Section 59 – Parenting
By | Jun 30, 2009
There are things that both sides agree on
That beating your children and child abuse are wrong.
That any discipline that leaves bruises, broken bones or injury is unacceptable.
Both sides agree.
Everyone agrees that we want well rounded children who contribute meaningfully to society. We all agree that good parenting is important for raising children. No one wants children that are belligerents, stubborn, aggressive, or totally unresponsive to parents. No one wants good loving parents, who spend quality time with their kids to get a criminal record for lightly smacking their child on the bottom.
I wonder if the two sides just have different images in their heads? Does Larry have in his mind a good middle class Christian home where a reasoned smack is part of the overall loving parenting policy used in extreme situations, while Sue is picturing a lower socioeconomic home that struggles constantly with financial pressure where a parent who has too little support reacts in frustration to their kid and strikes out. If you have been involved in any child youth and family case this image will not leave you.
Those against the reform of section 59, two questions. Firstly, what are you afraid of? Are you concerned that if all parents stopped smacking their kids they will become totally unruly? That they will be aggressive in school, ignore their teachers? Lose all respect? That society will suffer? Is this your primary concern? If so, there are schools throughout the country with children who are exactly like you are afraid of. But, they are being smacked at home. Is the issue that they are not being smacked enough? Or that they are not being loved, nurtured, and given enough of their care givers time?
A second question, do you believe that smacking is a compulsory part of good parenting? Is it possible to be a good parent without smacking? If it is possible, since law change has to effect everyone, can you allow that ‘good’ parents have the recourses and skills to explore other means in order to close a loop hole for parents who are not as good as you? Can you consider the point of this law change to be about shifting the social norm on striking children? Force the consideration of what it takes to parent well – time, care, play, time for example – once as a nation we accept that we will not strike children.
This is the main reason I will vote yes. I want to shift the social norm in Aotearoa.
Users
“Would to God that all the Lord's people were Prophets.” Num. 11:29
Join in and add to the JUSTwiki today. Stories, reflection, news, comment. Be heard. Be just.
Hikoi of Hope: Walking On – Introduction
Submit a comment