then I would support this ban.
Yrama
Legislating against smacking is not going to stop some parents and caregivers killing their children. Perhaps Government would perhaps do more justice to the people it serves, by addressing the issue of poverty in our society, which creates frustration, helplessness and welfare dependency. This situation in turn gives rise to likely child abuse. I think this is where the problem lies. Also is Ms Bradford going to introduce a Bill legislating against abortion. Because if this is not the ultimate act of violence against a child, then what is?
Julie Cloughley
Raising children could well be the hardest but most rewarding job in the world. As a teacher with 16 years experience, as a mother of 3 boys aged 4, 11 and 15 and as a friend of parents with children, I have been involved in the lives of hundreds of children and parents. One thing that has stood out to me is how important clear and consistent boundaries are for children. Sue Bradford and others claim that violence (smacking) begets violence. Ironically, in my experience the opposite is true. The children who hit other children(and adults) and who have no respect for their parents are the ones whose parents proudly proclaim that they never smack or impose their will on their child. For some children being told off or going to their room is sufficient to change unacceptable behaviour. Others need a physical deterrent (once bitten twice shy) and a warning followed by a smack, an explanation, then a hug is a quick effective way of training such a child. Only my 15 year old boy fell into the latter category and he is a gentle, self assured, pleasant young man. I am not so sure this would be the case if we hadnt been allowed to smack. It will be a sad day for NZ if loving parents are turned into criminals because politicians cannot differentiate between a smack and abuse.
Derek Cantelo
As a member of society, I feel helpless in the face of all the different types of nonsensical legislation which has been passed during Labours tenure in office. It is beyond my comprehension that so many so called intelligent beings are able to find common grounds to agree on some of the matters raised as social issues before parliament. Whatever happened to common sense? It seems clear to me that within our current political system, the ability to compromise ones principles takes preference over personal moral fidelity and self integrity regarding ones own real beliefs. Politics in New Zealand has become a numbers game and a back scratching exercise,full of hidden agendas. Bow to the demands of the party. As a result society is the loser. The latest example in a long line of less than sensible legislation, is Sue Bradfords attempt to have smacking as a form of discipline banned completely. Parents legal ability to use smacking as a form of discipline is the very last remaining bastion society currently has, to deal with wanton and uncontrollable children. Policemen can't do it. Teachers cant do it. Neighbours cant do it. And if Sue Bradford gets her way, very soon the parents will not be able to do it either. We will by then have a very appropriate New Zealand national anthem. God Defend New Zealand. By then society will have lost all vestige of control. In its present suggested form this is not good legislation, for goodness sake lets introduce some common sense.
Dayne Kells
My views against the Anti-smacking law are well expressed already. This will not stop child abuse, just as laws against sexual abusers do not stop child molesters. And no, a smack on the hand is not Violence. : Is not discipline a good thing? I am not currently living in NZ, and honestly seeing what is happening, have no plans to return at the present time, A I dont want to be put in jail for bringing up children with discipline, and b, I dont want my kids to be growing up with other kids who have no discipline. If a child cant understand the consequence of no at 5, how will they understand it when they are 20? Get ready for a crime wave in 10-15 years time.
Nikki
As an at home Mum to 3 young children, I am constantly amazed that people out there are able to discipline their children without smacking. I think that there are only a few very calm, laidback individuals that are capable of disciplining without smacking. I smack my children as discipline, and have concerns about where this law might take me. Will it give my grumpy neighbour something illegal to use against me? For those who do not have young children, or their children have grown up, it is very easy to forget how little ones behave. They do not think like adults. They do not act like adults. Therefore we don't treat them like adults. They whinge constantly, No is there favourite response, and they h
