Newslink 12: On the anti-smacking legislation

02 April 2007 5 Comments

I voted against legislation to ban smacking and I will keep voting against any law that makes a parent potentially criminal for appropriate smacking of a child.

The best protection for a child is a functional family and this legislation will make a difficult job harder for parents without any benefits for children at risk of violence.

The government and its agents such as police and social workers should not interfere in the relationship between functional parents and thriving children.  People justify this interference with two flawed arguments.

The first is that the country needs to make a statement about child abuse. Apparently the way to stop people killing children is to attack normal functional parents.  This is like saying we’ll make a statement against arsonists by banning the use of fire.

The best protection against child abuse is a functional family and a community that supports families.  Why undermine the authority and judgement of parents in functional families who do not abuse their children just to “make a statement”?

The second argument for the smacking ban is that children deserve the same protection as adults. This argument ignores the fact that the relationship between parent and child is completely different from the relationships between adults.  Of course children deserve protection, but they also need direction and discipline. I don’t tell other adults to get out of bed, do the dishes, or be polite because I have no legal or moral responsibility to do so.

However, I am totally responsible for my children’s physical and moral welfare. The law reinforces my obligations to make sure my children have enough to eat and that they go to school.  In fact too many parents these days lack confidence in their ability to treat their children as children and give them direction. Other influences like the peer group and the media seem to take over at a younger and younger age.


This anti-smacking ban reflects the current philosophy that parents don’t know what they’re doing.  The government seems to believe every parent needs to be a qualified child psychologist and teacher as well as an expert on occupational health and safety legislation operating from licensed premises under regular inspection.

Most parents do a good job of bringing up their children. The smacking ban makes many of them potential criminals and it won’t make any difference to child abuse.

Parliament is out of line with public opinion on the anti-smacking legislation.  There’s only a few weeks to pull them back. So let the politicians know your opinion.


Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 - BK 2007-04-16 16:57 - (Reply)

Thank you for some common sense Bill. Why is every aspect of our lives becoming political? I'm surprised there isn't an uprising! Why are we funding them so they can take more from us? It seems rediculous that this bill has got this far!! Are we all that apathetic?

#2 - Mark Taylor 2007-05-31 18:44 - (Reply)

Great article, noble sentiments. Pity about the follow-through. I conclude that since writing, you now believe that we parents don't know better than the State after all, when it comes to bringing up our children. I guess State-sponsored intimidation of good parents bringing up secure & responsible children in a way they KNOW works has since become necessary, in your opinion. What changed your mind? PS: We have let "the politicians" know our opinion, just like you said we should in your fine article. Over 80% of us were against, according to polls - but guess what - we have been ignored (or is it betrayed?).

#2.1 - Tanya Stebbing said:
2007-10-01 21:06 - (Reply)

Yes I agree, I think that National should have stuck to its original guns and backed 80 per cent of the people's opinion on this one. I thought Mr English's speech was excellent, thought-provoking and sensible, and I felt betrayed and let-down as well, and I am sick and tired of the politicians ignoring the will of the public, it is typical of Labour, so I don't get why Natinonal followed suit. Also on the lowering of the drinking age and the prositution laws the popular opinion has been ignored. Labour thinks it knows better than us parents, and better than everyone, as well as how to spend our money better than us wage-earners do. Please National, don't stick with the 'Labour Lite' tag, and let them sink their own ship. I would not be surprised if a snap election was on the cards, by the way...(here's hoping).

#3 - DeeDub 2008-11-24 16:03 - (Reply)

Well, now you can do something about that legislation, eh Bill?

#4 - Tanya Stebbing 2008-12-05 22:52 - (Reply)

This seems like old hat now, doesn't it? I've kind of gotten used to the thought of the law there now, doesn't seem like such a big deal, maybe it's time to just move on and to try and do something about all the crime/child abuse etc that is still rampant out there. At least hold a referenda on the anti-smacking (not whacking) bill, and see what Joe Public really thinks. Congrats on the election result, by the way, well deserved by National, what a fantastic campaign, lots of electorates swung.


Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

 
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.