OPINION
ACT New Zealand Justice Spokesman Stephen Franks today told the
Child/Youth Law & Policy Conference that criminalisation of parents who
choose to smack their children is now purely a political struggle.
Punishing smacking
“It has nothing to do with reason. There's no evidence
that banning smacking would save a single child from brutality. Some
earnest people of good intent are caught up in this — but, mainly, this
is about political elites wanting to look good to their mates,” Mr
Franks said. “I addressed a Barnardos forum on this two years ago, and
took the argument seriously. I researched, and tried to find evidence. I
tried to respect the good intentions of those urging the law change, and
set out my conclusions:
Likely Effects of
Repealing Section 59 of the Crimes Act.”
“I shouldn't have bothered. This cause attracts dud
science and dishonest rhetoric, and feeds the same impulses as previous
decades' recovered memory syndrome and satanic abuse panics — and, no
doubt, witchcraft trials centuries ago. It's a modern version of the Inquisition. Conclaves of the
self-anointed, clerics quivering with indignation and the urge to
punish. But punishing people who brutalise children is too hard — there
is more sanctimonious satisfaction in threatening the ordinary people
who don't share their ideology, and who dare to question their authority
and motives.”
“This reeks of the dishonest debate over abolition of
corporal punishment in boys' schools. None of the claimed benefits have
materialised. All the opponents' feared detriments have emerged. There's
no proof of cause and effect either way. Yet we've seen no apology from
those who were so superior and scornful of the defenders of the status
quo. The issue has become a tribal identification badge. The fact that 80
percent of ordinary parents are saying ‘Who are you to tell me how to
raise my child’ just confirms for them their special status. They feel
anointed to save the lesser breeds from themselves.”
“Labour, Progressive Alliance, New Zealand First, the
Greens, and National spokespeople say they'll repeal the law allowing
reasonable force to discipline children. They think it will win opinion
leaders' support. They despise the ordinary people, assuming our
memories are so short that if the change is made early in the next
election cycle they won't lose votes. But, unlike other stupid changes, this will get attention. When
police are forced to prosecute decent and caring parents, when a
‘righteous' judge’ sends a message' and convicts a normal mother, the 80
percent won't meekly accept their education at the hands of the law.
“This could be a watershed issue in social policy. ACT
will do its best to make it as intractable for the establishment as the
coming home to roost of the seabed and foreshore albatrosses,” Mr Franks
said.
27 November 2003
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/PA0311/S00517.htm
home
|